California Says AT&T Can’t Just Hang Up On Unwanted, Taxpayer Funded Copper DSL And Phone Connections
from the you-weren't-still-using-that,-were-you? dept
Four years years ago AT&T, a company that for years cheapened out on upgrading its broadband lines to fiber, effectively stopped selling DSL. While that’s understandable given the limitations of the dated copper-based tech, the problem is that thanks to concentrated telecom monopolization, many of these customers were left without any replacement options due to a lack of competition.
There are other issues at play too. AT&T has, for decades, received countless billions in tax cuts, subsidies, merger approvals, and regulatory favors (remember how killing net neutrality, broadband privacy rules, or approving a wave of doomed mergers were all supposed to unleash untold innovation, job creation, and network expansion? Yeah, AT&T doesn’t either).
In many states, AT&T has managed to lobby lawmakers into removing any requirement that the company continue servicing these users, many of which are elderly folks still using traditional landlines used for 911 access. But in California those efforts aren’t going too well after the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) told the company it can’t just hang up on these unwanted (taxpayer subsidized) connections.
AT&T had tried to argue that it shouldn’t be held to the state’s “carrier of last resort” requirements because these users now have the option of numerous voice services and “outdated copper-based landline facilities are expensive to maintain.” But the PUC found there weren’t replacement options available for many rural users, and nudged AT&T to upgrade its network to fiber instead of complaining:
“Carrier of last resort rules are technology-neutral and do not distinguish between voice services offered… and do not prevent AT&T from retiring copper facilities or from investing in fiber or other facilities/technologies to improve its network.”
AT&T is responding to the demand by shifting more lobbying resources toward changing California state law and eliminating protections for folks left in a lurch from disconnected DSL and landline connections. In most cases this is justified by insisting that wireless is good enough for these impacted users (even if reliability may be worse and wireless provider coverage maps routinely over-state coverage).
You can understand superficially why AT&T doesn’t want to adhere to aging regulations governing technology it doesn’t want. But those arguments, again, tend to forget AT&T has been slathered in tax breaks, regulatory favors, and subsidies for 30+ years in exchange for network upgrades that are always, quite mysteriously, left only half-deployed. It also has a history of defrauding subsidy programs.
This hasn’t just been a problem with AT&T. Verizon has also routinely found itself under fire over the last fifteen years for letting aging phone and DSL networks fall into total disrepair despite billions in taxpayer subsidies. In most cases, well-lobbied lawmakers just forget telecom history and let these companies dictate all state telecom policy, making CA’s brief window of accountability a rare exception.
Telecom monopolies historically want to have their cake and eat it too. They want all of the taxpayer perks and subsidies that come along with being an essential utility, but none of the obligations. And with very, very limited exceptions, state and federal corruption usually nets them the outcome they’re looking for.
Filed Under: california PUC, cpuc, dsl, fiber, landline, regulations, subsidies, telecom
Companies: at&t
Comments on “California Says AT&T Can’t Just Hang Up On Unwanted, Taxpayer Funded Copper DSL And Phone Connections”
I’m pretty sure AT&T can.
Not because I support them, but because I don’t see the state government reining them in. Ajit Pai freaked the fuck out when, following the death of net neutrality, enforcement was passed onto the states to enforce “50 different sets of rules”. Even in that “worst case scenario”, what damage has AT&T suffered to their bottom line? What other strategy have they committed themselves to besides telling the government to go pound sand and fuck themselves?
So, this kind of says the opposite of the title, unless one reads very carefully. The company can “hang up” on copper, but can’t “just” do that; they can only do it when a replacement is available. And it’s not clear to me whether these “COLR” rules require them to offer it at any specific rate, or to allow third-party providers to use the non-copper infrastructure; and while “residents ‘highlighted the unreliability of voice alternatives'”, I suspect the rules don’t impose reliability requirements on the alternatives (for example, most won’t operate during power outages unless the customer provides their own backup power).
Yet again
Tech Dirt keeps insisting that just because something was promised and paid for it should be provided.
Re:
Got me in the first half, NGL.
Re:
Techdirt is insisting that big companies keep their promises and spend their money the way they’re supposed to according to those promises in order to retain customer trust. What’s wrong with that?
isnt it wonderful
That, as we know HOW Capitalism works and Should be controlled.
Some one is always there to release the regs and Let them DO as they would want.
WHY dreate the regs if not to enforce them? All laws and regulations were created AFTER the fact. That SOME corp or idiot did something to take advantage of the System.
WE FIX IT, NOW we DONT enforce it.
Isnt it time Those we elected DO THERE JOBS.
AT&T sucks
I work in the alarm industry, where we monitor fire & security alarm systems. Over 20 years ago AT&T went to Congress/FCC, I forget which, to be allowed to ‘sunset’ the copper POTS (Plain Old Telephone System). Whatever their official reason was it was really that they weren’t making enough profit off of it and they could see that cellular communications were going to get big.
This has been a boost for our and other businesses, because we sell/provide monitoring over cellular communicators. We do a lot of contracts where doing that upgrade is the total of the work involved.
But it sucks for customers a lot of the time because AT&T says there is ring tone so the line is fine. It may be fine for voice transmission, but won’t work for data. Or they just refuse to come out and fix the equipment. Because ‘sunset’ means, at least in this case, that when equipment breaks they won’t fix it. That’s it, no more POTS in that area. They don’t have any intention to repair or upgrade those systems.
When a big disaster hits, like a hurricane, and wipes out their infrastructure, they don’t replace it. They just say get out your cell phone. They don’t want to be in that business any longer.
Re: POWER FAIL
You forgot to mention “CELL TOWERS”
DON’T work when the Power is OFF
or their Battery Backups, are depleted.
Re: Re:
Of course, but that wasn’t the point of my comment, or the article. But if you’re going in that direction, the same can be said of VOIP providers, like your cable company. Their backup power is likely non-existent.
Re: Re: Re:
It all comes down to the same thing: toothless regulators. The reason why land lines can last for days without grid power is because the telcos have generators and huge racks of batteries in their central offices. That was a condition of them having a monopoly for critical infrastructure: they had to actually run it well.
Today, cellular services and wired internet connections are just as important, but regulators are reluctant to burden such “new” technologies with overly restrictive rules. Were they willing, they could absolutely require a natural gas generator at every cell tower near a supply line. Elsewhere, maybe a wind turbine and some batteries. It’s probably not even that expensive.
So, AT&T accepted tax funding for a project they never intended to complete and stopped even faking it early.
So, literally, just like every other time AT&T accepted tax funding for a project they never intended to complete and stopped even faking it early.
I’m sure this time.. for realsies, they’ll be suitably chastened. lol
AT&T aka Cingular Wireless
Nobody seems to recall that perhaps the most reprehensible national wireless carrier ever, Cingular, changed its name to AT&T after a merger/acquisition. Continued reprehensible conduct shouldn’t be a surprise.
Re: whats worse
Is our gov. has been Cut back so much. that they cant/wont Follow up to Fix things or even listen to complaints.
Even Worse, is TRYING to find out WHO to bitch to about Corporation Problems in the first place.