The following stories have been tagged north carolina ← Back to All Tags

MI-Connection Embraces New Strategies, Increases Speeds for Free

MI-Connection, the North Carolina community-owned network serving Davidson, Cornelius, and Mooresville, is upgrading network speeds and unveiling a new marketing campaign. MI-Connection was formed when a few towns north of Charlotte purchased the old, dilapidated Adelphia cable network out of bankruptcy and began rehabbing it.

According to David Boraks of the DavidsonNews.net:

The company on Dec. 10 will begin selling a new top speed internet service tentatively called “Warp Speed Broadband,” though the name could change. It will offer 60 mbps downloads and 10 mbps uploads. Customers can get it for $80 to $100, depending on whether they bundle it with TV and telephone.

Existing customers also will get faster speeds Dec. 10, at no extra charge (Download speed x upload speed): 8×4 becomes 10×5, 12×4 becomes 15×5, 16×4 becomes 20×5 and 20×4 becomes 30×10.

Notice that this community network offers faster upstream speeds than most privately owned cable networks -- because they recognize the importance of empowering subscribers rather than hoping they will just consumer video and do little else.

The DavidsonNews.net article also covered MI-Connection's last quarter financial audit report. The network has faced chronic financial problems but things continue to improve. From the article:

The financial report for the quarter that ended Sept. 30 showed that the company grew revenues in all three of its businesses – cable TV, telephone and internet. Altogether, revenues were up 6.5 percent from the first quarter a year ago, to $4,114,992. Expenses fell 8.7 percent, in part because of savings on what the company pays its high-speed internet providers.

The company’s earnings from day-to-day operations continued to grow.

A new marketing plan, dubbed "Straight Talk," will appeal to local ownership and include slogans like "If you owned a grocery store, wouldn't you shop there?" "Can you create jobs just by watching TV?" and "When your boss is everyone in town, your customer service had better be good." It will be interesting to see whether or not the appeal to community spirit helps increase subscribership.

North Carolina law is especially hostile to community owned networks and MI-Connection has struggled financially, in large part due to how poorly Adelphia (a private company) had maintained essential components. Competitive attacks from Time Warner Cable have aggravated the situation. StopTheCap reported in April that, in a rare instance of private overbuilding, the cable giant has begun serving the area and appears to be making a competitive grab for MI-Connections customers.

Stop the Cap

The situation has been difficult for MI-Connection but great for all consumers in the region. From the Stop The Cap article:

Other residents in nearby Cornelius are also getting prices substantially lower than residents in cities like Charlotte, where many residents have one choice for cable: Time Warner. 

Sam, a Stop the Cap! reader in the Morrison Plantation neighborhood, noted they skipped the last few rate increases from the cable company.

“You just call and tell them the rate is too high and as soon as they find out you have MI-Connection as an alternative, they lower the price,” he said. “My niece in Charlotte can’t get the same deal even when we gave her the details — it’s only good in areas where MI-Connection operates.”

That leaves Charlotte residents paying $35-50 more a month than savvy customers further north can have for the asking.

Once again we find that competition improves affordability, even in a state with some of the toughest restrictions.

Sam, quoted in the StopTheCap article makes an astute observation about the cable company's agenda:

“It seems pretty clear to me that Time Warner isn’t hurrying to compete with Comcast or Charter — just MI-Connection and that makes me suspicious,” Sam says. “After spending all that money to ban community broadband in the state, they now seem to be trying to drive out of business the handful of companies that were exempted.”

“My niece is probably paying for this right now on her cable bill too, and once MI-Connection is out of the way, those prices will shoot right back up,” Sam concludes.

Community Fiber Networks Conference November 8-9 in Danville, Virginia

The Economic Development Conference Series' first event, Community Fiber Networks, is scheduled for November 8 - 9, 2012, in Danville, Virginia. Dates and locations for later events will follow. The series is being produced by Broadband Communities Magazine. Danville is near the border with North Carolina.

Christopher Mitchell and a long list of industry experts will be presenting on a wide range of topics at the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research in Danville.

Leaders in all areas of the Advanced Broadband Network industry will be sharing their findings and expertise. Danville was chosen because it is a true success story. By using their fiber network as a catalyst for economic development, Danville transformed itself. For years it was a struggling textile town but is now a highly desirable destination for businesses and individuals seeking advanced telecommunications services.

Christopher will be talking on Thursday, November 8th, on "Winning Community Initiatives." Friday, November 9th, he will present as part of the panel on "Innovative Financing Methods." The full agenda for the conference is available to help you plan your schedule.

Danville Location in Virginia

From the press release:

THIS IS THE FIRST conference of its kind in this country - an event devoted entirely to the relationship between a community's economic vitality and the presence of advanced broadband networks. Nations around the world have recognized this powerful linkage and responded to it - as have a growing number of communities in the United States.

Each event in this new conference series will be held in a city with an advanced broadband system.

Each event will have an impressive array of speakers whose mission will be to help attendees evaluate the options and opportunities and develop the optimal, affordable solution for their communities.

The first conference is in Danville, Virginia - the Comeback City that bounced back from devastation with a visionary broadband strategy that's creating jobs and attracting the businesses and industries of tomorrow.

Register here. Fee for the event $110. For more information contact BBC Mag at meredith@broadbandproperties.com.

Community Broadband Bits 5 - Catharine Rice of SEATOA

For our fifth episode of the Community Broadband Bits podcast, we have a discussion with Catharine Rice of SEATOA - the Southeastern Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors. We discuss legislation in North and South Carolina designed to stop communities from building their own networks.

Catharine Rice has been a strong advocate for local authority, helping communities respond to the CenturyLink and Time Warner Cable lobbying Juggernaut in the state capitals. After many years of successfully stopping these big companies from enacting anti-competition legislation, North Carolina passed a bill in 2011 and South Carolina in 2012.

You can read our stories that touch on South Carolina here and North Carolina here.

We want your feedback and suggestions for the show - please e-mail us or leave a comment below. Also, feel free to suggest other guests, topics, or questions you want us to address.

This show is 25 minutes long and can be played below on this page or subscribe via iTunes or via a different tool using this feed. Search for us in iTunes and leave a positive comment!

Listen to previous episodes here.

Thanks to Fit and the Conniptions for the music.

Wally Bowen: Open Wireless is Essential Infrastructure

Once again, we are reprinting an opinion piece by Wally Bowen, founder of the nonprofit Mountain Area Information Network based in Asheville, North Carolina. The op-ed was originally published in the Asheville Citizen-Times.

Once upon a time, Internet enthusiasts made the following comparison: the Internet is to 21st-century economies what navigable waterways and roads were to 19th and 20th-century economies.

But what if our rivers and highways were controlled by a private cartel which set tolls and dictated the make and model of our boats and vehicles? It’s unthinkable, of course. Yet over the last decade, a cartel of cable and phone companies has gained this kind of control over more than 95 percent of Internet access in the US.

In response, many communities have built municipal broadband networks. The cartel, in turn, has persuaded legislatures in 19 states, including North Carolina, to pass laws prohibiting municipal networks.

Scholars call this the “enclosure” of the Internet, similar to the enclosure of rural commons by private owners in 18th and 19th-century England. This trend includes smart phones and tablets which are locked down and controlled by licensing agreements. By contrast, the personal computer is open to innovation. You can take it apart, experiment, and create new functionality. You can also download your choice of software, including free open-source programs.

The full impact of this corporate enclosure of the Internet is still to come, but evidence of it is growing. Consider e-books. When you purchase a real book, you enjoy “first sale” ownership. You can resell it or use it as a doorstop. You can do anything with it, except reproduce it. But when you purchase an e-book, your options are limited by a license that can be changed any time by the vendor without your consent.

With an enclosed Internet, we become renters rather than owners. Our freedom to experiment and innovate, while not totally lost, is governed by gatekeepers and licensing regimes.

But there is a way around the Internet gatekeepers: “open wireless” networks using unlicensed spectrum.

Most spectrum used for smartphones is licensed to, and controlled by, the telecom cartel. By contrast, the free Wi-Fi we enjoy in coffeehouses is unlicensed and free for anyone to use and experiment with. But this spectrum has a very limited range. In 2008, therefore, the FCC approved the “TV white spaces” (TVWS) for unlicensed use. Often called “Wi-Fi on steroids,” this superior spectrum has a far greater range and capacity than conventional Wi-Fi.

