TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

AT&T sues Louisville to stop Google Fiber from using its utility poles

296 点作者 pavornyoh大约 9 年前

11 条评论

SwellJoe大约 9 年前
The telecoms are masters of destroying competition through legislative means. They utterly destroyed DSL competition during the dawn of broadband (my first company sold to independent ISPs; I watched them all wither and die within the span of about four years, as broadband took over and they were prevented from competing by shady behavior by AT&amp;T and Verizon), and now they&#x27;re trying everything at their disposal to continue to deliver poor service at high prices without effective competition.<p>The difference this time is that Google is bigger than they are, and not <i>quite</i> as much of a pushover in the legal domain. It&#x27;s still an uphill battle, and consumers are still going to be the ones to suffer under pathetically poor quality and expensive Internet service (the US is something like 14th in quality&#x2F;speed&#x2F;price in the world for Internet service, despite it having been invented here, and despite having vastly more infrastructure investment at all levels).<p>The best thing that could possibly happen for the Internet in the US would be the swift and total annihilation of anti-competitive companies like AT&amp;T, Verizon, and the major cable companies, leaving room for innovators to step in and fill the void. But, that won&#x27;t happen...they&#x27;re too good at stacking the deck to remain in leadership positions in the market, despite delivering terrible service on nearly every front.<p>Not that I&#x27;m bitter, or anything.
评论 #11187325 未加载
评论 #11186282 未加载
评论 #11186591 未加载
评论 #11186062 未加载
评论 #11186190 未加载
评论 #11186112 未加载
评论 #11186199 未加载
评论 #11186085 未加载
tzs大约 9 年前
Most of the comments are discussing broader issues that aren&#x27;t actually part of this particular lawsuit. Those issues are certainly more interesting than the narrow issue that this lawsuit is about, so I can understand why everyone wants to talk about them. Nevertheless, we should have at least <i>some</i> discussion about the actual lawsuit, so I&#x27;ll have a shot at it. :-)<p>I took a look at AT&amp;T&#x27;s court filing (there&#x27;s a link in the article to it for those who want more detail). They make two main arguments.<p>The first argument is that under FCC rules an entity with existing attachments is entitled to written notification if someone else&#x27;s attachment is going to affect their facilities. They then have 60 days to modify their attachments to accommodate the new attachments. If they do not complete the work on time to accommodate the new attachments, then the entity wanting the new attachment can go ahead and do the work themselves.<p>Under the municipal ordinance the new attacher only has to provide notification if they think that their work is likely to cause a customer outage. If not they can simply go in themselves and move or modify the existing attachment.<p>This is at odds with the FCC rules, and AT&amp;T argues that this should invalidate the municipal ordinance.<p>The second argument AT&amp;T makes is that while the Federal law <i>does</i> allow states to override FCC pole attachment rules in some circumstances, Kentucky state law vests such power exclusively in the Public Service Commission of Kentucky (and they cite Kentucky court cases confirming that this includes the power to regulate pole attachments). Thus, AT&amp;T argues, the municipal government does not have authority to enact its ordinance.<p>These actually seem like pretty decent arguments. I&#x27;m curious what counterarguments the defendants will raise.
评论 #11186771 未加载
datashovel大约 9 年前
Publications just need to continue to follow these stories, and print relevant details. The rest will take care of itself.<p>Investors with large stakes in AT&amp;T, and board members, need to take a look in the mirror and ask themselves whether the CEO&#x27;s compensation is in line with his ability to ask his legal department to sue people &#x2F; companies &#x2F; governments, or is it in line with his ability to make at&amp;t a great company that accomplishes amazing things for its customers.
gjkood大约 9 年前
I read a book a long time ago about AT&amp;T Bell Labs. I think it may have been &quot;Three Degrees Above Zero&quot;, but I am not sure now.<p>Something that impressed me a great deal at that time was the testing that AT&amp;T used to do with utility poles, to ensure that it withstands the vagaries of nature and time in all types of climatic zones.
评论 #11187697 未加载
评论 #11186128 未加载
jleader大约 9 年前
My understanding is that telephone, cable, and power providers share the poles. Don&#x27;t the power companies usually own the poles? So if they added internet providers to the list of companies authorized to share the poles, AT&amp;T wouldn&#x27;t have grounds for complaint. Since internet providers (such as AT&amp;T) already share the poles, this seems like a reasonable move.<p>In my neighborhood we had 2 competing cable providers for about a decade, and they managed to share the poles (along with the phone company and the power company) without any problems (or at least, any problems that made the news).
评论 #11186194 未加载
notlisted大约 9 年前
Related: if you want to read how the Telecoms have us over a barrel, and how they fleeced us all yet never delivered on what they promised, read <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Broadbandits-Inside-Billion-Telecom-Heist&#x2F;dp&#x2F;0471660612" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Broadbandits-Inside-Billion-Telecom-He...</a> (by Om Malik, of GigaOm fame)
评论 #11187651 未加载
jessaustin大约 9 年前
TFA isn&#x27;t clear about this, but I suspect that all of the poles in question are actually <i>owned</i> by LG&amp;E who operate the electrical lines that hang from them. So &quot;...its utility poles&quot; in the title should actually be &quot;...the same utility poles it uses&quot;. There probably is some dumb FCC rule that supports ATT&#x27;s position here, because after all those rules are written by ATT. One hopes that courts would decide FCC don&#x27;t govern how LG&amp;E&#x27;s poles are used. If any agency would, surely it would be DoE?
评论 #11187402 未加载
评论 #11186290 未加载
jfoutz大约 9 年前
An elegant reply would be to enact a large fee on privately owned telephone poles, and then waive the fee for one-touch consenting pole owners.
评论 #11186234 未加载
EliRivers大约 9 年前
&quot;This lawsuit is not about Google. It’s about the Louisville Metro Council exceeding its authority.&quot;<p>Uh huh. I&#x27;m sure that if Louisville Metro Council passed an ordinance beyond their remit about soup kitchens serving the homeless AT&amp;T would be right in there.<p>There comes a point when the self-serving lies become so transparent it&#x27;s offensive that they&#x27;d even say them.
drawkbox大约 9 年前
This is a losing tactic, just delaying the inevitable or buying time. Legislation can only stop progress towards innovation for so long.
评论 #11186326 未加载
XJOKOLAT大约 9 年前
Sorry, down-votes accepted, disclaimer that I don&#x27;t support Google out of preference at all, but from a consumer point of view, I must say ...<p>FUCK YOU, AT&amp;T.