Isn't Competition Supposed To Lower Rates?
from the oh,-right... dept
If you haven't been following what's been going on in Lafayette Louisiana, they've been having quite a technology battle. The local telco and cable company (BellSouth and Cox) have been spending millions of dollars fighting a proposed muni-fiber offering that the residents of the city voted for. The people of the city voted for it, even after push polls (designed to influence the vote, not accurately predict it) and silly threats from the incumbents. Ever since it was approved, however, the incumbents have been able to hold up the deployment by fighting it in court. Cox and BellSouth, of course, claim that such a muni network would represent unfair competition -- something they should know an awful lot about, since Cox was recently accused of anti-competitive practices in blocking out competitors in certain new housing developments. Apparently, from their point of view, "unfair competition" is just about any competition. Competition, of course, might force them to do something like offer more competitive rates -- something studies have shown isn't really happening yet. With that in mind, is it really any surprise to hear that Cox is now raising their cable rates in the city, even as they try to convince the courts that the muni-fiber network would be bad for the people of the city?
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
suck my
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: suck my
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if what your competitor is doing to compete is illegal, then it is illegal competition. if what he's doing is legal, its just plain old competition. there is no such thing as unfair competition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No matter what
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No matter what
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
but i got the ads
I called dish (whom i also subscribe to their tv)
guess what no high speed
I went thorugh just about every company
I had two choices
T1 or comcast cable
so I went with $60!! comcast
$60!!
$60!!!
__ __
(| |__ | |
|) |__| |_|
Not happy
Too many DNS errors
No one seems to remember that they NEED to work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Comcast and the almight Dollar
Not to mention the fact that these people have more than a little DNS issue, they simply forgot how to operate one.
Their cable modems prevent me from using DHCP-DNS...Woo whoo.. Crap
Try Earthlink
207.69.188.187
207.69.188.186
207.69.188.185
---> thier DNS works... Just be sure to add it to everything.... Router, Switch and Machines.
or Assign it as DHCP for the Router, and all is right in DNS land again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Time for system update
Good point. Semantics I know, but worth thinking about.
I'm trying to find a counter example. What about "loss leaders"?
Technically those are legal, no crime is done by selling your product at a loss. But I'm sure there are examples of courts finding that practice to be "unfair" and issuing orders against companies. Correct me if I am wrong. In this case it must have been a civil action brought by one company against another claiming "damage" to their business. So is "unfair competition" just another example of tort law gone insane? Is this just an American thing? Obviously not because of the way the EU is fining Microsoft right now. They have done nothing illegal. It does seem to fly against basic free market principles. If so, what is to stop you suing AT&T because they are stopping you from breaking into the telecoms market with your two cans and piece of string? Who decides "unfair" and on what basis? Who gives them the authority to so arbitrate?
Robert #4
That's a very interesting comment.
It's supported by an overwhelming body of evidence that the majority of elected and appointed officials today don't have the first fucking clue about the specialised subjects they are tasked with. Yes, it is true to say that the "average lay person" is better informed.
Better informed on the ramifications to their own lives, better informed on the technology and social issues.
I don't know a lot about the machinations of American government, I believe it was held very highly once upon a time, but what you describe sounds like an increasing problem in all political systems. As progress speeds up the relevance of an officials knowledge/position within a given timescale diminished to zero. Basically they just can't keep up. So what would seriously improve that, as happens in Europe, is that a referendum is called. That is a single issue vote conducted nation wide. The cynic in me says Americans would be too apathetic to engage, but surely we all eventually *must* move in that direction.
People knock democracy as an impossible concept. Even the Greeks gave up on it. Everybody likes to point out how we don't actually live in a democracy but rather an oligarchy. The main argument is that true democracy is too fickle and creates a tragedy of lowest common denominator thought. I recognise that, but I don't think it is a fault of the ideology, only a fault of the implementation. The oligarchy has a kind of stability built in to it, usually just a slowly reciprocating slide between left, right, and back to left again over a few decades.
A truly dynamic democracy abandons all notion of the two part see-saw. Maybe there is still hope for true democracy. If the Diebold voting machines weren't rigged and there was really a credible method for massive quickfire referenda on a number of social issues can you imagine how dynamic and interesting participatory democracy in real time might be?
I would happily give it a shot over the current system of special interests paying for laws behind closed doors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
seriously... the republican / oligarchical system is so f'ing antiquated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cox just sold out to a local competitor here in Texas, upon which they bring in a lawyer and try to force all the employees to sign an intellectual property rights clause in it. Basically screwing every employee who did anything computer technical on the side. Bad company practices just seems to breed the same type of bedfellows. This article is really no surprise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Second that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i vote no for mob-rule
democracy isn't the end-all be all... a racist group of people can vote to kill a mexican. it doesn't make them right-- this is why we have a representative democracy and seperation of powers with checks and balances.
there's a cool option that may be a forced competition to cable t.v. companies.. IPTV-- standardized internet television broadcasts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i vote no for mob-rule
It's a nice sentiment to believe in a "representative democracy and seperation of powers with checks and balances."
