You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
October 28, 2016, 01:00:24 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Time Warner pushes anti-municipality bill through NC State House.  (Read 752 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Basically Time Warner is trying to keep cities they IGNORE from setting up their own Network backbone. They've harried the city of Wilson, NC repeatly over this. Pulling them into court to have ISP/Network info they themselves refuse to disclose put out as public record.

Basically, rather than upgrading/expanding their systems into smaller towns, they want to be the only choice for access in as many areas as they can.

Offline Yorubi

Come on I'm totally sure that its due to the freedoms america tries to offer and totally not because the politicians were paid off to do it. Come on, a corrupt state government? Please, there is no such thing as corruption.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Okay, TWC has changed the coverage definition of broadband to this: if SOMEONE in your census region has ANY BROADBAND (not the 4mbps minims as defined by the FCC but as low as 700 kbps) that region has coverage. IE EVERYONE has 'access' to broadband. Meanwhile something like 53% of the state doesn't have it.

But, going by their claim, there is no need for a municipality to put it insincere they (TWC) have proven the state has been fully covered.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

And the fun goes on. The Bill is at this moment sitting on the Governor's desk TODAY. Governor 'Bev' Perdue, who is only a little less bent than her predecessor and LIVES for decision by the polls and 'What is best for me'.

I know it doesn't seem like a LOT but there are a LOT of rural areas that don't have broadband yet and this is the first step is cutting the 'off the beaten path' folks out of options since folks like Time Warner won't be going out to them.

The reason that the big broadband folks are doing this is because if the smaller cities and rural co-ops can show that they can do more for less, some of the bigger cities/counties might be tempted to do it. And while they don't care about a rural co-op making a thousand or so folks happy, they sure as hell don't want a city like Charlotte or Raleigh getting into the broadband market.

Not to mention even bigger cities like New York or such.

Offline Xajow

And people wonder why I think letting government pass such regulations is a bad idea.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Couldn't this be challenged under anti-monopoly laws?  It seems to me that this is the very definition of preventing competition.

Offline Xajow

Governments don't usually challenge monopolies they help create.

Online Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Governments don't usually challenge monopolies they help create.

Or better put, paid off politicians stay bought. Gov. Purdue in an excellent moment decided to neither sign or veto it.  So it goes into effect till she can figure out the polls (or Time Warner) tells her what to do.