Last December the FCC approved the first TVWS device. This new technology can provide seamless coverage throughout a city like Asheville, thereby creating a viable alternative to the cable/phone company cartel. Here’s a sampling of what’s possible via “open wireless” technology:

* “Buy local” advocates use open-wireless to run mobile payment systems that keep money in the local economy and reduce the burden of credit card fees on local merchants.

* “Green energy” advocates use open wireless to transform the corporate “smart-grid” to a “micro-grid” that empowers local innovators and entrepreneurs to promote conservation and new sources of energy.

* A hospital in Ohio is field-testing a TVWS network for its emergency room. When EMS vehicles are in range, patient information and vital signs are automatically transmitted ahead to the ER staff.

These creative and local uses of the Internet were possible because of open-wireless technologies. No one had to ask permission of a network owner or pay rent to a license-holder.

For “Smart Cities” and local self-reliance advocates, open-wireless networks are essential community infrastructure. “Community wireless protects our freedom to innovate and problem-solve in ways that keep money and jobs in the local economy,” says Christopher Mitchell, director of the Telecommunications as Commons Initiative for the Institute for Local Self-Reliance.

Since 2003, the nonprofit Mountain Area Information Network (MAIN) has operated an open-wireless network, but its reach and capacity have been limited. With the imminent arrival of the TV “white spaces” technology, MAIN is launching a $50,000 capital campaign to convert its wireless network to TVWS. This new technology is estimated to have a range of 15-20 miles with speeds of 10-15 megabits per second.

As the telecom cartel tightens its grip on the Internet, MAIN and its partners envision Internet access for Asheville and WNC that protects civil liberties and preserves the freedom to innovate for local inventors and entrepreneurs. To learn more or to get involved, visit: http://www.main.nc.us/TVWS.

Wally Bowen is founder and executive director of MAIN. In 2010, he was diagnosed with ALS. He will be stepping down as executive director later this year, but will continue working on community broadband policy and advocacy.

Newton, North Carolina Is One Big Hotspot

North Carolina infamously became the 19th state to enact barriers to community broadband, but we wrote about a loophole to it last year - communities can provide services for free without interference from the state capital. And starting last year, Newton, with 12,968 residents, began offering free Wi-Fi among 48 blocks and has plans to expand.

The city leaders were looking for ways to revitalize downtown. Jason Clay, the City IS Director, wanted to provide free outdoor WiFi as a way to get residents out and into the heart of the city.  He had explored the possibility in the past, but the high cost was always a barrier. Initial estimates were between $50,000 and $150,000 to install free Wifi.

Clay put in time researching  the products that would work for their situation. Rather than pay a consultant to do radio frequency and engineering studies, he did the work himself. By shopping directly with Meraki and Ubiquiti, Clay found significant savings. He even enlisted the help of the city's electrical crew and Information Services staff to install the needed devices. Where did they put the equipment? On city poles and water towers. Free WiFi in Newton is truly an initiative fueled by ingenuity, determiniation, and some elbow grease. From Joe DePriest's Charlotte Observer article written when the network went live:

"I knew the equipment was out there and that we had to find out which one fit our needs," Clay said. "So I kept digging and researching, trying to take the mystery out of it. When you take the mystery out of anything, it's usually just a lot of smoke and mirrors anyway. I kept at it. And we came up [with] some pretty cool stuff."

In a September city press release:

“Currently the City has surplus Internet bandwidth so it just makes sense to share it with the citizens,” he [Clay] said. “We do have bandwidth limitations set so the free Wi-Fi cannot interfere with City data traffic.”

In addition to visitors to the city's downtown area, the network is used by city employees to monitor the electric grid and water supply and for public safety purposes. The City plans to expand the use of the network to real time public safety purposes and for employees that are in the field, including GIS, street division work, and public works purposes. Also in the press release:

“The City found it too costly to provide cellular data cards to all of the city’s mobile workers,” Clay related. “By owning the wireless network, the City will have the flexibility of expanding the system, controlling the security, and managing the capacity. Plus, the area’s 3G coverage is spotty and 4G isn’t even here.”

The goal, according to Clay, is to expand the wireless network to all areas in the city limits. Currently, areas served are in the downtown business district, at the City pool, at Jacob Fork Park, and inside City Hall.

Downtown businesses see the value in offering free WiFi. In addition to using the network for commercial purposes, business leaders consider it a boost to the atmosphere and the local economy. In the Observer article:

Mayor Pro Tem Anne Stedman, 54, who runs the Trott House Inn Bed & Breakfast on North Main Avenue, sees the free access as one tool to boost the heart of the town she grew up in. At 13, she delivered The Hickory Daily Record in a thriving downtown, stopping for ice cream or a cherry Coke at H&W Drug. Free wireless alone won't restore the town to its old glory, but Stedman thinks it's a step in the right direction. "Newton has never lost its charm," she said. "This is a way to help put the spirit back."

Big Bucks: Why North Carolina Outlawed Community Networks

Less than a year after North Carolina became the 19th state to create barriers to community networks, effectively outlawing them, the non-partisan organization Follow the Money has crunched the numbers and found that private telecommunications interests donated quite heavily to lawmakers that pushed their bill through the Legislature:

According to a report by the National Institute on Money in State Politics, Dialing Up the Dollars: Telecommunication Interests Donated Heavily to NC Lawmakers, Republican lawmakers and those who held key leadership positions, sponsored the bill, and/or who voted in favor of the bill received considerably more campaign contributions from the telecommunication donors than did their colleagues. For example, lawmakers who voted in favor of HB 129 received on average 76 percent more than the average received by those who voted against the bill. The four primary sponsors of the bill received an average of $9,438 each, more than double the $3,658 given on average to lawmakers who did not sponsor the bill.

Recall that Time Warner Cable pushed this bill for years with some help from AT&T, CenturyLink, and others that stood to benefit by limiting broadband competition. But the Legislature wisely refused to enact it... until 2011.

Now we have a better sense of what may have shifted the balance. Consider this:

Thom Tillis

Thom Tillis, who became speaker of the house in 2011, received $37,000 in 2010–2011 (despite running unopposed in 2010), which is more than any other lawmaker and significantly more than the $4,250 he received 2006–2008 combined. AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon each gave Tillis $1,000 in early-mid January, just before he was sworn in as speaker on January 26. Tillis voted for the bill, and was in a key position to ensure it moved along the legislative pipeline.

Running unopposed for office, he collected more money from the cable and phone companies than any other Representative and almost 10 times as much as in the previous two cycle combined. As Speaker, he set the agenda and decided priorities. At a time when communities need as many broadband options as possible, he pushed a bill to limit competition.

It does not prove corruption, but in the immortal lyrics of C&C Music Factory, it "makes you go, hmmmm."

Senator Apodaca, one of the lead supporters of the bill in the Senate, received $21,000 from telecom political action committiees. Only one other Senator came close to that total -- Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger. Most Senators collected well under $10,000.

How did others in leadership positions do?

Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger received $19,500, also a bump from the $13,500 he received in 2008 and the $15,250 in 2006. He voted for the bill.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Brown received $9,000, significantly more than the $2,750 he received in 2006 and 2008 combined. Brown voted in favor of the bill.

Democratic Leader Martin Nesbitt, who voted for the bill, received $8,250 from telecommunication donors; Nesbitt had received no contributions from telecommunication donors in earlier elections.

Oppose HB 129

None of this data suggests quid pro quo corruption. We are not saying that these people only supported this bill because they got thousands upon thousands of dollars from those who wanted it passed.

Nonetheless, the Legislature decided to prioritize a bill to revoke local decision-making authority from communities to make them more dependent on a small number of cable and DSL companies that just happened to give tens of thousands of dollars to key lawmakers.

Hmmmmm.

No use crying about it now. The question is where we go from here. Time to hold their feet to the fire -- after the bill passed, CenturyLink claimed "Thanks to the passage of House Bill 129, CenturyLink has gained added confidence to invest in North Carolina and grow our business in the state."

Can anyone attest to CenturyLink increasing investment in North Carolina? Almost certainly not. AT&T has admitted it won't continue the U-Verse rollout it once promised state legislators.

Let's collect the stories of people denied fast, affordable, and reliable access to the Internet due to laws limiting local authority. Always feel free to share such stories with us.

North Carolina County Turns on First White Spaces Wireless Network in Nation

A local government in southeast North Carolina is the first entity to deploy a "Super Wi-Fi" white-spaces broadband network. New Hanover County, North Carolina, owns the network that was developed by Spectrum Bridge.

New Hanover County and The City of Wilmington do not plan to charge people to use the WiFi capability made possible by the new network. As long as the service is free neither they nor other municipalities deploying the technology are likely to run afoul of anti-municipal network legislation that has been adopted in some areas.

Recall that North Carolina passed a law last year to limit local authority to build networks that could threaten Time Warner Cable or CenturyLink's divine right to be the only service providers in the state (even as they refuse to invest in modern networks).

These white spaces are sometimes called "Super Wi-Fi" because the public knows that Wi-Fi is wireless and therefore anyone can quickly grasp that "Super Wi-Fi" is newer, better, and perhaps even wireless(er).

GovTech also covered the announcement:

According to the FCC, these vacant airwaves between channels are ideal for supporting wireless mobile devices. The FCC named the network “super Wi-Fi” because white spaces are lower frequency than regular Wi-Fi and, therefore, can travel longer distances.

New Hanover County is deploying the super Wi-Fi in three public parks, starting with a playground area at Hugh MacRae Park on Jan. 26, followed by Veterans Park and Airlie Gardens. Other locations in Wilmington, N.C. — located in the county — will also have access to the new network.

Apparently the newsiness of this story derives from its official launch - MuniWireless covered many of the details about this network in early 2010:

Muni Wireless Logo

According to Wilmington Mayor Bill Saffo, the city has a fiber network to support municipal applications, and they are now using wireless technology (over the TV white spaces) where they cannot deploy fiber, for example, in environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands where they want to monitor water quality in real time. The city is also using the wireless network for Department of Transportation cameras which monitor a parkway (where there is a drawbridge) for traffic accidents and heavy traffic flows. With wireless cameras streaming live video to DOT offices, they can send emergency vehicles and adjust the timing of the traffic signals to manage the flow of vehicles.

The benefits of the network appear to mainly center on more efficient government:

Another application is the ability of the city to turn off the lights in sports fields (ball park, soccer field) shortly after a match. They have installed wireless cameras to see if people are still using the ball park and if not, they turn off the lights remotely (for example, an employee can do this from his home). In the past, the lights would remain on even hours after a match is over. The city expects to save $800,000 per year in energy costs alone.

Georgia Legislature to Revoke Local Authority to Build Networks

The Georgia Senate is considering SB 313, a bill that would overrule local decision-making authority in matters of broadband. Even as connections to the Internet have become essential for communities, the Georgia Legislature is poised to make it harder for communities to get the networks they need.

We saw very similar language in North Carolina pass last year after many years of lobbying by Time Warner Cable and CenturyLink. These massive companies use their lobbying clout to stop any form of competition they could face, and they are presently threatened by the examples of many communities that have built incredible next-generation networks. For instance, see the thousands of new jobs in Chattanooga that are credited to its community fiber network.

Community networks spur competition -- it is why Chattanooga got Comcast's xfinity service before Atlanta, despite Atlanta having long been prioritized over Chattanooga previously. It is why Cox Cable, which is headquartered in Atlanta, launched its upgrades in Lafayette, Louisiana -- they felt the competition pressure from a community fiber network.

Bill supporters are already claiming that this is just an attempt to level the playing field:

"The private sector is handling this exceptionally well," Rogers said. "What they don't need is for a governmental entity to come in and compete with them where these types of services already exist. We're not outlawing a local government entity from doing this, but if they're going to compete, they can play by the same rules and ask the voters if it's okay before they go out and spend all these dollars."

We have mapped the states that enacted barriers to community networks,written extensively about level playing field arguments, and even produced a video about the level playing field:

As for whether the private sector is providing enough competition or high enough capacity networks, I leave that to individual communities to decide.

SB 313 effectively removes such decisions from local communities. It purports to just set additional terms that the public sector must meet, but many of these terms are sufficiently onerous (especially when taken all together) that communities will not be able to build the network they need.

The bill first requires communities to ask the private sector to build the necessary network. This ignores the basic fact that community networks are operated with different incentives that privately owned networks. Due to the scarcity in the market, private providers tend to keep prices higher than necessary to maximize their short term profits. Publicly owned networks lower prices (while still paying their costs) in order to spur job creation and increase digital inclusion.

The bill requires communities to pass a referendum before building a network and requires inaccurate, damning language be included on the ballot. Broadband referendums tend to invite deep-pocketed incumbent providers to spend heavily to buy the votes necessary to stop competition - see the Longmont saga for an excellent example of how hard it is for a community to stand up to these big cable corporations.

Georgia Legislature

Communities that somehow get this far are then subject to all the regulations as are private providers in addition to numerous additional regulations imposed on them by this legislation and their inherent duty to operate in an open and transparent manner. Despite being nonprofit, they are required to pay taxes and still face additional barriers that private operators do not.

They will be restricted in how they price their services and where they offer services in ways the private sector is not.

In short, this bill will make it all but impossible for communities to build networks -- even in areas that are presently unserved. The bill purports to exempt some unserved areas, but does so in a cynically evasive way. The only way a community could meet the unserved exemption is if it vowed to only build in the least economical areas -- meaning it would have to be significantly subsidized. Serving unserved areas and breaking even financially almost always requires building a network that will also cover some areas already served (because that is where you can find the margins that will cover the losses in higher expense areas).

The bill is presently in the Senate Regulated Industries and Utilities committee. We will continue covering it and attempt to learn which interests are pushing to revoke local authority and replace it with what distant legislators think best.

Photo used under Creative Commons license, courtesy of Flickr's PhotoPhiend.

New Year, Same Lame Cable and DSL Monopolies

It's a new year, but most of us are still stuck with the same old DSL and cable monopolies. Though many communities have built their own networks to create competition and numerous other benefits, nearly half of the 50 states have enacted legislation to make it harder for communities to build their own networks.

Fortunately, this practice has increasingly come under scrutiny. Unfortunately, we expect to see massive cable and telephone corporations use their unrivaled lobbying power to pass more laws in 2012 like the North Carolina law pushed by Time Warner Cable to essentially stop new community broadband networks.

The FCC's National Broadband Plan calls for all local governments to be free of state barriers (created by big cable and phone companies trying to limit competition). Recommendation 8.19: Congress should make clear that Tribal, state, regional and local governments can build broadband networks.

But modern day railroad barons like Time Warner Cable, AT&T, etc., have a stranglehold on a Congress that depends on their campaign contributions and a national capital built on the lobbying largesse of dominant industries that want to throttle any threats to their businesses. (Hat tip to the Rootstrikers that are trying to fix that mess.)

We occasionally put together a list of notable achievements of these few companies that dominate access to the Internet across the United States. The last one is available here.

FCC Logo

As you read this, remember that the FCC's National Broadband Plan largely places the future of Internet access in the hands of these corporations. On the few occasions the FCC tries to defend the public from their schemes to rip-off broadband subscribers, Republicans (joined by a number of Democrats) threaten to overrule what is supposed to be an independent agency to defend the corporations that just happen to be donors to their campaigns.

Back when most assumed AT&T would be able to push its horribly anti-competitive takeover with T-Mobile through an impotent federal government, a few stories exposed the tip of the iceberg of AT&T's astroturf efforts, as with this report from the Center for Public Integrity:

“It is important that we, as Christians, never stop working on behalf of the underserved and forgotten,” the Rev. R. Henry Martin, director of the clinic, wrote to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in June. “It might seem like an out-of-place endorsement, but I am writing today in order to convey our support for the AT&T/T-Mobile merger.”

...

Not included in Martin’s letter to the FCC was the fact that his organization had received a $50,000 donation from AT&T just five months earlier. Indeed the Shreveport-Bossier Mission is one of at least two-dozen charities that were recipients of AT&T’s largesse and have written in support of the T-Mobile buyout, which will cut the number of national wireless companies from four to three.

When AT&T's wasn't able to buy enough influence with legitimate groups willing to sell out the interests of their members (who would pay more for their communications in a less competitive environment), it would simply create its own groups to push its interests:

AT&T Logo

Tallahassee Mayor John Marks brought an Atlanta nonprofit to the city as a partner in a $1.6-million federal-grant project, saying it would put high-speed Internet into the hands of poor people.

What he didn't say, and now says he didn't know, was that the Alliance for Digital Equality (ADE), in its first three years of existence, was nearly 100-percent funded by AT&T and spent most of its money — four of every five dollars — to pay board members, consultants, lawyers and media companies to push the global communication giant's positions on Internet and wireless regulation. Nor did Marks disclose, initially, that ADE had paid him $86,000 over several years as a member of its board of advisers.