But I assert that is just as much a myth as true democracy. I mean, show me one? You're alluding to the government of the USA, am I correct? So how is it that this representative democracy with seperation of powers and checks and balances came to the enlightened position of invading two other soverign countries and getting themselves into a situation where they are dropping phosphorous bombs on women and kids? It didn't make them right either did it?
You may call them a mob, I call them people.
Imho the sum of the opinions of a large group of people, which may contain a few fringe lunatics, is better than the sum of the opinions of a small group of cloistered elitists consisting of mostly fringe lunatics.
I'll take my chances with the "mob" thankyou very much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why re-invent the wheel?
I disagree with the supposition that people are intelligent - most people are not, or rather, they are ignorant and choose to be. Please - if a soundbite can influence the vote, we aren't talking about the best and brightest. How tough can it be to see that running the country is complicated and sound bites oversimplify the issues?
It really is all moot, anyway. Now that the Republicans have perfected and refined their methods of "legal" voting fraud, they will continue to steal elections and subvert the wishes of the people. Then, they will accuse the Democrats of being traitors, hating America and freedom, etc., etc. They have forfeited the right to call themselves patriots, imho, with their hypocrisy and anti-republican (in the old sense of the word) corruption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The name, nothing else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Okay - some home truths.
You're talking about your own damn brothers and sisters!
Ever heard the phrase "divide and conquer"?
I mean - let me put it bluntly (and you may not like this, so if you're oversensitive please avert your eyes now)
America is not very popular right now. America is hated by many people of many nations. Those of us who love America and the values of which you speak are having a hard time defending you. For most of my life democracy and freedom have been synonymous with America. As an Englishman I grew up on a diet of those very same values though television. But it's no longer the case that America is loved, looked up to, or even respected. In fact America is increasingly seen as an example of a failed state, a failed democracy in the same way that Russia (USSR) is seen as failed communism. More and more it seems like you both lost the cold war, both your ideologies are bankrupt. All this talk of republics and checks and balances is air, nothing but puff. You're just romanticising the way things were. They're not anymore.
What has happened in the USA is a tragedy. Many are still shocked by the rapidity with which the decline has occured. Nobody ever thought they would hear representatives of the US government talk of condoning torture, imprisonment without trial, murder of civilian populations and assasinations of world leaders. Yet here we are in 2006 and all those things have come to pass. Your government has blood all over its hands and a guilty look all over its face. Here we are arguing the finer academic points of democratic theory and the reality is that the last two elections in the USA were frauds and your government is dragging your name through the mud in every nation on Earth. You've already lost the "war on everything" - just look at the state of your freedoms and your economy now!
Who are we (the rest of the world) to blame? Mature people don't despise the folk of another country because their government or army are monsters. Aren't your government your responsibility? Don't you have the power to control them? You need someone to do it for you?
In 1945 you did us a favour, and all of Europe is very grateful for that. But I don't think Europe has the military power or political will to come and liberate you guys. You're going to have to do it yourselves from the inside.
I think that starts with
And before anyone yells Pot! Kettle! Yes I know. But there's a difference. Blair is finished over here. And when he's done we're going to put him on trial for war crimes (after a respectful interlude). Just you watch and see. I hope I get to see it on TV when Bush and Blair are standing there together and they kick away the stools. Both are treasonous bastards who've let down their people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Okay - some home truths.
Spectacular job. Now go take your meds and come back to reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lafayette Resident
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
respect
the debate about your ecomomic rights (broadband competition) and your political rights (republic versus direct democracy) are inseparable. The reason your economic rights are trampled on is because you have virtually no political rights. The reason you don't realise this, and the reason that so many others are convinced that representative democracy protects them from 'the rule of the mob', is that you in the US do not have a free press as you like to imagine (our European press is mostly in similar condition). The myth of the enlightened western democracy watched over by a free press is repeated so often that most have come to accept it as thruth without questioning.
If you'd like to ask some questions as I am sure you would, because I think the majority of people in the world are not unlike me, then you could start with:
Australian reporter/filmmaker/author John Pilger - for evidence of genocide and oppression by the US, the UK, Australia and others
American political activist/writer Noam Chomsky for analysis of US foreign policy and its reporting in the 'free press'
Edward Hermann/Noam Chomsky book Manufacturing Consent for explanation of the severe limitations of 'free press' in the US, directly applicable also to European press
American author Gregory A. Fossedal - his book Direct Democracy in Switzerland. This is a glimpse of what it is like truly to have political rights. Read it and weep, so to speak.
Google 'direct democracy' to find out what it actually means for you
PS> I,41 - Let's hope you're right about Pious Murderer Blair. I am less optimistic than you, just look at Thatcher.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
support for Laffayet people
[ link to this | view in chronology ]