Model Anti-Municipal Broadband Bill

Grok Headline matches for Model Anti-Municipal Broadband Bill

US senators offer bill to protect
municipal broadband

US senators offer bill to protect
municipal broadband 06/24/2005 06:54 PM

WASHINGTON - Two U.S. senators have jumped into a growing debate about whether cities should be allowed to create tax-funded broadband services, with the two introducing a bill that would prevent states from outlawing municipal broadband projects.

Fourteen U.S. states have passed laws limiting municipal broadband services, with large Internet providers lobbying against city-offered services.

The Community Broadband Act of 2005, introduced Thursday by Senators John McCain, an Arizona Republican, and Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, would prevent states from outlawing municipal broadband service while requiring cities to regulate their own broadband services the same as they regulate competitors. For example, a municipal broadband service would have to pay the same franchise fees as other providers.

Several cities, including Philadelphia, have explored offering municipal broadband, typically using Wi-Fi technology, in recent months. Late last year, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell signed legislation preventing further municipal broadband projects, but along with the bill came an agreement between the city of Philadelphia and Verizon Communicatons Inc. over a city-run Wi-Fi network.

The Community Broadband Act is needed to meet President George Bush's goal of universally available broadband in the U.S. by 2007, McCain said in a speech Thursday. McCain noted that the U.S. ranks 16th among nations in broadband penetration.

"This is unacceptable for a country that should lead the world in technical innovation, economic development and international competitiveness," McCain said. "As a country, we cannot afford to cut off any successful strategy if we want to remain internationally competitive."

Private investment in the Internet should be protected and continued, he added. "However, when private industry does not answer the call because of market failures or other obstacles, it is appropriate and even commendable, for the people acting through their local governments to improve their lives by investing in their own future," McCain said. "In many rural towns, the local government?s high speed Internet offering may be its citizens only option to access the World Wide Web."

Verizon and SBC Communications Inc., which both offer DSL (Digital Subscriber Line) services, have opposed municipal broadband, as has Time Warner Cable, saying tax-funded services should not be allowed to compete against existing commercial services. A spokesman for Verizon said Friday the company had not reviewed the McCain/Lautenberg bill and had no comment on it. An SBC spokesman didn't immediately respond to a request for comments.

The two telecom giants, however, helped fund a study released in February that said municipal Wi-Fi networks could have "grave flaws."

The New Millennium Research Council study suggested municipal broadband services could dedicate tax dollars to rapidly outdated technology. The study also noted that municipal broadband networks could be expensive to maintain. "Municipal Wi-Fi networks present a number of serious problems that are being overlooked as cities rush into committing millions in taxpayer dollars to pay for network development and expansion," the study said.

The McCain/Lautenberg legislation stands in contrast to a bill introduced in May by Representative Pete Sessions, a Texas Republican and former SBC employee. The Sessions bill, the Preserving Innovation in Telecom Act of 2005, would outlaw municipal broadband services in areas where competing commercial services exist. The bill has been referred to a House subcommittee.

Sessions introduced the bill to ?discourage local governments from wasting taxpayer funds on building duplicative infrastructure while at the same time encouraging private-sector companies to offer continually innovating service in underserved areas by removing the specter of government competition" he said in a statement when the bill was introduced.

On Thursday, 40 groups representing local governments, the IT industry and consumers sent a letter to members of Congress asking lawmakers to support pro-municipal broadband legislation. Among the groups signing the letter were the League of California Cities, Public Knowledge, the Rural Broadband Coalition, Consumers Union and the Fiber to the Home Council.

SEE ALSO:

Da ta privacy gets a hearing

BT's 'new wave' services contribute more to revenue

ADVERTISEMENT
Trend Micro
NEW ANTI-SPYWARE SOLUTIONS FROM TREND MICRO

Municipal Broadband at SXSW

Municipal Broadband at SXSW 02/07/2005 01:07 AM
Events move so fast, my head spins: a few days after covering the flurry of activity around the New Millennium Research Council's report discouraging municipal broadband, I was asked to moderate a panel on the discussion on March 14 during the South by Southwest (SXSW) music, arts, and interactive festival and conference in Austin, Texas. Esme Vos is also on the panel, from MuniWireless.com, and we should have a rip, and might I add, roaring time. The interactive part of the event runs March 11 to 15; the overall event is from March 11 to 20....

