Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : AT&T -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: trouthead who wrote (1924)	2/9/1999 1:47:00 PM
From: lml	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4298

What does opening the pipes have to do with "lack of service?" Seattle seems to be following Portland's lead in denying approval of transfer of the franchise from TCI to T unless T opens up its pipes to ISPs other than ATHM. We all know that this has lead T to request injunction relief to compel the City of Portland to approve the transfer. Question raised here is whether the City has the legal authority to prohibit the transfer of the franchise on such grounds. If its "lack of service," that's one issue. But if its to "open up the pipes," I would argue that the City is preempted by the FCC decision not to compel T to do so. The lack of service argument doesn't stand up well, because allowing the transfer to go forward will improve the level of service to the City's residents. Get a clue Portland.