Headline FeedsTechNewsWorld Talkback
|
|
See Full Story
Hold on to your hats -- California lawmakers have finally done something even the most jaded critic will appreciate. It's called cable franchise reform, and it will have a positive impact on California and the entire nation. "California has led the way in the evolution of new technology, and with this bill, our state's policy towards contemporary TV and entertainment technology is catching up to the times," said Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles.
Re: Cable Reform: From California to Congress
Posted by: alise 2008-01-06 18:49:49 In reply to: Sonia Arrison
Razzlefratz. at&t has already shown its true colours by refusing to follow the new law. Something about white guys in power ties, at&t is the new IBM, I guess.
ah
ah
Re: Cable Reform: From California to Congress
Posted by: toddpthayer 2006-09-13 06:41:59 In reply to: Sonia Arrison
It's been interesting to watch almost complete lack of journalistic coverage on this legislation early on swing to rubber-stamped support full of misstatements and misinformation.
The story states that "it was past time for lawmakers to remove the monopoly that local governments created...). The reality is, that it was the (Federal) 1984 Cable Act that allowed monopolies - regardless of local entities wishes. The article also fails to note that the 1996 revision of the Cable Act expressly removed all barriers to competition - allowing multiple franchises - again - regardless of the local franchise authority's desire.
The real issues for the telcos in this push for legislation is about control over when and where they build - redlining, and universal service and local oversight of PROW (public rights of way). And the main lever for ensuring these issues are addressed lies with the local franchise negotiations – the process for which, again, lies in the Federal Cable Act.
Most of us involved in franchise issues are very much in favor of competition, lower prices, and a streamlined franchise process. The problem lies not so much with the stated intent, but in the technical details that will strip local communities of revenues and resources that have been in place for as many as thirty years.
In my community, we’ve had two cable companies that for ten years have had the option of overbuilding into each others territories and have chosen not to for business reasons. It’s ironic that the local community is now at fault for their decision not to compete.
The story states that "it was past time for lawmakers to remove the monopoly that local governments created...). The reality is, that it was the (Federal) 1984 Cable Act that allowed monopolies - regardless of local entities wishes. The article also fails to note that the 1996 revision of the Cable Act expressly removed all barriers to competition - allowing multiple franchises - again - regardless of the local franchise authority's desire.
The real issues for the telcos in this push for legislation is about control over when and where they build - redlining, and universal service and local oversight of PROW (public rights of way). And the main lever for ensuring these issues are addressed lies with the local franchise negotiations – the process for which, again, lies in the Federal Cable Act.
Most of us involved in franchise issues are very much in favor of competition, lower prices, and a streamlined franchise process. The problem lies not so much with the stated intent, but in the technical details that will strip local communities of revenues and resources that have been in place for as many as thirty years.
In my community, we’ve had two cable companies that for ten years have had the option of overbuilding into each others territories and have chosen not to for business reasons. It’s ironic that the local community is now at fault for their decision not to compete.
