What is Digg?35 Comments
- AZTriGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28Wondertwin powers - ACTIVATE!
Form of - MONOPOLY! - taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22And as a monopoly rises from its grave into a new undead monopoly, Judge Greene is rolling in his.
- taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I also find this interesting
'AT&T's last-minute commitments include a two-year pledge to abide by "net neutrality" -- agreeing not to discriminate against Web companies in pricing or in access to lines. That was an about-face for the company, which has argued that it should be allowed to give priority to Internet firms such as Google, Yahoo and Microsoft if they pay for it. Whitacre said last year that anyone expecting to use the phone lines free was "nuts."'
that statement proves that AT&T, the convicted monopolist, plans on doing everything that net neutrality would prevent them from doing. They agree to not do it for two years, and that means that we need legislation to approve net neutrality to prevent them from destroying our Internet. - bossm4n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Everything old is new again.
- netcraft, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Netcraft confirms. All your base are belong to AT&T.
- trunkster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Baby Bells UNITE!!!!!
- theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Right. What exactly was the point of the breakup in the first place then?
- Justcim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Everyone who is posting about the monopoly is forgetting one major thing, when they were originally broke up, there was no good alternative for voice communication, you had to go through the phone companies. Now the phone companies have to compete with wireless companies (except those that they own of course) and the cable companies with the emergence of VOIP. The telephone companies are losing quite a few (read a lot) of land line subscribers to both wireless and VOIP, because who really needs a land line anymore? So in conclusion, on the voice communication front, the joining of the Bells back together is really not a monopoly this time around.
- 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4i've heard upwards of $ 4 billion @! to get rid of the cingular orange man logo
- alphacorvus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why the hell did they break it up in the first place just to allow it to reform?
Something tells me they'll remember why they broke it up in a few years. - terrachronos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Thats no moon, its a space station!!!
- sparkles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Read their exceptions, too. They're exempting IPTV from their net neutrality concessions, and they conspicuously leave out any type of neutrality except sender, owner, and destination. They won't even commit to that for two lousy years.
- signorescuro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow I bet this is going to be really confusing to former AT&T Wireless customers as they transition Cingular back to AT&T Wireless. Not to mention the millions going to be wasted in rebranding.
- nosferatu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2today is a dark, dark day at the intersection of democracy st and media ave.
- Mc_Carter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The Sherman Act provides: "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal" (see 15 U.S.C. § 1). The Act also provides: "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony [. . . ]" (see 15 U.S.C. § 2). The Act put responsibility upon government attorneys and district courts to pursue and investigate trusts, companies and organizations suspected of violating the Act.
Thank you wikipedia - scubascuba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2what state are you in? AT&T traditionally has been known to be expensive
- BigKitty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Justcim,
Maybe - that would depend on what other choices are available for Internet service in the area. If one company can manage to tie up the alternative means of accessing the Internet backbone from your area, generally by persuading the govt. to give them concessions, that's bad for the consumer. - yocheo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually when acidhash said that AT&T had the lowest DSL prices, he was generally right. AT&T usually has a broader array of DSL tiers compared to other baby bells. Like over here in Nashville for instance, Bellsouth's lowest DSL tier is $24.00 a month for 256kbs/down, AT&T's lowest tier in certain areas is $15/m
for 384 to 768/kbs; obviously far superior than Bellsouth's offer. - omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It is important to note that SBC bought out AT&T, not the other way around. AT&T was a decent company, while SBC played dirty. I remember the "voices for choices" advertising battle when SBC successfully lobbied the FCC to end leasing requirements for local phone competition. When SBC won, AT&T had to exit the local phone market, leading to SBC's acquisition (and Verizon's acquisition of MCI). In the NY Times article on the Bell South merger, the new AT&T (a.k.a. SBC) promised to uphold Net Neutrality for two years, or until Congress acts on the issue. Let's hope Congress does its job.
- dbalaski, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Exactly what I was thinking --- It seems we've are coming around into a full circle.
AT&T has acquired a lot of the former Baby-Bells --
I know they absorbed SBC (which includes PACBell) sand a few others -- now Bell-South ...
It just makes me wonder if these shuffles really accomplish anything .... - Conwaysb0718, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1where is the "*Hums Darth Vader's theme*" guy when you need him?
- rderveloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The new death star is complete. :-)
- DevlinD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow, must be easier to buy people at the FCC now then in 1984.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Well I'm sure if Obama, Hillary, Slick Johnny The Trial Pimp, Biden win the Presidency in 08 they'll break it up again, Well that is unless Ma Bell decides to drop $50-70 mill to the DNC.
- acidhash, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5AT&T has taken a good position on net neutrality. They have the lowest DSL prices in our state. Our home phone bill is cheaper than the neighbor's, who use Verizon. Shut up you stupid little college kids. I love AT&T.
- strangerzero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Smart people broke it up dumb people allowed it to reform.
- Doghound, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"I know they absorbed SBC (which includes PACBell)" -db
Get your facts right. SBC (which owned PacBell) bought AT&T. Why is this important? Because the AT&T execs were not the ones to buy out SBC. Instead, SBC's execs bought out AT&T and took control.
Big difference. - Justcim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@BigKitty,
That is very true, but the way I understand it, AT&T's and Bellsouth's territories did not overlap. So in that respect, it will be no different than it was before. - sanman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll ride in the head! :)
- liquidc0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Justcim
"That is very true, but the way I understand it, AT&T's and Bellsouth's territories did not overlap. So in that respect, it will be no different than it was before."
AT&T & Bellsouth overlaps in the biggest cash cow of all markets: Business (Big & Small). - robinator08, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So they really are merging again, this was predicted even before 1998, but it to actually occur with very small promises of change. Offering low cost service for 30 months is nothing, and 2 years of net neutrality is nothing either. In fact, it would take that long for them to develop technology that enforces favoritism. They have really laid the time table to net neutrality to end, and the FCC has approved!
- ormenipar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0thanks for the news, AT&T should continue to rise for a while, the media stock is still a good shot http://www.trendio.com/word.php?wordid=478&language=en
- edlowe0, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I'll stick with cable. don't need home phone and i love my Internet access/DVR/digital cable.
- 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1The government has a monopoly on a lot of things and people never seem to complain about that. It would be nice if people would be a little more consistent. I guess the public schools forgot to teach them how to think.
- Erectus, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2as the old saying goes...
"There are only two monopolies... and one told the other how to run the phone company."
Good for them. The consumer certainly has enough choice with wireless and multiple ways to access the internet. Can't say I'm pleased about all the government intervention in private enterprise, but at least things are mostly up to us (the free market) now... All the access providers seem to dick over their customers equally, so really its just about innovating technology and who can nickel/dime their customers the most without pissing too many of them off (i.e. text message cost hikes, obscure "fees").
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is