The Baby Bells have declared war against municipal broadband. While BellSouth and SBC did battle in Louisiana and Illinois, Verizon helped push a bill through Pennsylvania's legislature to stop Philadelphia from becoming the world's biggest Wi-Fi hot spot (see View, Lessig, page 79). A compromise saved Philly's plans, but the law gives telcos veto power over other public broadband initiatives in the Keystone State. We asked senior VP of broadband solutions Marilyn O'Connell why Verizon won't set bandwidth free.
WIRED: The Baby Bells have been trying to snuff out municipal broadband wherever it appears. What's this war all about?
O'CONNELL: I don't see it as a war. They're all very different situations. In Pennsylvania, we were able to reach a good compromise with the state that ensures they can build the Wi-Fi network in Philadelphia.
That "compromise" gives Verizon veto power over other municipal Wi-Fi efforts. What right do you have to stomp on a small town's efforts to provide wireless Internet access?
I don't think we'd have a problem with that. But when we have obligations that prevent us from recouping on a commitment we've made to a municipality or to a state, we're going to speak up.
Commitments?
Well, to ensure the rollout of broadband, we have to make an investment commitment in various states and we have to make a service-level commitment. These investments are quite substantial.
From the citizen's perspective, it sure seems like you're trying to prevent wireless access from becoming a basic public utility. Shouldn't bandwidth be free?
A lot of things would have to come together before you have the kind of coverage that would allow people to say, "I don't need any other bandwidth, I can just go and plug into the city's network." I don't see that governments are going to supply that kind of service in such a broad, ubiquitous way. The reality is, to have the kind of broadband-rich networks you need, private companies have to come forward.
- Lucas Graves
VIEW
>
Verizon Vetoes Public Wi-Fi
