[TriLUG] Call and urge Perdue to veto H.129 or it becomes law tonight!

[Steve Pinkham]

On 05/20/2011 12:10 PM, David Burton wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Steve Pinkham <steve.pinkham at gmail.com>wrote:
> 
>> In the 21 century, how are roads and Internet access so different that
>> our laws must treat them so differently?
> 
> 
> There's no competition in roads, and the nature of roads means that,
> generally, no competition between roads is possible.
> 
> Dave
That's not the case from history. Most roads *were* private roads at
first.  There was a lot of public/private competition early on, we just
found that public ownership made sense for most of the reasons this bill
is trying to squash in Internet access.

The Internet is infrastructure for the 21st century.  If that model
works for sewer, water, roads, etc, why should we impoverish ourselves
at the expense of corporations for many years to come by enshrining in
law that the benefits of public last mile ownership are illegal?

This law removes the benefits of public ownership and leaves only the
downsides.  The FCC agrees.

http://stopthecap.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/MLC-Statement-on-Anti-Municipal-Broadband-Legislation-FINAL.pdf

It is just too early in the game to cripple the public sector in this
way.  We cannot afford to be so short-sighted.  If I'm correct, this
bill will cripple our competitiveness for decades to come.  If your
point of view is correct Time Warner might make a slightly lower profit.
 Are you a gambling man?
-- 
 | Steven Pinkham, Security Consultant    |
 | http://www.mavensecurity.com           |
 | GPG public key ID CD31CAFB             |