Originally published: January 7, 2010
Last updated: January 7, 2010 - 4:59pm
[Commentary] The truth is that publicly owned networks do quite well. Communities typically borrow from outside investors to build the network and pay off the loans over a 15-20 year period with revenues from phone, television, and broadband services (for wired networks). These networks have eased telecom budgets (e.g. by increasing speed to schools while dramatically cutting costs) and encouraged economic development. Nationally, they average high take rates—a measure of how many people take service on the network. State barriers to publicly owned broadband networks may benefit monopolistic cable and telephone companies but can cripple communities within those states. Of course, such policies also give a competitive edge to cities in other states who have moved ahead.
- Will the FCC Vacate State Broadband Restrictions?
- New Report Concludes: To Be Competitive, Cities Must Own High Speed Information Networks
- Stimulus to increase rural broadband may not be enough
- Public ownership of broadband access is best
- Who decides what you can watch on your television?
- Seattle, Gigabit Squared, the Challenge of Private Sector Cable Competition
- Circuit Court to FCC: You Can Restore Local Authority to Build Community Networks
- Law Curbing Muni-Broadband Advances In North Carolina
- Community Broadband Beats Cable, DSL Companies in Speed, Price
- Is municipal broadband more important than net neutrality?
- RUS Seeks Input on Telecommunications Modernization, Distance Learning and Telemedicine
- Minnesota Local Governments Advance Super Fast Internet Networks
- Publicly Owned Fiber Networks Spur Competition
- Municipal Broadband Opposition Laws: Pros and Cons -- and Legality
- The Government Makes the Internet Better