PDA

View Full Version : Applause For Finland: First Country To Make Broadband Access A Legal Right


artherd
10-14-2009, 8:29 PM
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/14/applause-for-finland-first-country-to-make-broadband-access-a-legal-right/

Kudos to the Finnish government, which has just introduced laws guaranteeing broadband access to every person living in Finland (5.5 million people, give or take).

This is reportedly a first worldwide.

Starting July 2010, every person in Finland will have the right to a one-megabit broadband connection as an intermediate step, says the Ministry of Transport and Communications. By the end of 2015, the legal right will be extended to an impressive 100 Mb broadband connection for everyone.

According to Wikipedia, approximately 79 percent of the Finnish population use the Internet. Finland had around 1.52 million broadband Internet connections by the end of June 2007 or around 287 per 1,000 inhabitants.

(Via IntoMobile)

mexrunner
10-14-2009, 9:04 PM
ya but they tax thier citizens for it so its not free, just another example of big govt.

Telperion
10-14-2009, 9:13 PM
So ... if it's a right, does this mean the Finnish government is and has been depriving their citizens of a right until 2010? Maybe someone should take them to court and demand their rights now. And why wait until 2015, don't they know a right delayed is a right denied? :D

nick
10-14-2009, 9:14 PM
How can something like that be a right?

JDay
10-15-2009, 3:39 AM
I wish we had 100mbit home internet here. What ever happened to that nationwide fiberoptic network that our tax dollars paid the telecoms for?

mmartin
10-15-2009, 3:43 AM
How can something like that be a right?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

I'm thinkin' it's a legally mandated entitlement endowed by the gvt using taxpayer funds.

megan

Dr. Peter Venkman
10-15-2009, 6:21 AM
ya but they tax thier citizens for it so its not free, just another example of big govt.

I bet it's cheaper than what we pay here for our 'privatized' internet.

Digital_Boy
10-15-2009, 6:52 AM
I bet it's cheaper than what we pay here for our 'privatized' internet.

Goddamn straight! I've worked for several of the incumbents, most notably AT&T in their Pronto DSL department. I've heard senior VP level executives from Texas say in as many words that ATT is never going to be a technology leader, that they aren't about innovation, but about pushing sales.

Regarding the nationwide fiber optic last mile that JDay was referring to, I know PacBell started a huge project called Project Broadband in the early 90's. It was a 45Mbit symmetric pipe to the side of your house, fiber to the node, then coaxial cable from the cross connect box to the side of the house. They had visions of true high speed data, on demand TV content, full motion high res video conferencing and a slew of other services. Unfortunately, the cable companies *****ed to the CPUC that it would put them out of business, and the CPUC obliged them by denying PacBell land use permits to put in new pedestals and cable runs where they didn't already own the real estate. This essentially killed Project Broadband, cost PacBell a multibillion dollar loss in facility (fiber/coax in the ground, construction crew labor to put it there, etc) and hardware and opened the door for SBC to take them over and become the "new" ATT that we all loathe today.

.454
10-15-2009, 9:10 AM
I want the human right to have a 10 day free fishing trip to Baja California every year, dammit! And a swimming pool in my backyard. And a full tank of gasoline every week. These are human rights too. Hear that Obama?

JDay
10-15-2009, 6:33 PM
Regarding the nationwide fiber optic last mile that JDay was referring to, I know PacBell started a huge project called Project Broadband in the early 90's. It was a 45Mbit symmetric pipe to the side of your house, fiber to the node, then coaxial cable from the cross connect box to the side of the house. They had visions of true high speed data, on demand TV content, full motion high res video conferencing and a slew of other services.

Wasn't just PacBell, many telcos were involved. They received over $300b in tax payer money for this project and have never had to pay it back.

Gryff
10-15-2009, 6:43 PM
A "legal right"?

Doesn't that mean that those with money get to pay for those without money, just so that they can surf porn faster?

No thanks. I'd rather the decision to give my money to others be left to me.

Fat_Rat
10-16-2009, 11:43 AM
I bet it's cheaper than what we pay here for our 'privatized' internet.

Yea, what was that a 2500 toilet seat the gov paid for a couple of years ago.

thedonger
10-16-2009, 11:54 AM
You have the legal right to it here in the US.

You just have to pay for it yourself.

tankerman
10-16-2009, 7:39 PM
How can something like that be a right?
It's called Socialism.....some folks are support it.
Not me, I'm not a Socialist.

patman
10-16-2009, 8:12 PM
Don't forget one of the great late 20'th century accomplishments from Finland. Go Linus!

That 14.4Kbps modem took forever to download (remember zmodem protocol and dos telex;)) those floppies. A 1Mbit line would have been SWEET.

RRangel
10-17-2009, 10:42 PM
That which government controls they control. That's my Yogi Berra comment for today.

