|
Consumer Issues
-
In an open and competitive system, consumers should pay less and get
more. In the closed AT&T/Comcast de facto monopoly, consumers
pay more and get less.
-
Under an AT&T/Comcast de facto monopoly, "free-choice" consumers will
have to pay twice to get high-speed cable access to the Internet service of
their choice.
-
This "pay twice" monopoly discriminates against people of limited means, and
widens the gap between the technology "haves" and "have nots".
-
An open system will ensure that consumers have competitive prices and wider
choices that will not be available under the cable industry's monopolistic
system.
-
AT&T and Comcast's respective exclusive control of the cable franchises in
communities across the country has already been marked by consumer frustration
and higher prices, remember, they are the cable company, enough said!
Bigger Issues
-
An ISP controls the flow of information between you and the Net, do we really
want to afford one company all of this control?
-
An ISP can force you to view content one their web pages, including causing
ads to pop up. Do we really want a monopoly with this kind of advertising
power?
-
An ISP can either SPAM or reject SPAM. Do we really want to trust the cable
companies to do the right thing?
-
An ISP can choose to terminate your account for a number of reasons. Some of
these reasons may
be justified in one person's mind, but not justified to another person. When an
account is terminated where there is just one choice, what is that persons
recourse?
Without competition, the consumer is left to simply hope for the best.
When a company maintains a de facto monopoly, what is that company going
to base their decisions on? Their captive customer's best interests or the
advertising dollars that are sure to come flow their way? Who loses in this
scenario? We believe it is the the consumer that loses.
|