Re: Verizon Plans to Offer Naked DSL on 4/5 of its Wirelines5

On 12 Feb 2005 22:32:46, snipped-for-privacy@aracnet.com asked,

> "Verizon expects "that in the not-too-distant future that you will be >> able to get Verizon DSL without getting Verizon phone service," said >> Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs and >> communications. "It's a technological issue, it's not a marketing >> issue." "From a very practical perspective, we would like to be able >> to offer the DSL service on a stand-alone basis and the effort is >> being made to bring that about as rapidly as possible," he said. > So that begs the question, will that option only be available to > Verizon Online subscribers, or will those of us who prefer an > independant ISP but are forced to pay through the nose for Verizon > Data's DSL service be able to take advantage of it?

That depends on how the FCC rules in pending CC Docket 04-440 -- go to the FCC website, e-filing, ECFS, and read the comments on 04-440 to see the record. It is a Petition from Verizon (similar to, but more extensive than, one previously filed by BellSouth in 04-405) for the FCC to "forbear" from enforcing the rules with regard to any of its "broadband" services, primarily DSL, but also (because of an earlier petition) ATM, Frame Relay, and possibly T1 and higher-speed leased lines. The rules in question are:

Title II of the Communications Act, in general -- the portion that concerns Common Carriage. Forbearing from Common Carriage (specifically Sections 201 and 202) means that they would not have to provide "Just and Reasonable" rates, or offer "nondiscriminatory" service. This would allow them to turn away all ISPs other than Verizon Online. However, Verizon suggests that they will enter into commercial agreements with another ISP or so, if that ISP offers them a good enough deal, like revenue sharing. But having a free choice of ISP? If the Petition goes ahead and is not overturned in court, fuggedaboutit.

The other rule in the Forbearance Petition is Computer II, which requires a telco's unregulated affiliates (Verizon Online, in this case) to purchase services from the regulated parent company (The Verizon Telephone Companies) at the same terms and conditions (tariffs) that are offered to unaffiliated entities. Again, this is what made the ISP industry possible; if this goes away, "Internet" becomes the property of the ILEC, so long as it uses their copper wire, full stop. Verizon claims that since cable modems have a bigger share (they don't offer wholesale service to other ISPs, again except for very limited special deals), they should be treated the same way. And the independent ISPs can go pound sand, or dig up the streets and install their own wires.

Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting

formatting link