The Ups And Downs Of Municipal Broadband

The Ups And Downs Of Municipal Broadband 04/14/2004 11:51 AM
Following last month's Supreme Court ruling stating that state s could outlaw municipal broadband, ZDNet has an interesting interview with Jim Ballmer, one of the lawyers fighting to let municipalities offer broadband, should they want to. Meanwhile, the very large UTOPIA municipal broadband (offering fiber to the home) project in Utah was dealt a huge setback last night when Salt Lake City decided not to support the project, after a fairly intense fight over the issue. Qwest is rejoicing, as they've been complaining about UTOPIA ever since it was first conceived. However, the folks behind UTOPIA are clearing trying to push ahead, and hope that they'll be signing up a few other cities to help out soon. The big questions now are whether or not the other cities involved are willing to foot the larger part of the bill and whether or not they'll be able to find enough subscribers to make AT&T still be interested in being a service provider on the network. Once again, we return to the example of Burlington, Vermont, where a municipal fiber connection with ownership by its own users means much more opportunity for everyone except companies who previously had the local monopoly on providing (much slower) broadband access. A municipal solution that allows companies to sign on as providers builds on the idea of a natural monopoly while still allowing true competitive market pressures to provide people with better services.

Bill would thwart municipal Internet

Bill would thwart municipal Internet 02/01/2005 09:14 PM
Indystar.com - Tue Feb 1, 08:50 am GMT

Senators back municipal broadband

Senators back municipal broadband 06/24/2005 03:32 PM
In the face of opposition from the telecom industry, some US senators are supporting municipal broadband.

Does Municipal Broadband Save Jobs?

Does Municipal Broadband Save Jobs? 04/30/2004 01:33 PM
Just as certain states (at the urging of big broadband providers) are trying to ban municipal broadband offerings, Broadband Reports is looking at whether or not municipal broadband helps create jobs and boost the local economy. It seems like it's a mixed bag - but in a fairly expected way. Obviously, it has the ability to do two things: (1) give jobs to local residents working for the municipal broadband service provider and (2) help create new jobs for those who need broadband. However, it's unlikely (on its own) to suddenly turn any town or city into the next Silicon Valley. Still, with some towns unable to get broadband any other way, it can clearly help towns keep jobs that would otherwise go away. Considering the fact that, these days, many jobs require broadband access, it seems somewhat ridiculous for states to mandate that their towns and cities can't come up with their own solutions.

NRMC Report on Municipal Broadband Is
Out

NRMC Report on Municipal Broadband Is
Out 02/05/2005 09:27 PM
I've read the report, and it's worth downloading and reviewing: The report from the NMRC is called "Not In The Public Interest - The Myth of Municipal Wi-Fi Networks -- Why Municial Schemes to Provide Wi-Fi Broadband Services With Public Funds Are Ill-Advised." I've studied it now and have some comments. Before reading my comments, you should review that report and one that's a predecessor and cited in this report and in some of the advance publicity from The Heartland Institute, which co-produced the report--The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University's Municipal Broadband in Concord: An In-Depth Analysis. (See also Karl Bode's more irate analysis of the report.) I'm going to back in time to March 2004, when the Beacon Hill Institute report was published because many elements of it are embedded in the NMRC report. The Concord report from Beacon Hill analyzes whether a proposed network in Concord, Mass., has any hopes of producing a good return with low risk. The report looks at four cities, including Tacoma, Wash., and Ashland, Ore., and also examines RCN, a cable operator that tried to offer competitive broadband services in areas with incumbent operators. Some financial details in the report on Tacoma and Ashland date to 2001 partly because financial information isn't readily broken out for these two projects. Based on aspects of the Beacon Hill report, it was clearly primarily written in late 2003 when full-year figures for 2002 were all that would have been available. It's tricky to tease out where they got numbers for Ashland and Tacoma even after studying and following the footnotes and reading reports at the various project sites. For instance, a citation on Ashland borrowing as much as $20 million from other city agencies to make up revenue shortfalls in their fiber network is attribute to a site called Dynacorp-sucks.com that was "last accessed January 28, 2003" in the footnote reference. There is no record of this site at Archive.org, either, which doesn't mean it didn't exist, but means I cannot research what used to be there. On the Ashland Fiber Network site and City of Ashland's site, I cannot find recent numbers on cost and capital expenses, except that in the 2003-2004 budget, income from AFN outstrips expense by about 15 percent ($2.67 million in versus $2.33 million out). There appears to be no primary research in the Beacon Hill report, such as...

