California Makes Slightest Push For Naked DSL
from the when-a-$15-product-costs-you-$40 dept
Telcos have raised all sorts of objections to naked DSL as they do their best to resist offering it. Now, Karl Bode at Broadband Reports points out that California regulators have urged telcos to drop their phone line requirements, a first step towards potentially requiring it. SBC responds it's trying to work out "technical issues", an excuse that sounds pretty fishy. The company also adds it believes the market, not the government, should make the decision, responding to claims from consumer groups that a requirement to offer naked DSL be made a condition of the SBC-AT&T merger. Of course, for SBC, "the market" means "us here at SBC", and it will continue to force users to buy services they don't want in order to get one they do want as long as it can.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
Anyways, if they drop the phone line requirement then Im guessing that dsl prices will go up so its the same thing, and equillibrium will be restored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
All I want is a internet connection. I dont want a phone or a video feed. But with either DSL or cable, I get force fed those "addons" to my connection service.
I currently have DSL in california without a phone number. I do pay a bit more for having a "phoneless" connection, but I feel its worth it.
Just because its the way it was doesnt mean its the way it HAS to be. Lets think in ways that can actually help the consumer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
can't stand it
I don't use my Home Phone unless I call bellsouth to complain about the service being down again. I have a Cell Phone to call people. I DO NOT need a home phone it is useless to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]