PolishMike
10-17-2009, 10:45 PM
No way in hell is broadband a "right".

Dr. Peter Venkman
10-18-2009, 12:01 AM
It's called Socialism.....some folks are support it.
Not me, I'm not a Socialist.

Beat the anti-socialist drum while you pay more for a crappier service than what the Finns have. What does that make you?

kf6tac
10-18-2009, 3:49 AM
A legal right just means that there is a law saying that people must be allowed to have it. It doesn't mean it's a constitutional right, fundamental right, natural right, inalienable right, or anything of that nature. People are blowing this way out of proportion.

bruceflinch
10-18-2009, 7:30 AM
Good for them. They're getting something for their tax dollars. Guess they don't have a problem w/ guns, healthcare, homelessness, education, etc.

freakshow10mm
10-18-2009, 8:19 AM
I think that is complete BS.

Finland is so damn liberal it makes me puke. But automatic rifles and silencers are unregulated. Go figure.

Just another example of socialism ruining lives and costing more money.

gose
10-18-2009, 8:57 AM
Having access to broadband and getting free broadband are two very different things.

This doesnt mean that the government will pay for everyone's internet access, it means that the government can (and most likely will) use this to "force" ISPs to offer access to everyone and not just the most economically viable areas. Someone who wants to run an ISP business in Finland better be prepared to offer access to people living in the middle of nowhere (even though the very most remote areas are likely to be exempt)

So yeah, people seem to be blowing this _slightly_ out of proportion (wouldn't that be a Calguns first?)....

freakshow10mm
10-18-2009, 9:00 AM
That's the problem I have. Government is interfering with free market.

dirtnap
10-18-2009, 11:05 AM
If they are just forcing them to provide people the opportunity to pay for and connect to the internet, even in remote areas where it would not be deemed financially worthy, I am for it. With the internet comes education(and porn), and I think everybody should have the chance to educate themselves(and watch porn). I don't see much difference between this and building libraries. The only down side is the government kicking some companies in the ***, but it is for a good cause and only helps the inhabitants of their country. Again, assuming this is not going to be "free" internet paid for by tax dollars.

freakshow10mm
10-18-2009, 11:10 AM
A private company is not obligated to provide opportunity to anyone. The citizens need to seek the opportunity to obtain for themselves. This is more nanny state BS.

Dr. Peter Venkman
10-18-2009, 12:55 PM
Just another example of socialism ruining lives and costing more money.

Would this mean that our "capitalist" ISPS are ruining even more lives and costing more money, given that they charge more for their service?

bigmike82
10-18-2009, 2:13 PM
The US system of broadband ISPs is *hardly* an example of capitalism. It's more of an example of what happens when the government tightly regulates a market to allow only a select few giant companies to control a particular area.

freakshow10mm
10-18-2009, 4:09 PM
Would this mean that our "capitalist" ISPS are ruining even more lives and costing more money, given that they charge more for their service?
I believe in a market price.

The US system of broadband ISPs is *hardly* an example of capitalism. It's more of an example of what happens when the government tightly regulates a market to allow only a select few giant companies to control a particular area.
I agree.

tankerman
10-18-2009, 9:58 PM
What does that make you?
Not you, fortunately.

Dr. Peter Venkman
10-19-2009, 2:52 AM
Not you, fortunately.

Great, but expected, comeback. :rolleyes:

The US system of broadband ISPs is *hardly* an example of capitalism. It's more of an example of what happens when the government tightly regulates a market to allow only a select few giant companies to control a particular area.

But obviously the Finns are "ebul soshialists" given the rhetoric in this thread. Their more efficient with more government than we are with less.

doughboy334
10-19-2009, 2:55 AM
If they are just forcing them to provide people the opportunity to pay for and connect to the internet, even in remote areas where it would not be deemed financially worthy, I am for it. With the internet comes education(and porn), and I think everybody should have the chance to educate themselves(and watch porn). I don't see much difference between this and building libraries. The only down side is the government kicking some companies in the ***, but it is for a good cause and only helps the inhabitants of their country. Again, assuming this is not going to be "free" internet paid for by tax dollars.

all for it, especially remarks in parentheses!

kermit315
10-19-2009, 3:01 PM
Would this mean that our "capitalist" ISPS are ruining even more lives and costing more money, given that they charge more for their service?

Internet isnt a basic necessity, if you are to the point that you are having your life ruined because you cant afford internet, your priorities are jacked. Beyond that, our ISP's offer a service for a price, its not forced on anybody, and can set their prices accordingly.

bigmike82
10-19-2009, 6:09 PM
"Their more efficient with more government than we are with less."
But that's my point. This isn't a situation where there is 'less' government. The telco industry is one of the most tightly controlled sectors there is.

So...I guess the final point is that Finland's government is more efficient than ours is. Which I don't necessarily disagree with...