FCC to explore removing laws blocking muni broadband networks


In addition to drafting net neutrality rules that would prohibit blocking Internet services or discriminating between them (widely expected), the FCC says it will explore eliminating state laws prohibiting municipalities and local government from building their own broadband networks.

At the same time, the FCC has rejected calls from net neutrality advocates to classify broadband ISPs as common carriers, a move that would subject them to tougher regulations than basic neutrality rules would allow. Also, mobile services are set to remain exempt from neutrality rules.

Thanks in large part to lobbying from cable and telco ISPs, 20 states have passed laws limiting public broadband investments. With U.S. broadband prices often far higher than those charged for comparable services overseas, and many cable and telco ISPs relying on high-margin broadband services to offset slumping TV and/or voice revenue, there's plenty at stake over the long-term.

Major ISPs that could be affected: T, VZ, FTR, WIN, CTL, CMCSA, TWC, CHTR, CVC

Previous: FCC to draft new net neutrality rules, won't appeal Verizon case

From other sites
Comments (8)
  • Deehena
    , contributor
    Comments (144) | Send Message
     
    Very interesting. It would be sad to see Comcast gooble up Time Warner cable and gain even more advantage in setting prices that please them, at our expense. It's time after all these years for the anti-trust division in the Justice Department to come alive.
    19 Feb 2014, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • TCG,llc
    , contributor
    Comments (463) | Send Message
     
    I don't see how a merger between the two cable giants would be good for consumers. Prices (cable or content delivery) are already way too high for most consumers hence the move of many to data-streaming....The FCC really needs to think about this one....
    19 Feb 2014, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • Bosshogg55
    , contributor
    Comments (194) | Send Message
     
    Comcast gobbling up Time Warner may actually be good for shareholders and investors. If Comcast has the power to set rates wherever they want, that means it should benefit the investor. It may very well be the time to own it in your book. I am going to start looking at them. As for the consumers: They are screwed and will pay through the nose for the services they need from Comcast.
    19 Feb 2014, 01:33 PM Reply Like
  • TCG,llc
    , contributor
    Comments (463) | Send Message
     
    Consumers do have options as the move to gobble up Time Warner have indicated....Comcast's move is a by-product of lost revenue from data-streaming which options provided to consumers to choose content delivery. So, Comcast reaction is a direct consequence of higher cable prices and consumer choice. Let's not forget that cable is luxury expense where consumer wallets are tight due to a lack of disposable income....
    19 Feb 2014, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • PVYMCH
    , contributor
    Comments (42) | Send Message
     
    In Europe for under $40.00 US you get mobile Voice / Data (twice the speed of US)- landline phone /Data & 120 ch.cable or sat tv.
    Because the European governments generally represent the consumer NOT the corporate CARTELS.
    For example: NC.law prohibits municipal run Broadband Networks.
    19 Feb 2014, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • alan ljl
    , contributor
    Comments (273) | Send Message
     
    Television delivery as we know it is history. The pipes that have been built by CMCSA and TWC are the only way presently for homes to enjoy the internet and ultimately television via the internet.
    Pay for what you use will become the only equitable structure of payment.
    The mobile internet platform is the poorest method of watching television, and who really would enjoy that?
    Countries other than the US (South Korea) are 3-4X the broadband speed and 40% the monthly cost of the US.
    Complaining is not a strategy. You have to be proactive and vote for those who support you.
    19 Feb 2014, 03:18 PM Reply Like
  • HibiscusAnole
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
     
    What does this mean for WIN?
    19 Feb 2014, 04:14 PM Reply Like
  • Anasazi101
    , contributor
    Comments (3384) | Send Message
     
    I think the part, that most are missing...Is eliminating restrictions "On the Government" to keep them out of the Telcom and Communications business.

     

    It didn't work when they deregulated parts before, and then broke up the Bell System...
    It was totally confusing for most, competition rose from the mire, and prices went up accordingly....Increased probably 50% more than needed, because of other Companies "skimming off the cream"..
    It wasn't a Monopoly...It was a "Regulated Monopoly"...That was a huge difference.
    19 Feb 2014, 05:43 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs