SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Ars Technica is reporting on San Francisco's initial steps to create a citywide fiber-to-the-premise (FTTP) open-access network where ISPs compete for customers.
According to Ars Technica:
San Francisco is trying to find network providers to build a city-wide, gigabit fiber Internet service with mandated net neutrality and consumer privacy protections. It would be an open-access network, allowing multiple ISPs to offer service over the same lines and compete for customers.
The city yesterday issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to find companies that are qualified "to design, build, finance, operate, and maintain a ubiquitous broadband FTTP [fiber-to-the-premises] network that permits retail service providers to lease capacity on the network." The project would also involve a free Wi-Fi service for city parks, city buildings, major thoroughfares, and visitor areas. Low-income residents would qualify for subsidies that make home Internet service more affordable.
ISPs offering service over the network would not be allowed to block or throttle lawful Internet traffic or engage in paid prioritization. ISPs would also need customers' opt-in consent "prior to collecting, using, disclosing, or permitting access to customer personal information or information about a customer's use of the network."
Could this be the first major US metropolitan area to create a real free market in broadband Internet? Do any Soylentils have similar municipal networks?
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday February 05 2018, @09:22PM
That has nothing to do with the power of local governments to enact laws affecting their territory. They absolutely do have that power. They can't easily discriminate, but if they pass a law that equally affects all cable companies, for instance (regardless of the fact that there's only one operating there at the time), they should be able to do that. The cableco could sue in state court and try to claim the local law is arbitrary and capricious, but it really shouldn't be that hard to avoid that. A big tax on cable should be fully legal; local governments levy large taxes all the time--just look at the enormous taxes many cities enact on hotel rooms. The main problem with this kind of thing is pissing off the local voters, but if the local voters are in on it (because they want to stick it to the cableco, so they can use the money to build their own municipal network, no different than cities sticking it to hotelliers so they can benefit the local economy or build a sports stadium), the local government won't be voted out.