---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <2ee197b4-29c8-494f-91b3-4ec90684c574@googlegroups.com> Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 12:21:42 -0700 (PDT) From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: Alternatives to AT&T DSL service On Saturday, September 10, 2016 at 2:55:01 PM UTC-4, bob prohaska wrote: > Suppose I have a copper pair connected to a CO-powered phone. It sounds > as if my carrier (AT&T) is obliged to share this copper with any ISP I > designate. Is this correct? It must be emphasized that "obliged", as used in this context, doesn't mean very much. That is, on paper the carriers may be required to provide certain services at a certain level of quality, but it doesn't mean that they will meet their obligation. As we've seen, many of the carriers have let their customers down. Even entire communities have been screwed. I can't speak for AT&T, but Verizon is racing for the bottom of service quality. This is sad, because its predecessors, Bell Atlantic and Bell of Pennsylvania, provided good service. Mr. Goldstein makes many excellent points in his posts, including: "No. You have no rights at all." ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Thu, 15 Sep 2016