Big telcos lobby for laws to make it illegal, e.g. Louisiana 844.42 [1]:
"To ensure that cable television services and telecommunications and advanced services are provided through fair competition [...]"
Advanced services are defined in 844.43 [2] to mean Internet that's faster than 144 kilobits per second.
This means that the wifi in MSY (New Orlean's airport, a government facility) is utterly unusable.
I can understand the narrative: having government skim the good stuff is a bad deal for corporations since government can do things corporations can't (e.g., taxes, zoning, land use permits, seize land). Presumably, this discourages corporations from providing comprehensive services since they cannot subsidize poorly-performing areas with great performing areas. I'm skeptical that that's a valid reason to have such a law, but c'est la vie.
> I can understand the narrative: having government skim the good stuff is a bad deal for corporations since government can do things corporations can't (e.g., taxes, zoning, land use permits, seize land). Presumably, this discourages corporations from providing comprehensive services since they cannot subsidize poorly-performing areas with great performing areas.
The think I can't understand is why we should care. If the government is providing reliable gigabit fiber at a reasonable price, who cares if Comcast can't profitably offer service in the same geography? If the city is doing a good job then you don't need them. Meanwhile if the city does a poor job then Comcast will have no trouble providing better service and winning all the customers, right?
Its illegal in many states to do this, including north carolina since Wilson, NC turned to be successful. TWC lobbied and got new laws passed to prevent other cities to do the same. Wilson, NC got an exemption because they aleady built the infrastructure.
it may already be too late for your city. often when cable companies wire up a town, they offer free access to gov and school buildings in return for exclusive development rights. no one can compete with them, including the town itself.
That happened in the town where I grew up. My parents still cannot get proper broadband. There is a cable company in the town and they have one of these exclusivity agreements with the county.
However, they refuse to provide broadband access to the entire county. It is quite frustrating.
"To ensure that cable television services and telecommunications and advanced services are provided through fair competition [...]"
Advanced services are defined in 844.43 [2] to mean Internet that's faster than 144 kilobits per second.
This means that the wifi in MSY (New Orlean's airport, a government facility) is utterly unusable.
I can understand the narrative: having government skim the good stuff is a bad deal for corporations since government can do things corporations can't (e.g., taxes, zoning, land use permits, seize land). Presumably, this discourages corporations from providing comprehensive services since they cannot subsidize poorly-performing areas with great performing areas. I'm skeptical that that's a valid reason to have such a law, but c'est la vie.
[1]: http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=285523
[2]: http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=285524