ISEN was confused with my Comments

Here are the original comments to the Isen post on Net Neutrality:

When developers build a subdivision, they have to put in roads and infrastructure (water, sewer, and gas lines, plus electricity). The city or county gets easements on that property for right-of-ways. The power company installs poles or trenches. All on property originally owned by the developer. Plus a portion of the land has to be established as conservation. Now some communities want a portion of the houses to be worker affordable. Developers don't make money on roads, easements or conservation lots --- but that is what it takes to get your permits to build your neighborhood. How is this kind of regulation any different than the Telcos having to build the infrastructure that they have been paid for and promised back in 1999?????

Now here is a better explanation of the analogy:

• Developers like Pulte, Lennar, and M/I Homes have to get a permit to build a subdivision.
• When cable companies want to provide service, they have to get a county franchise.
• Developers have to put in INFRASTRUCTURE like sewers, water lines, roads and sidewalks.
• Cablecos use th efranchise agreement for right-of-way to build their network.
• Telcos use the right-of-way to build a common carriage network without a franchise.
• Developers do not make money on the infrastructure they are required to build, per se.
• Cablecos don't have to share their network, but a couple of public access channels.
• Telcos are only required to share their copper plant, not fiber system.
• Telcos right-of-ways are granted for common carriage network, not information services.
• Telcos cry because they cannot charge for a tiered or priority network.
• Telcos used free right-of-way under the common carriage grant to build a network they do not want to share and want to use for a walled garden for information services.
• To get Franchise agreements, cablecos have to make certain concessions to the county.
• To get building permits, developers have to make certain concessions, like conservation areas and easements. (They don't make $ on these; in fact, it increases the cost of each housing unit).
• Telcos don't want to get local franchises
• Telcos don't want to make any concessions
• Telcos don't want to share.
• Telcos want a walled garden (like their cellular, IMS-enabled subsidiaries have).
• Telcos promised us in 1999 to bring 45MB to the home.
• Telcos have been granted numerous rate hikes to deliver on the Broadband promise.
• Telcos do NOT deliver on promises.

Those were my points.