On 12/20/23 20:45, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 8:04 PM Pocket <poc...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
On 12/20/23 19:48, The Wanderer wrote:
On 2023-12-20 at 19:39, Felix Miata wrote:
Pocket composed on 2023-12-20 17:55 (UTC-0500):
Actually I can not change as the ISP has exclusive rights to the high
speed internet in the area I reside in.
No other providers are allowed.
That could be a historical concept, depending exactly on where you live. Some of
us mericans who formerly had no access to real broadband except via
prohibitively
expensive, high latency satellite dish now have broadband provided wirelessly.
All
the big cablecos have been slowly rolling it out. The areas covered are limited,
with limited overlap among providers. The targets so far have been mostly areas
unserved by traditional cable, but there is overlap. Maybe you should check with
T-Mobile:
https://www.allconnect.com/local/oh/columbus
It is my understanding that there are (or at least have been, and I know
of no reason for this to have changed) some apartment buildings, et
cetera, in which there is a provision of the tenancy agreement (or
whatever else applies) requiring that Internet service be exclusively
through the provider chosen by the management of the apartment building.
(The question of motivations for doing this, on the part of both the
management and the provider, I leave un-discussed for at least the time
being.)
If that is correct, and if Pocket resides in such an environment, then
it is possible that even if wireless "high-speed" Internet access could
in a technical sense work in that area it might be prohibited in a
contractual sense.
You are exactly correct
wireless "high-speed" Internet access is prohibited as stated in the agreement
(made in the year 1995) between city council and time warner who was bought out by
charter/spectrum
This does not pass the sniff test (to me). Service providers are
usually not allowed to enter into those types of agreements because it
is anti-competitive for the consumer. I know the FCC forbids it
between landlords and service providers in multi-tenant environments
(MTEs). See
<https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/consumer-faq-rules-service-providers-multiple-tenant-environments>.
This is the entire city and outside area.
What you posted is about buildings
From your link....
Apartments, condominiums, and office buildings are homes and workplaces
for millions of Americans. To promote competition and consumer choice,
the FCC regulates access to telecommunications, cable, and broadband
services in these "multiple tenant environments," or MTEs for short.
These rules regulate the kinds of agreements service providers may enter
into with landlords and prohibit certain anti-competitive arrangements.
Additional rules recently went into effect that place new obligations
and restrictions on service providers in MTEs.
If you are tenant in an MTE, or own or manage one, check out the FAQ
below, along with the overview of new FCC rules for MTEs, to gain a
better understanding of how you may be affected.
I would probably contact the FCC and see what their [the FTC] position
is when a city attempts to grant a monopoly to a service provider.
Well it was 28 years ago
I also fail to see what a mail service provider has to do with your
internet service provider. They are different services, and one should
not affect the other. If you use Spectrum for internet access, then
that's your business. It does not affect your decision to use Yahoo or
Hotmail for your email service.
I didn't say it did
I have spoken
--
Hindi madali ang maging ako