We continue to see these massive companies abuse their market power to increase their prices, knowing that their lobbying arms will continue pushing legislation to stop communities from building their own networks.
Time Warner Cable hiked its rates in North Carolina immediately after passing its legislation to stop communities from building networks. Mediacom raised its prices while it attempts to sabotage efforts in rural Minnesota to build networks in unserved areas. And invented new fees to rip off its subscribers while trying to disrupt a rural fiber-to-the-farm initiative that slightly overlapped some territory in which they have long refused to invest.

Even as profits on cable broadband services approach Exxon proportions, Time Warner Cable has pushed for usage-based pricing to further overcharge subscribers, but mostly to strangle enormously popular competitors like Netflix. CenturyLink is not far behind, with usage caps prioritizing its own video content over competitors.

Verizon Wireless tried to sneak a new fee past subscribers by announcing it just before Christmas but backed down after outraged consumers reacted. One has to wonder whether it would have backed down in a world where AT&T took over T-Mobile, resulting in 3 out of 4 wireless customers being with Verizon Wireless and AT&T. Four competitors isn't the robust competition envisioned by Adam Smith, but it still beats the duopoly dynamic that results from even less competition.

Verizon Logo

Speaking of less competition, the recent deal between Verizon and cable companies is troubling. We already knew that FiOS was all but dead, but this deal truly puts a fork in it:

I'll assume that neither cable operators or Verizon are going to let us see the deal fine print to confirm the Times guess, but the logic fits Verizon's strategy. Verizon already cherry picked the most valuable FTTH upgrade markets, and has shown total disinterest in further upgrades. This deal allows them to save money on FTTH upgrade costs, instead soaking up remaining customers with LTE -- which we noted was the plan some time ago. This deal is very bad news to the rural telcos without the cash for large-scale upgrades (CenturyLink, Frontier, Fairpoint, two of which Verizon sold aging DSL networks to), and for satellite broadband providers.

The future of next-generation networks is now only community networks, cooperatives, and some small private networks.

We've long argued that phone and cable companies have systematically overstated their coverage in mapping efforts as part of their effort to blunt any sensible public policy that would result in all Americans having a choice between fast, affordable, and reliable connections to the Internet. The New England disaster called FairPoint is back in the news for overstating the number of subscribers that have access to DSL. The company has not met the requirements it agreed to when purchasing Verizon's lines a few years ago.

Comcast Logo

And in the continuing saga of Comcast's growing domination over the information people can access, Bloomberg TV is fighting Comcast's practice of discriminating against channels in which it has no ownership stake. Comcast has long strongly encouraged those who want to put television channels on its lineup to give Comcast a piece of the action, not unlike a mobster encouraging a small business to pay protection money. It wants to continue expanding its role as a gatekeeper to the Internet, particularly in the many areas where people have no real choice from other high speed providers.

And perhaps the best example of why we should not trust these massive corporations to run essential infrastructure is the revelation that AT&T defunded 9-11 call centers in Tennessee to gain a market advantage over competitors, a practice they were previously caught doing, leading to settlements out of court.

These corporations are not evil, they are following a sensible mandate to maximize their shareholder value. It is our government that is not sensible -- entrusting them with the future of Internet access without even bothering to enact the most basic regulations. Communities must continue to wise up and ensure they have the access they need to modern communications -- access that reponds to their needs, not those of distant shareholders.

Salisbury's Fibrant Hits 1600 Subscribers

The muni FTTH network owned by the city of Salisbury, North Carolina, is finishing the calendar year with over 1600 subscribers. The network just began signing up customers 13 months ago.

“We already said in the first four years, we would not break even,” City Councilman Brian Miller said. “That’s not a surprise to anyone.”

According to documents, the city expects Fibrant to become cash-flow positive after four years. The city billed the first Fibrant customers one year ago in December 2010.

The city expects Fibrant to eliminate its deficit as more people sign up and revenues increase. The utility, which competes with private providers like Time Warner Cable, has a 13 percent market share, interim City Manager Doug Paris said, and is billing about $200,000 a month.

“We’re growing in what is an extremely tough market,” Paris said.

Paris said after the meeting Fibrant has about 1,600 customers. The utility needs about 4,500 to become cash-flow positive.

Salisbury has a new mayor coming into office, but he is a supporter of the network, as was the outgoing mayor, who spent a significant amount of time defending the community network from Time Warner Cable's attacks via the state legislature.