Wired broadband for all may not work out
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 02-03-2009 - 8:14pm |
Part of our new stimulus bill, is a broadband infrastructure improvement. This in an attempt to get everyone access to broadband.
It doesn't look like the companies which are capable of providing service are very keen on the idea.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601204&sid=aElDFE0IfbEc&refer=technology
Cable Providers Scoff at Obama’s Plan to Get Every Child Online
President Barack Obama may face pushback from Comcast Corp. and other cable providers on his plan to wire rural areas for high-speed Internet access.
The biggest companies, including Comcast and AT&T Inc., probably won’t take part in the plan unless lawmakers provide more money for installation of costly broadband lines and drop speed and access requirements, said Robert Atkinson of the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation.
“As the bill is currently structured, the companies that provide 90 to 95 percent of broadband won’t be applying for these grants,” said Atkinson, who leads the Washington-based think tank. “It’s just not a good trade-off for them.”
The House of Representatives approved $6 billion in funding for the Internet buildout, while the current version of the Senate bill allocates $9 billion. Even smaller providers, such as Roseville, California-based SureWest Communications, say that won’t cover the cost of building to remote areas or ensure that enough customers sign up to justify the expansion.
“The stimulus package doesn’t make any sense for us,” said Steven Oldham, chief executive officer of SureWest, which provides service to customers in Northern California and Kansas City, Missouri. “If there was an economic model to build out to these homes, we would’ve already been there.”
Rural users have long suffered sluggish Internet dial-up service because there is no financial incentive for cable companies to bring high-speed lines to their homes. President Obama, when he was running for office, made connecting these areas a priority.
“It’s unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption,” Obama said in a speech in December. “Here in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have a chance to get online.”
Mediacom’s Spending
Representatives at Comcast, AT&T and Verizon Communications Inc. declined to comment.
Reaching that goal will be expensive. Mediacom Communications Corp, the eighth-largest cable provider in the U.S., estimates it spends $30,000 to build one mile (1.6 kilometers) of fiber-optic cable. The more homes it signs up on that mile, the faster the return.
The enterprise value for Comcast to connect one household to its line is about $1,200, according to Craig Moffett, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. in New York. Based on those figures, with just one household on a mile of cable, a company would have to wait decades before it breaks even.
“We’ve built those lines with no government subsidies,” said Rocco Commisso, Mediacom’s CEO. “Now our competitors are going to get free money for the same build-out and it’s just not fair.”
Stimulus Bill
Under the stimulus bill passed by the House of Representatives last week, $6 billion was dedicated to broadband build-out. Cable operators that accept grants may have to share the networks they build with competitors and meet speed requirements.
“If I make the investment, why should I have to share?” said Commisso. “Government subsidies don’t allow us to compete on an even playing field.”
General Communications Inc., a cable provider based in Anchorage, Alaska, likes the idea of federal aid, though is hesitant about the speed requirements. The House plan calls for companies that get grants to build broadband networks with speeds of at least 45 megabits per second, faster than most homes can get now. The Senate version includes speeds of up to 100 megabits.
Faster Speeds
Any speed faster than 5 megabits is “more than most people need,” said Ronald Duncan, General Communications’ CEO. The demand may “put the capital case out of reach for us and instead of getting some access, you’d get nothing.”
General Communications currently offers households speeds of as much as 10 megabits per second.
The short-term aspect of the plan also concerns some providers.
“The stimulus package is temporary,” SureWest’s Oldham said. “From our perspective, if the demand is there for a high capacity network service we don’t need a stimulus grant of any kind to do it.”

Pages
Yes...this is probably a bad idea for the reasons expressed by the cable companies whose representatives are quoted in the article.
“The stimulus package doesn’t make any sense for us,” said Steven Oldham, chief executive officer of SureWest, which provides service to customers in Northern California and Kansas City, Missouri. “If there was an economic model to build out to these homes, we would’ve already been there.” ****
This is my neck of the woods in No. California. I have family that lives in these areas. No we don't have broadband. Only got access to cable at my house about eight years ago after a neigbor spent some money getting it put in place at thier house.
What this article is saying is that the private, free trade profit
Entire articles have been posted here for as long as I've posted on iV.... 10 yrs.approx.
My understanding is as long as you post the link
Candidate Obama did promise to close the broadband gap with other nations.
I guess he'll figure a way to provide low cost internet to everyone in the U.S.
The current bill doesn't seem to be the correct venue.
That is not true.
With all due respect. Providing attribution only allows one to avoid plagiarism. Attribution has nothing to do with copyright infringement. The DMCA, increase the penalties for copyright violations, the duration of copyright was lengthen and it more closely defined copyright as it applies to electronic mediums. The portion of the law that deals with the use of materials covered by copyright fair use. Fair use clearly limits the amount of the material that can be copied. The fact that the practice has been long standing doesn't alter make the practice compliment with copyright law. A better practice is to provide a citation and a link to the full text.
If you want more information on this issue
1. Copyright (c) 2003 by the State Bar of Arizona Arizona Attorney, October, 2003, 40 AZ Attorney 36, COPYRIGHTS:--THEY'RE NOT WHAT YOU THINK THEY ARE: USE, FAIR USE, IMPLIED USE AND MISUSE, BY MICHAEL S. GREEN
1.Copyright (c) 2005 Buffalo Intellectual Property Law Journal Buffalo Intellectual Property Law Journal, Fall, 2005, 3 Buff. Intell. Prop. L.J. 46, 16229 words, NOTE: Who Owns the Cow When We Give Away the Milk for Free? Fair Use and the Protection of Web-Posted Materials, Annie R. Lin +
""In the context of the inquiry into the purpose and character of use, courts are less likely to find that exact copies are transformative and are "reluctant to find fair use when an original work is merely retransmitted in a different medium." n127"
"The fair use statute provides that the significance of the portion used lies not only in how much of the work was taken, but also the substance of that portion in relation to the work as a whole, since "no plagiarist can excuse the wrong" by merely showing "how much of the work he did not pirate." n144"
Pages