33 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.The Telecom Digest for Mar 27, 2015
| ||||||||
| The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves - George Washington |
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
| Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:56:50 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: City Council member laughs off Centurylink representative Message-ID: <20150326165650.GA4393@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Monroe City (Louisiana) Council Chairman Ray Armstrong left an overflow crowd in shock at Tuesday night's council meeting after he laughed off a CenturyLink spokesman. Carrick Inabnett, director of public policy, legal and governmental affairs for CenturyLink, spoke to the council about Armstrong's controversial purchasing policy that would have required council approval for all professional services spending over $15,000 with a single vendor in a year. The ordinance would have also required potential vendors with the city to disclose their political contributions. As Inabnett was wrapping up his comments, he said he was disappointed with the way Armstrong was acting. http://www.thenewsstar.com/story/news/local/2015/03/25/armstrong-laughs-centurylink-council-meeting/70431844/ -or- http://goo.gl/1fFyVb -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly) The ladies come to see you, if your name still rings a bell They give you damn near nothin', and they'll say they knew you well - Danny O'Keefe |
| Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:04:53 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: USTelecom asks court to review FCC Internet Rules Message-ID: <20150326170453.GA4413@telecom.csail.mit.edu> The U.S. broadband industry this week moved to overturn Internet rules that were adopted by the Federal Communications Commission. The United States Telecom Association (USTelecom) argued that the FCC's Open Internet Order is "arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion," violates the U.S. Constitution and Communications Act of 1934, and runs afoul of notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements. The petition for review was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. That is the same court that overturned FCC Internet rules more than a year ago following a challenge by Verizon. -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly) Now he's got a woman at home He's got another woman down the hall He seems to want me anyway Why'd you have to get so drunk And lead me on that way - Joni Mitchell |
| Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 17:56:42 -0400 From: "Neal McLain" <nmclain.remove-this@and-this-too.annsgarden.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: CenturyLink may exclude service to minorities, critics say Message-ID: <598032e281f2e0fea026d461e4a60241.squirrel@email.fatcow.com> On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 11:03:35 AM UTC-4, Bill Horne wrote: >> By Harry Colbert Jr. >> >> Competition is good, right? >> >> Of course it is. Competition in business is so needed that there >> are rules in our nation that guarantee a competitive >> marketplace. So it may come as a shock that when CenturyLink >> announced it wants to compete against Comcast - Minneapolis' only >> cable provider since 1983 - the communications company was met with >> opposition. But those opposed to CenturyLink say they agree with >> competition in a free marketplace, what they don't agree with is >> CenturyLink being able to cherry pick where to compete - especially >> if CenturyLink chooses not to service areas of lower income that >> tend to be minority concentrated. On Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 11:20:28 AM UTC-5, HAncock4 wrote: > In a free marketplace, a business is free to NOT participate in a > marketplace if feels it won't be profitable for it. For example, a > store selling senior citizen health and comfort supplies (e.g. adult > diapers, walkers, canes, support hoisery, etc), won't find much > business across the street from a high school, and a high school > malt shop* won't find much business near a senior center. > If we are going to impose demands onto providers that cost them > money, then obviously we have to impose them on all providers. Precisely the point. > But first, we need to closely look at the demands to see if they're > truly worthwhile. > For instance, IMHO, it is reasonable to mandate a restaurant have > sanitary inspections because that benefits all customers. However, > IMHO, it is not resonable to demand the restaurant stay open at 4 > a.m. "just in case someone is hungry". But if we did, in fact, require that Restaurant A stay open at 4 a.m., and Restaurant A did, in fact, agree to that demand, then can we change the rules for nearby Restaurant B and allow it to close before 4 a.m.? > If a business, carrier or otherwise, does not think a neighborhood > location will be profitable for them, then I don't think they should > be forced to serve that neighborhood. But if we did, in fact, require Carrier A to serve that neighborhood, and Carrier A did, in fact, agree to that demand, then can we change the rules for Carrier B and allow it to serve only certain neighborhoods? > We must remember a BIG reason we got rid of the old Bell System > business model was to eliminate the cross-subsidization that Bell > was doing. But if we did, in fact, require Bell to serve a designated service territory, and Bell did, in fact agree to that demand, then can we change the rules for a CLEC and allow it to serve only a portion of that territory? > In a competitive marketplace, some people will pay more. For > instance, the only gas station in an isolated area will charge high > prices, not the prices charged elsewhere. People can't have it both > ways. This argument is irrelevant. Governments do not designate service territories to gas stations. > Another example: from time to time an old house of worship (any > denomination) announces it's closing due to lack of members. > Usually there are a few senior citizens who are upset as they still > regularly go to worship and would have trouble getting to a more > distant location. But those few seniors are not enough to support a > congregation and are basically out of luck, harship or not. This argument is irrelevant. Governments do not designate [a church's] parish boundaries. Neal McLain |
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
| Contact information: |
Bill Horne Telecom Digest 43 Deerfield Road Sharon MA 02067-2301 339-364-8487 bill at horne dot net |
| Subscribe: | telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom |
| Unsubscribe: | telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom |
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself. Thank you!
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.