On Monday, June 11, the Federal Communications Commission’s December 14, 2017 repeal of the agency’s 2015 Open Internet Order will go into effect. This repeal not only eliminates the 2015 Open Internet Rules, but also eliminates the agency’s authority to oversee the broadband market. The following statement should be attributed to Gigi Sohn:

Telecommunications companies are increasingly reaching out to property owners to discuss cell towers lease agreements -- whether it’s negotiating new ones or renegotiating existing contracts. After all, much of today’s lifestyle is built around cell phone use. The expanding reach of cell phones is also what increases the need for proper coverage. One could make the argument that these cell towers have become the very backbone of modern life. Yet, many people who are contacted don’t understand the full value of a cell tower on their property.

I had heard of American painter Laura Owens. I’d seen her name bandied about, but a quick perusal of small reproductions of her paintings did not inspire me to investigate further. Then my latest copy of the New York Review of Books, a publication I take seriously, arrived in the mail.

Download a copy of Reply Comments of Elauwit Networks, LLC, filed in the FCC’s Notice of Inquiry proceeding entitled “Improving Competitive Broadband Access to Multiple Tenant Environments”, GN Docket No. 17-142.

This is Part II of an extended entry to this blog on MTE Access Reform. Originally, I planned to make Part II a summary of filings by reform proponents in the FCC’s Notice of Inquiry (the “NOI”) in the Improving Competitive Broadband Access to Multiple Tenant Environments proceeding, with Part III a summary of filings by reform opponents, and so on. However, upon reading the filings by reform proponent INCOMPAS, the plan has evolved, because I believe that comments filed by INCOMPAS deserve particular attention. The plan will continue to evolve as we move forward.

Preface: This is Part I of an extended blog post concerning recent efforts to reform rules and policies pertaining to broadband service providers’ access to Multi-Tenant Environments (“MTEs”). Part I introduces the topic in a general way. Part II summarizes the position of those advocating MTE access reform, and Part III summarizes the position of those opposing reform. In Part IV we will attempt to summarize any conclusions that follow from the earlier discussion.

A bulk service agreement differs from a non-bulk or “retail” agreement (also known as an “access agreement” or a “right of entry agreement”) in that under the former it is the property owner (or, in the case of a condominium or other common interest development, the homeowners’ association (“HOA”)) – and not the individual subscribing resident – that receives and pays the monthly invoice from the service provider.

First published by Counterpunch at https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/30/saving-caesar/

When I first saw the photograph (referred to as “the Gaza photograph”) on July 29, the effect was of experiencing something overwhelming, as when some part of reality, or the reality of something in the world, or of the world itself, seems to bend and outstrip one’s capacity to understand – in this case, as if what I knew or thought I knew about the world in which I live were fundamentally inadequate. 

When a service provider enters an MDU property for the purpose of providing services to residents, it is necessary and appropriate that the owner sign an ROE Agreement with the service provider because the service provider is entering, operating on and generating a profit on private property and the most basic characteristic of private property is the owner’s right to exclude . . .