I saw this blog over at Huffpo and it actually made my jaw drop, not because Harold DLC Ford wrote it, but at the audacity of it. Then I read the comments and I smiled:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harold-ford/fcc-re-designation-of-bro_b_588879.html?ir=PoliticsThere has been a significant amount of news coverage regarding the recent announcement by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that, for the first time, it may classify many broadband services under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. Title II was designed to give the then newly-formed FCC authority to regulate telephone and telegraph services; a long stretch from modern broadband access to the Internet.
Legal and agency experts are poring over the technical aspects of moving broadband from Title I to Title II, but what has not been carefully examined -- and which should be -- is the economic impact this re-designation will have on investment decisions that broadband network providers will make in deciding how, where, and if to build, upgrade and maintain the next generation of broadband networks.
(snip)
Tuna Amobi, Standard & Poor stated in a May 6th MarketWatch piece:
"
creates potential long-term negative investment (and competitive) implications for major cable broadband providers.'"
John Hodulik, with UBS stated in a May 5th Wall Street Journal article:
"Cable companies and carriers are likely to fight this in court for years and could accelerate their plans to wind down investment in their broadband networks...You could have regulators involved in every facet of providing Internet over time. How wholesale and prices are set, how networks are interconnected and requirements that they lease out portions of their network."
(end sip)
I hear tiny violins, Harold. And, as many of the posters indicate, US broadband sucks.
:nopity: