Re: M$ Monitor: Why You Haven't Heard From Us

[rd@cottonwood.com (Rick Dahlgren)]

Louis:

All providers must rely on one of the wires attached to your residence. 
The ISP's fight every day to obtain timely competitive service from telco's
for "resale" of the telcos' dsl services.  Further, DSL requires equipment
in a central switch which cannot provide service outside a limited wire
distance from the telco central switch.  With the right court ruling or a
little enhancement of the Congress at the hands of lobbyists, independent
ISP's could be wiped out.

Audrie is right on target, except to say that cable companies (including
ATT, Time Warner and Cox), while operating completely within the law,
should really develop a win/win model for opening up before congress does
what we suggested 3 years ago and again this spring, which is to merge
title VI and title II provisions of the act.

Rick Dahlgren
Cottonwood Communications
rd@cottonwood.com

>Audrie,
>
>Your stand on suggesting that broadband access should be sold only by
>local monopolies is short sighted.
>
>Consumers simply do not want to be limited to only two choices for high
>speed internet access (i.e. the local cable monopoly and DSL).  That is
>a ridiculous suggestion.
>
>Right now consumers have a choice of 3 or 4 or more ISPs who can provide
>comparable service.
>
>Your stand would cut that down to perhaps one or two based upon who owns
>the wires.
>
>That solution will never serve consumers.
>
>
>Audrie Krause wrote:
>> 
>> The Micro$oft Monitor ... <clipped...see orgininal message>
>
>
>-- 
>Lewis A. Mettler, Esq.(Attorney and Software Developer)
>lmettler@LAMLaw.com
>http://www.lamlaw.com/ ( detailed review of Microsoft antitrust trial
>transcripts )
>________________________________________________________
>NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet.  Shouldn't you?
>Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
>http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html