New Orleans Wi-Fi angers BellSouth
p2p news / p2pnet: BellSouth Corp is cancelling its plan to give a building damaged by Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans. It would have housed new police headquarters, the Washington Post quotes city officials as saying.
But BellSouth’s Louisiana operation “angrily” yanked the offer because it’s upset by the New Orleans project to launch the first free wireless network to be owned and run by a major US city.
“Around the country, large telephone companies have aggressively lobbied against localities launching their own Internet networks, arguing that they amount to taxpayer-funded competition,” says the story. “Some states have laws prohibiting them.”
When news of the New Orleans Wi-Fi service broke last week, Steve Sawyer, Cox Communication vp of public and government affairs for New Orleans, said the company would “watch to see how the city operates and expands the WiFi system,” says the Times-Picayune. “I’m not going to lie and say we don’t care,” he said.
“BellSouth spokesman Merlin Villar said Tuesday that company managers were not prepared to comment on the city network,” said the story, adding that both companies learned about the WiFi network from media reports.
Also read:-
Washington Post – Angry BellSouth Withdrew Donation, New Orleans Says, December 3, 2005
free wireless network – Big Easy’s Wi-Fi connection, November 30, 2005
Times-Picayune – N.O. hopes wireless service connect, November 30, 2005
December 5th, 2005 at 5:11 pm
if it’s a success, hopefully everywhere else will adopt it
December 5th, 2005 at 5:17 pm
“Around the country, large telephone companies have aggressively lobbied against localities launching their own Internet networks, arguing that they amount to taxpayer-funded competition,”
Gee, I didn’t know that the government is taxpayer-funded competition.
Let us see:
- The Police is state funded competition to Wackenhut.
- The public schools are state funded competition to private schools.
- The public hospitals are state funded copetition to private hospitals.
- The public museums are state funded competition to all sorts of entertainemnt, including boxing, wrestling, and gambling casinos, industries where millions of hard working Americans work.
- Public transportation is state funded competition to private taxis. Besides it causes layoffs in the automotive industry and reduces the sale of petroleum by the Saudi family.
- Social Security is a state funded competition cmpetition to insurance companies and to private retirement schemes, you know, the ones that dissapear when the employer goes bankrupt.
I suspect that big business expects to get benefits from all that lobby expense, It just is not fair, as big business sees it, that the government (the people) do anything on their own that reduces their costs, reduces the profits of big business and lasts longer than the life cycles of private corporations.
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com
December 5th, 2005 at 8:12 pm
The idea of having a free wireless network through out the city sounds good. But, is it really free?
Some people wont be happy because it wont offer them the speed, protocol, etc… they want, so they will still opt for a subscribed service. Then there are those, who don’t own a laptop or computer to utilize the “free” service. There are Thousands that would fall into these categories. Yet, these groups will be paying taxes for this service, making additional costs for them not less. This hurts the low income, middle income, and high income classes, however its the low income class that will feel the pinch.
It’s true that it maybe cheaper than a subscribed service from a big company, but atleast a subscribed service places the bill on the oppropriate party, the person who wants to use the service. This proposed “free” wireless network will be cheaper for those that would use it, simply by distributing the cost to all citizens(taxation) regardless of wether they use the service. Too bad our country is shifting to a socialism.
Also with a government supported network comes government censorship and monitoring. Maybe not at first, but it will come eventually. The clever strategist doesnt make his plans known, he lures his subject into the trap then executes the plan. Afterwords people ask, “what the hell happened?”
I for one dont want my ISP to be “Big Brother”.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:16 am
Well stated!
My heart weeps for those poor Bellsouth shareholders…
December 6th, 2005 at 12:26 am
You make good points. I have one question & one obsevation.
Quote “I for one dont want my ISP to be “Big Brother”.”
What makes you think it isn’t now (or won’t be in the future)? IMHO a city government is subject to more oversite and transparency requirements than any private company. You trust corporations more than government? I’d say it’s a toss-up.
“Too bad our country is shifting to a socialism.”
Maybe, but I for one don’t think so. Perhaps we are slipping twards fascism, but socialism on a functional level? Nope.
December 6th, 2005 at 6:06 am
Let us see:
- The Police is government funded
- The public schools are government funded
- The public hospitals are government funded
- The public museums are government funded
Too bad they are all under-funded. In my own experience, I find that most people have more negative things to say about these programs then positive. Last thing government needs is too enlarge itself by creating more programs that will inevitably be under-funded and create discontent with service.
There is nothing wrong with a business making profit, after all that’s what capitalism encourages. I do believe that big businesses should be more responsible and not engage in price gouging.
December 7th, 2005 at 5:29 am
While I would rather be able to chose what service I want for internet access and not have my paycheck shrink for yet another government program that does not benefit me in the least, the entitlement attitude of big business is getting disturbing. I remember a few months back when The Weather Channel was upset and going to sue the NWS (national weather service) for starting to release their data online for free. They spouted the same bulls**t âunfair competitionâ line. The only thing is, the main source of data for The Weather Channel and its buddies is the NWS, which is taxpayer funded. They wanted the taxpayers to pay for their weather data, and then charge them for access to it. Outrageous
March 25th, 2006 at 5:58 pm
Who has their profits ensured by protectionist legislation.
The fact that they want to pull free wifi from people who still have no phone service, or other internet service shows it.