Podcast: Municipal Broadband Panel
Discussion

Podcast: Municipal Broadband Panel
Discussion 03/17/2005 03:44 AM
Listen to an hour of discussion at South by Southwest Interactive (SXSWi) on municipal broadband: Deep in the heart of Texas, mere blocks from the State House where a bill is under consideration to ban all forms of municipal networking, I led a panel discussion at SXSWi with three people well poised to discuss the issues: Esme Vos of muniwireless.com, Rich MacKinnon of Austin Wireless, and David Isenberg of the SMART Letter. The conversation was fairly focused, and you'll hear the same themes over and over again: disruptive technology is threatening incumbents who are trying to prevent all forms of experimentation and innovation by municipalities because any success on these fronts could produce competitive private businesses. All three panelists agreed the innovation and competition were good, and all four of us at various times agreed that utilities should probably not have anything to do with broadband except in facilitating competition by removing barriers to access to poles and conduits, or by contracting private firms to build neutral networks onto which any provider can roam. The audio quality is mixed: you can hear the panelists quite well, but questioners and commenters from the audience--including well-known quantities like Jock Gill, Dewayne Hendricks, Cliff Skolnick, and Jon Lebovsky--are a little faint. You can download the audio in MP3 format either directly as MP3 [31 MB] or as a ZIP archive [24 MB]. An article in yesterday's Austin Business Journal--in which publication my picture will appear in about two weeks in an unrelated story--points out that even airport-based Wi-Fi and broadband could be threatened because the contract that the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport has with Wayport would be banned under the first form of the house bill....

Of Municipal Broadband, Astroturfing And
Figuring Out What The Real Story Is

Of Municipal Broadband, Astroturfing And
Figuring Out What The Real Story Is 02/05/2005 09:49 PM
It's been pretty fascinating to watch this story develop over the past few days. Of course, it's nothing new to find out that supposedly "objective" research was actually carried out to favor a specific interest, but congratulations should go out to Glenn Fleishman for focusing the attention on the real story here. The background is that an organization called the New Millennium Research Council came out with a report which seemed to suggest that all municipal broadband was pure evil (well, not exactly, but that's how the pre-release info made it sound). Glenn took it upon himself to pull back some of the curtain on the folks who were behind the report. eWeek then took that a step further, and suddenly the "story" was no longer about the evils of municipal broadband -- but the sketchy connections between powerful telco interests who have been fighting as hard as they can against any kind of competition and the group that wrote the study. Glenn later gave a thorough review of the actual report, where he notes it's not nearly as bad as it had appeared from the initial leaks, and that it does raise some valid points. However, the real story is the underhanded way in which this report was written, with money being funnelled from a group supported by the big telcos to what appears to be nothing more than a front organization to write up reports that favor its funders. Now, others are picking up on the astroturf attempt, rather than the study itself.

Heavy-Hitters Join Pro-Municipal
Broadband Legislative Battle

Heavy-Hitters Join Pro-Municipal
Broadband Legislative Battle 06/24/2005 10:01 PM
Dell, Intel, Texas Instruments, and others want more broadband to sell more gear to consumers: They've increasingly gotten involved in the ongoing debate over whether incumbent monopolies and duopolies deserve right of first refusal for broadband deployment in their service areas over municipalities because of incumbents' investments, municipalities' tax-free and bond-raising abilities, and the role of government in competing with private enterprise. The Wall Street Journal walks through the issue, starting with a small town in Texas that's building broadband because SBC can't or won't. The Texas legislature was considering a telecom "reform" bill--a bill which removed many public service and oversight controls on telcos--that would also have banned municipalities from participating in broadband. The original bill was so broad it would have banned virtually all private-public partnerships that the FCC and the Bush Administration have stressed for extending broadband into the furthest reaches of the country. The backlash is now coming since Texas's bill hit defeat for a variety of reasons, partly including Dell's founder picking up the phone and calling legislators. You see, computer makers would enjoy selling more equipment and one way to do that is broadband. (Homes with broadband connections tend to buy newer equipment and more computers, among other reasons.) Pete Sessions (R-Texas) has introduced a bill at the national level to pre-empt local legislation (there's that anti-federalism again) governing municipal operation of broadband. Sessions is the representative from SBC: a former employee with huge stock and stock options held directly (not in trust) with a spouse who currently works there. His chief of staff told the Wall Street Journal that "the congressman's ties to SBC do not present a conflict of interest." Except in that he has millions of dollars at stake over SBC's continued performance in the market....

Ricochet Offers Broadband Portable
Internet to Municipal & Public Safety
Workers

Ricochet Offers Broadband Portable
Internet to Municipal & Public Safety
Workers 05/12/2004 05:28 AM
dBusinessNews.com May 12 2004 9:41AM GMT

New group urges public/private sector
partnership to facilitate municipal
broadband

New group urges public/private sector
partnership to facilitate municipal
broadband 04/16/2005 05:07 AM
A group called the High Tech Broadband Coalition is encouraging public and private sector partnership to facilitate municipal broadband.

Secure Resolutions Upgrades Their
Anti-Virus Engine to Include
Anti-Spyware, Anti-Adware, Anti-Dialers,
Anti-Hoaxes, Anti-Jokes, and
Anti-Hacking Tools

Secure Resolutions Upgrades Their
Anti-Virus Engine to Include
Anti-Spyware, Anti-Adware, Anti-Dialers,
Anti-Hoaxes, Anti-Jokes, and
Anti-Hacking Tools 06/05/2005 11:14 PM
Secure Resolutions desktop security (Resolution Antivirus™) automatically detects and eliminates all types of viruses, worms, Trojans Horses, dialers, hoaxes, jokes, and hacking tools within a managed desktop security solution. [PRWEB Jun 2, 2005]

Congress OKs anti-spam bill

Congress OKs anti-spam bill 12/09/2003 12:23 AM
CNN Dec 8 2003 11:22PM ET

Anti-Gmail Bill Introduced

Anti-Gmail Bill Introduced 04/28/2004 10:29 AM
Seth Finkelstein reports that California State Senator Liz Figueroa has introduced her bizarre bill. Press release, Info, Text. I've talked to several privacy advocates (and I'd like to think of myself as a privacy advocate, as well) and I have yet to understand any possible scenario where this bill makes sense. (If you think you can explain it, please tell me.) Let's be clear: This bill would make Gmail illegal. It wouldn't ask them to change some poor business practices, it wouldn't ask them to add privacy protections, it would just force Google to fund it some way without ads or shut it down. So why go to this drastic step? What's the harm? As I see it, there are three parts to Gmail: Receive your email. Every web email service does this, and nobody has objected. Store up to a gigabyte of email. Since this is so much more email than any other service, this could lead to some increased privacy problems. (Google could search through your archives at any time.) But this doesn't seem to be what people are objecting to, and Google has said they'll try their best to keep your email safe. Analyze your email. This seems to be what people are objecting to. But I don't see what the problem is: Google searches your email for key words, finds ads that match those key words, and shows you the ads. Then it throws all the information it generated away immediately, so no human (other than you) ever sees it. Google doesn't store any information about how many times or to who ads were shown. They don't store any information about what was in your emails. And no human ever goes and looks at your emails. So what's the big deal? How could this possibly cause a problem for anyone? I think the real problem here is that people feel uncomfortable about ads in their email. (I felt a bit uncomfortable at first too.) But to say there's a privacy problem with Gmail's ad system, without spelling out what it is, only capitalizes on people's fears. Sadly, that's exactly what thirty-one privacy and civil liberties organizations have done. Again, if you can explain the problem with Gmail to me, I'll take it back....

Anti-spam bill passed

Anti-spam bill passed 12/02/2003 01:49 AM
The U.S. House of Representatives passed anti-spam legislation that provides for prison time as well as hefty fines

Anti-Spyware Bill Is Back

Anti-Spyware Bill Is Back 01/06/2005 02:38 PM
As was widely expected, Mary Bono has reintro duced her anti-spyware bill to Congress, where it's expected to get approval (as it did last year, before being shut down in the Senate). Clearly, some thought has gone into the bill, and it's not as bad as some previously proposed anti-spyware laws. However, you still have to wonder if it will really help. There will be provisions in the bill that are likely to have unintended consequences, causing problems for some software products. Meanwhile, the nastiest spyware products will remain controlled by criminals who don't care about the law because they don't expect to get caught. I don't think it's the worst thing in the world, but any law should have a provision to keep an eye out for negative unintended consequences and have a way to fix those quickly. There should also be a way to monitor whether or not this actually has an impact. Otherwise, it's just going to get voted into law without any balances to make sure it doesn't do any harm, because who wants to vote in favor of spyware?

Anti-File Sharing Bill Changes Name,
Little Else

Anti-File Sharing Bill Changes Name,
Little Else 06/23/2004 05:34 PM
Last week we wrote about the so-called INDUC E Act, that would outlaw inducing or even counseling someone to infringe on copyrights. The bill was supposed to be introduced last week, but some of the publicity around the leaded version made the sponsors hold back a few days. If you thought they used that time to change the bill, you were wrong. They did change the name, getting rid of the laughable "child exploitation" part in the name, but leaving the actual law the same. The bill is now called, The Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (IICA), which must upset those politicians who love bill names that spell out words related to the bill. Either way it's a dreadful and somewhat scary bill that would clearly outlaw file sharing networks, along with VCRs and other methods for infringing copyrights. Unfortunately, it appears to have strong bi-partisan backing, that's looking to rush it through Congress. If it did pass, it would be disastrous for the tech industry which (stupidly) is supporting it in the form of the BSA and the ESA. The RIAA is also thrilled about it. All three are missing out on the fact that they're basically trying to kill off the best distribution system that's ever been handed to them -- one that's been shown to have strong promotional value. It's amazing how badly these industries, with their pocketed politicians are shooting themselves in the foot. This bill would make it impossible to create something like the VCR or TiVo today. It's dangerous, it's stupid and it's going to damage our economy if it passes. Update: TechLawAdvisor points out the fact that "counsels" has been dropped from the bill.

Speed limit Plans to get everyone using
broadband may fail says Bill Thompson

Speed limit Plans to get everyone using
broadband may fail says Bill Thompson 11/14/2003 11:29 AM
BBC Nov 14 2003 10:45AM ET

Congress OKs National Anti-Spam Bill

Congress OKs National Anti-Spam Bill 12/08/2003 09:29 PM
AP via Daily Press Dec 8 2003 8:36PM ET

Bush to sign anti-phishing bill

Bush to sign anti-phishing bill 07/15/2004 08:29 AM
Mandatory minumum sentences for ID theft

Anti-DMCA bill gathers weight

Anti-DMCA bill gathers weight 06/22/2004 07:48 AM

Bush signs anti-spam bill

Bush signs anti-spam bill 12/17/2003 07:20 AM
Computer Weekly Dec 17 2003 6:21AM ET

Congress approves anti-spam bill

Congress approves anti-spam bill 12/08/2003 09:29 PM
CNN Dec 8 2003 8:35PM ET

Anti-Spyware Bill Gets One Step Closer

Anti-Spyware Bill Gets One Step Closer 06/17/2004 07:33 PM
Despite strong lobbying efforts from a number of large tech companies, a House panel has approv ed an anti-spyware bill that would require any software to clearly tell the user that it includes traffic tracking components. It would also prohibit keystroke logging, browser/computer hijacking and ads that can't be closed. While this (of course) won't stop the worst spyware offenders who don't really care about the law, it should slow down the proliferation of annoying and sneaky adware that's almost as bad. It's still unclear which part of the law tech companies are upset with at this point. It does seem to be clearly written to only focus on "bad" spyware.

Bush Signs Anti-Spam Bill

Bush Signs Anti-Spam Bill 12/17/2003 06:09 AM
Spammers violating the new law could be looking at stiff fines and even prison terms under legislation signed into law by the White House.

US anti-spyware bill clears another
hurdle

US anti-spyware bill clears another
hurdle 06/25/2004 07:06 AM
ZDNet UK Jun 25 2004 11:23AM GMT

House Panel OKs Anti-Spyware Bill

House Panel OKs Anti-Spyware Bill 06/17/2004 02:46 PM
Internet News Jun 17 2004 7:22PM GMT

Anti-Spyware Bill Advances in Congress

Anti-Spyware Bill Advances in Congress 06/24/2004 04:46 PM

Conservative group savages anti-P2P bill

Conservative group savages anti-P2P bill 09/24/2004 05:43 PM
Political wrangling over a copyright bill that could imperil some MP3 players heats up in the Senate before a vote next Thursday.

Anti-Spyware Bill up for Vote in
Congress

Anti-Spyware Bill up for Vote in
Congress 09/22/2004 08:33 PM

Lawmakers Introduce Anti-Outsourcing
Bill

Lawmakers Introduce Anti-Outsourcing
Bill 03/06/2004 02:01 AM
Lawmakers introduced a bill in Congress Thursday aimed to deter U.S. companies from outsourcing jobs overseas. The Defending American Jobs Act of 2004, sponsored by 50 legislators, proposes to cut federal funding from companies that lay off workers at higher rates in the U.S. than abroad.

Senate to Decide on Anti-Spyware Bill

Senate to Decide on Anti-Spyware Bill 09/22/2004 06:33 PM
Anti-spyware legislation that prohibits companies from installing software on a computer without user consent has been approved by the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee. Dubbed the Spy Block Act, the bill now moves to the full Senate where it will likely be voted on before the end of the year. The Spy Block Act requires software to provide an uninstall option, as well as outlaws any software that transmits user information without explicit approval.

SBC Promotes Texas Anti-Wireless Bill

SBC Promotes Texas Anti-Wireless Bill 04/08/2005 12:42 PM

Congress passes anti-spam bill

Congress passes anti-spam bill 12/09/2003 09:45 AM
'Ham fisted' CAN-SPAM Act

Congress Debates Anti-Spyware Bill

Congress Debates Anti-Spyware Bill 04/16/2005 02:44 PM

Anti-spyware bill heads for House

Anti-spyware bill heads for House 06/24/2004 03:05 PM
Measure to keep an eye on spyware takes a step closer to becoming law. Tech industry groups aren't too happy.

Lawmaker tones down anti-Gmail bill

Lawmaker tones down anti-Gmail bill 05/25/2004 10:04 PM

No One Likes California's Anti-Spyware
Bill

No One Likes California's Anti-Spyware
Bill 09/16/2004 09:18 PM
It looks like almost no one is happy with the proposed anti-spyware legislation in California. Companies aren't happy with it because they're afraid it may ban perfectly reasonable applications, while privac y groups say it's worse than no law at all since it's way too narrowly focused. Of course, it sounds like this narrow focus is making some of the companies that originally opposed the bill now view it in a more favorable light.
Grok Description matches for Model Anti-Municipal Broadband Bill
GrokA matches for Model Anti-Municipal Broadband Bill

Model Anti-Municipal Broadband Bill

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: