DOCSLIB.ORG

Ticket: # 364230

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

_____________________________________________________________________________ Ticket: # 364230 - AT&T Wireless Cellular Internet Throttling Date: 6/25/2015 11:13:59 AM City/State/Zip: Chantilly, Virginia 20152 Company Complaining About: AT&T _____________________________________________________________________________ Description I have an AT&T cellular phone with grandfathered unlimited internet. AT&T continues to throttle data rates as the usage approaches 5GB. It is my understanding that this is a violation under the new Open Internet policies and AT&T has been significantly been fined. I received the following text from AT&T this morning (6/25/2015) at 9:45am from 753-5. "ATT Free Msg: Your data has reached 75% of the 5GB network management threshold. If you exceed 5GB this month you may experience reduced data speeds at times and in areas that are experiences network congestion. Wi-Fi helps you reduce speeds. For further info visit att.com/datainfo or att.com/broadbandinfo" _____________________________________________________________________________ Ticket: # 364330 - ATT throttling Date: 6/25/2015 11:39:49 AM City/State/Zip: Houston, Texas 77040 Company Complaining About: AT&T _____________________________________________________________________________ Description Re: FCC 15-63 I have been an ATT customer since buying my first iPhone in 2007. I was a loyal T-Mobile customer for years and reluctantly moved to ATT only due to their exclusive position with the iPhone. Having prior experience with ATT long distance and other telephony services, I was circumspect due to what I perceived as game/tricks and downright deception which ATT utilized in their advertising and billing practices. However, having read the terms and conditions "unlimited" was unqualified other than for abuse. As an early adopter, I believe ATT used this tactic to build what is now one of the largest markets in the world and to maintain an effectively exclusive or at least dominant position in this market based largely on this position. My data usage over the years has been very "normal" and could not be seen as "excessive" or "abusive" by any measure. I have used the phone as advertised without worrying about limits but not taking advantage of the unlimited data, and have foregone numerous alternative deals offering services such as tethering and other benefits to maintain this privilege. However, after beginning to receive text messages from ATT a year or so indicating my data usage was "excessive" (by what standard?!) and after ATT began threatening to throttle my bandwidth to what would effectively render the device worthless under normal operation, I have severely curtailed my free use of the device and resist normal operations in today's market such as streaming audio or listening to lectures on YouTube in the car. I have never had an "always on" mentality with respect to my device, do not just keep video streaming in the background, etc., but I do have podcast apps and the like which periodically download material for consumption at regular intervals. This is normal advertised operation and is one of the primary benefits of a smart phone. The limits at which ATT began issuing these "warnings" or "threats" began at 3GB. My average usage is normally well below 3GB, but on occasion after watching a single Netflix movie or streaming an Apple WWDC keynote speech or the like, I might bump against the 3GB limit. Since one of the more popular data plans offered by ATT was 3GB at the time, this would hardly be seen as "abusive." I completely understand wireless companies needing to periodically throttle users' data in a particularly over-saturated area, but only due to the congestion at the time and without regard to individual (non-abusive) useres. Instead, ATT's practice appears to throttle (or at least threaten same) particular users' data without regard to any particular congestion issues. I would completely understand if heavy users were merely tagged for lower priority in the event of congestion, but to throttle or threaten same based on quite normal activity levels is anti-competitive and abusive. What ATT really wants is for users like me who built their network to leave these unlimited plans which were convenient for them for a time, but now are not (or to pay for unlimited plans and curtail their usage based on their threats). I have remained an ATT user over the years ONLY because of this single benefit. I would absolutely have left ATT for T-Mobile or other providers if this plan had not remained in place. Now, the bandwidth “limits” (on an unlimited plan) have seemingly grown to 5Gb, but so has the average media consumption and bandwidth requirements to merely surf normal web sites and consume common forms of media. Moreover, as these data requirements have grown, so have the fees and technical capabilities to manage data beyond mere throttling, so that the congestion should not be more of an issue for a non-abusive consumer than ever before. Speaking of "abuse," the type of things I would consider abusive would be running a streaming media server, tethering and providing hot spot access for others, maintaining an always on streaming player to replace a television in a common area 24 hours per day, and the like. Merely, enjoying average consumer media consumption such as a periodic podcast or drive-time audio, and automatic background uploading of photos, etc. can not be seen as abusive -- these are the very benefits touted not only by the device manufacturers but also ATT, itself. If unlimited means ANYTHING, it should permit my usage pattern. If an average consumption is 2- 3Gb, one would consider as abusive a user using an order of magnitude more data such as 20-30Gb, not 4 or 5Gb. In my opinion, a fine is not sufficient -- ATT should be precluded from these anti-consumer abusive "threats" and should be precluded from changing the terms of service for the loyal early adopters who built their network and dominant position. They should be required to permit such users to purchase (without losing their plan) "add-on" services such as tethering (as a convenience for other devices such as book readers or for laptop email, etc.) as long as their data is still not abusive (by an objective standard well out of line with their then-highest available bandwidth offering). Perhaps, the tethered data could be provided at a per-data usage cost, but to technically prevent such a convenience is just a punishment intended to incent users to abandon such plans. Further, any throttling necessary to maintain network availability should be only neutral as to user or should provide at least a still "usable" bandwidth for the throttled user. If the average user is provided several Mbits/sec, a reasonable throttling would be to 1Mbit/sec, not several k/sec (which is reportedly the throttling we have heard of) which is unusable even for basic email/mapping use. Finally, I believe ATT has been deceptive in their warnings/threats to users. Since this began, I have been tracking my data usage closely. I have a reliable application which monitors my non-wifi data usage and for this period, I am in day 19/30 days and have used 1.9Mb of data, which is projected by the app to correspond to a 3.1Mb usage for the period. I received the following warning just today: "Your data usage is near 5GB this month. Exceeding 5GB during this or future billing cycles may result in reduced data speeds. Wi-Fi helps you avoid reduced speeds." This is deceptive and abusive behavior from a dominant market provider and must be remedied. _____________________________________________________________________________ Ticket: # 364730 - Unfair billing practices, data cap, and speed throttling Date: 6/25/2015 12:38:38 PM City/State/Zip: Nashville, Tennessee 37013 Company Complaining About: Comcast _____________________________________________________________________________ Description Comcast continues to bait and switch customers. I am forced to call on a near monthly basis to receive the pricing that was promised for a 12 month period. It continually creeps up without notification. My speed is obviously being throttled when accessing youtube and netflix streams even prior to reaching the absurd 300GB data cap. I have validated this network throttling by using both VPN and proxy services to strip Comcasts ability to throttle, this instantly removes the choke hold on steaming services. Comcast's business practices are down right unethical and i'd venture to guess fraudulent if they were to be properly investigated. _____________________________________________________________________________ Ticket: # 365165 - Time Warner Cable Net Neutrality Complaint Date: 6/25/2015 1:51:20 PM City/State/Zip: Wheelersburg, Ohio 45694 Company Complaining About: Time Warner _____________________________________________________________________________ Description My Time Warner Cable account is experiencing Intermittent outages either caused by throttling or limitations on my account. I am not able to achieve my contractual connectivity speeds during all hours of the day. _____________________________________________________________________________ Ticket: # 365667 - Open Internet ATT Date: 6/25/2015 2:52:44 PM City/State/Zip: Sewell, New Jersey 08080 Company Complaining About: AT&T _____________________________________________________________________________ Description Today I got a SMS from ATT that my data has reached 75% of my 5GB network management threshold. I am on the grandfathered ATT unlimted
Recommended publications
  • Shenandoah Telecommunications Company

    Shenandoah Telecommunications Company

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020 ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from__________ to __________ Commission File No.: 000-09881 SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Virginia 54-1162807 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 500 Shentel Way, Edinburg, Virginia 22824 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) (540) 984-4141 (Registrant's telephone number, including area code) SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(B) OF THE ACT: Common Stock (No Par Value) SHEN NASDAQ Global Select Market 49,932,073 (The number of shares of the registrant's common stock outstanding on (Title of Class) (Trading Symbol) (Name of Exchange on which Registered) February 23, 2021) SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(G) OF THE ACT: NONE Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☒ No ☐ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ☐ No ☒ Note - Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act from their obligations under those Sections.
  • Broadband to Make Key Transitions in 2020

    Broadband to Make Key Transitions in 2020

    INDUSTRY ANALYSIS Broadband to Make Key Transitions In 2020 Large incumbent telcos, independent telcos, cable operators and electric cooperatives set bold broadband plans for 2020. By Sean Buckley / Broadband Communities s the new year begins, BROADBAND FTTH PENETRATION TO RISE COMMUNITIES is asking industry AT&T, CenturyLink and Verizon furthered Acolleagues what will drive the broadband fiber to the home (FTTH) growth in 2019, a industry in 2020. trend that will continue as providers ramp up Leichtman Research Group (LRG) found new builds and increase penetration. that 82 percent of all U.S. households get internet It’s hard not to notice fiber’s influence on service, of which 96 percent is broadband. broadband. Consider the fact that in 2002, Fiber continues to become a significant only 50,000 U.S. homes had access to fiber factor in the broadband race. Market research connectivity. firm RVA revealed in its North American 2019 Fiber broadband now passes 46.5 million Advanced Broadband Report that broadband unique homes in the United States – about 37 providers had passed 49.2 million homes with percent of total homes – and connects 20.5 fiber, up 17 percent in 2019. million. Unique homes are defined as those with But a key challenge for wireline broadband at least one fiber service marketed. RVA said operators will be how to stay ahead of the this excludes estimates of redundant services impending 5G threat. available to the same home. Jeff Heynen, senior RVA reports the number of homes passed research director for market research firm by fiber has risen 16 percent since 2018.
  • January 15, 2015 Meeting – Supplemental Packet

    January 15, 2015 Meeting – Supplemental Packet

    Title II and the Ka- Ching! Factor Consumers, Carriers and Economy MIGHT all take a hit 12/01/2014 8:00 AM Eastern By: John Eggerton TakeAway Foes of Title II network-neutrality regulations are making the case that such rules would hit carriers, consumers and the economy right in the wallet. WASHINGTON — Reclassifying Internet access under Title II could be a big hit in the pocketbook for both consumers and Internet-service providers. That potential hit to the bottom line is one of many fronts industry players have opened in their battle against the push for reclassifying ISPs under some form of Title II common- carrier regulations. As Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler ponders that reclassification under pressure from the White House and Silicon Valley, foes of that strategy are fighting back with economic arguments in an effort to dissuade him. They may have a little more time to make that case. Most FCC observers now anticipate that the agency is targeting February at the earliest, or more likely March, for new Internet-neutrality rules. An interim item seeking comment on the flurry of new options under consideration is also possible. In the meantime, ISPs and others have been amassing their arguments, including the one focused on Title II’s economic fallout. The American Consumer Institute told the FCC that reclassifying Internet access under Title II common-carrier regulations would be a big tax hit on U.S. consumers that would depress, not stimulate, the economy. In a letter to Wheeler and the other commissioners, ACI president Steve Pociask said that increased tax exposure could take many forms.
  • NET NEUTRALITY Work Operator

    NET NEUTRALITY Work Operator

    Database NET NEUTRALITY work operator. In October 2007, Comcast was ac- cused of secretly deploying filtering technologies to manage its network in order to keep some peer-to- Net neutrality denotes the neutral transmission of peer traffic from overloading its network and hence data via the Internet, i.e., every packet of data, affecting the accessing speeds of its other Internet regardless of its content, origin and the application subscribers. The FCC deemed it unreasonable for that created it, is treated the same way and the best Comcast to discriminate against particular Internet effort should always be made to forward it.This con- applications and not to disclose its practice ade- cept is often regarded as a fundamental characteris- quately to its customers and therefore ruled against tic of the Internet. However, the amount of data that Comcast’s practices of throttling Internet traffic and is transported via the Internet is increasing rapidly, delaying peer-to-peer traffic. Comcast appealed to especially because of applications like music and vi- the US Court of Appeals, claiming that no legally deo downloads, Internet TV,and Internet telephony. enforceable standards or rules on the matter existed. All these applications require large capacities. This In April 2010 the federal appeals court ruled that the may lead to a capacity overload and delays of data FCC had limited power over Internet traffic under transmissions.The current technological state allows current law. This decision allows network operators for assigning different priorities to different data to block or slow specific sites and charge sites to packets. Therefore, the discussion has emerged deliver their content faster to users.
  • Partner in Business

    Partner in Business

    PENTELEDATA’S CUSTOMER NEWSLETTER CONTENTS PARTNER IN BUSINESS OUR PARTNER IN BUSINESS - FIRST First Commonwealth Federal COMMONWEALTH FEDERAL CREDIT UNION Credit Union PenTeleData is proud of our partner- ship with First Commonwealth. First Commonwealth is the largest credit union in the Lehigh Valley, with over $550 million in LETTER FROM OUR GM assets, nearly 50,000 members and six branches. They offer the same financial services UPCOMING EVENTS found at a traditional bank, but with better FLASHBACK JUST 25 YEARS AGO...IT’S rates and lower fees. That's because they’re ALL BECAUSE OF OUR FIBER! structured differently. They are member- TECH TIP: owned and not-for-profit. Instead of earning What to do if your Cable Modem money for stockholders, they return profits to or DSL Stops Working? their member-owners (account holders) in the form of higher dividends on savings, lower DO YOU HEAR THE SONIC BOOM? rates on loans and lower fees. First Common- DOCSIS 3.0 packages for Business wealth was originally chartered in 1959 to begin this summer. An upgrade to their data processing sys- CUSTOMER CONTEST serve the employees of Western Electric in Al- tem will allow them to better serve their customers, with fully lentown. Today, they serve nearly 700 employer integrated accounts and streamlined processes. The more APRIL 2013 CUSTOMER CONTEST groups – ranging from large corporations to advanced technology will help to serve their members WINNER very small businesses. Their full-service menu quickly and efficiently with options such as mobile banking, includes everything from checking accounts OUR NEW RESIDENTIAL WEBSITE redesigned statements, account alerts via text messaging, and debit cards to mortgages, online banking FEATURES SOME VERY FRIENDLY FACES! and a customized landing page for account log-in.
  • Ptdchat-Vol12iss1 Links Layout 1

    Ptdchat-Vol12iss1 Links Layout 1

    PENTELEDATA’S CUSTOMER NEWSLETTER CONTENTS PARTNER IN BUSINESS OUR PARTNER IN BUSINESS - Sacred Heart Hospital Sacred Heart Hospital PenTeleData and Sacred Heart Sacred Heart Hospital is a 215-bed Catholic Hospital partner together. medical center located in central Allentown, Pa. Founded in 1912, Sacred Heart Hospital offers a LETTER FROM OUR GM wide range of advanced medical services rang- Our General Manager discusses how ing from obstetrics to bariatric surgery, vascular a little planning goes a long way. surgery, cardiology, rehabilitation and behav- ioral health services. They are nationally recog- UPCOMING EVENTS nized in case management, as a Center of OUR PARTNER IN BUSINESS - Sacred Excellence in Bariatric Surgery, are recognized as the network, without needing to traverse through a central Heart Hospital (Cont.) a Silver Plus Award winner for stroke achieve- customer hub. In a traditional multiplex network, you would ment, designated as an Acute Primary Care need to fully mesh each site (that is, connect each site to all Stroke Center, and its Transitional Care Facility other sites with virtual circuits) in order to simulate this func- was granted a Five-Star rating by the U.S. Cen- tionality. A Layer 3 WAN is typically used when an organization OUR CUSTOMER EDUCATION CONTESTS ters for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The Customer Education Contest wants a WAN with a primary and a disaster recovery site. With has been around for an entire The history of Sacred Heart Hospital dates back the Layer 3 WAN each of the remote sites can communicate year! to June 15, 1912, when a group of Missionary with the main and disaster recovery sites and with BGP routing Sisters of the Most Sacred Heart from Germany they can automatically switch to the disaster recovery site if WOULD YOU LIKE TO WIN SOME GREAT arrived in Allentown to care for the sick and in- the primary site goes offline.
  • West Virginia Broadband Enhance Council 2020 Annual Report

    West Virginia Broadband Enhance Council 2020 Annual Report

    2020 West Virginia Broadband Enhancement Council 2020 ANNUAL REPORT TO THE WEST VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1 2. Existing, Continuing and New Initiatives ............................................................................................... 2 3. Broadband Mapping ............................................................................................................................. 4 Key Components of the Interactive Mapping System .................................................................. 4 Broadband Advertised Speed Ranges Interactive Map ................................................................ 5 Broadband Development Hub ...................................................................................................... 6 Public Wi-Fi Map ........................................................................................................................... 6 Public Project Development ......................................................................................................... 7 Speed Tiers by County ................................................................................................................... 8 Speed Tiers Statewide ................................................................................................................... 8 Providers Statewide .....................................................................................................................
  • Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter of Modernizing Unbundling and Resale Requireme

    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter of Modernizing Unbundling and Resale Requireme

    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Modernizing Unbundling and Resale ) WC Docket No. 19-308 Requirements in an Era of Next-Generation ) Networks and Services ) PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF SONIC TELECOM, LLC Dane Jasper Karen Reidy Chief Executive Officer and Founder KTR Consulting LLC Sonic Telecom, LLC P.O. Box 65444 2260 Apollo Way Washington, DC 20035 Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Russell M. Blau Tamar E. Finn Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20004-2541 Tell: (202) 739-3000 Fax: (202) 739-3001 Date: February 8, 2021 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Future proof networks across all parts of the country are critical to ensuring truly advanced broadband—not just best-efforts 25/3 Mbps—is available to all Americans. Preventing a monopoly on those networks, and the broadband services provided over them, is necessary to ensuring broadband services that are affordable and enjoyed by all Americans. The Commission should reverse actions taken by the previous administration that hinder, rather than promote, the most aggressive fiber to the home (“FTTH”) builders—those using unbundled network elements (“UNEs”) as a stepping-stone for fiber buildout. The remote learning during the pandemic has dispelled the myth that the Commission need only promote broadband and fiber build out to rural and less densely populated areas. Commission policies need to spur deployment to underserved and unserved communities in urbanized areas, too. The record overwhelmingly demonstrates two UNEs – unbundled DS0 Loops and unbundled dark fiber – are key to FTTH buildout by those using them (competitors) and those responding to the competition with their own buildout (incumbent local exchange carriers (“ILECs”)).
  • Executive Summary

    Executive Summary

    Meeting: Study session Meeting date: September 14, 2020 Written report: 7 Executive summary Title: Comcast franchise renewal update Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is Categorized as Time-Sensitive** • The report is presented for information only. No action is required. Policy consideration: Is the progress on the franchise renewal in keeping with council expectations? Summary: The city’s current franchise agreement with Comcast expires in January 2021. Upon receipt of Comcast’s request to renew its cable franchise in the city, the city notified Comcast of its intent to conduct informal renewal negotiations in accordance with the federal Cable Act. To prepare for negotiations, the city evaluated Comcast’s past performance under the existing franchise and conducted a needs assessment to determine the future cable-related Public- Educational-Government (PEG) community needs and interests of the city. This is the criteria prescribed by the Cable Act. Following the conclusion of the needs assessment, the city’s cable franchise attorney developed a draft franchise agreement, which the city plans to submit to Comcast for consideration. Financial or budget considerations: The final franchise agreement will determine the franchise fee, based on a percentage of gross revenues derived from cable service and PEG (public- educational-government) capital funding to be received by the city over the next franchise term, expected to be 10 years. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Community needs assessment report and appendices October 28, 2019 council study session report Prepared by: Jacque Smith, communications and marketing manager Reviewed by: Clint Pires, chief information officer Brian Grogan, attorney at law, Moss & Barnett Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager Study session meeting of Sept.
  • Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554

    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554

    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) The State of Competition in the ) GN Docket No. 20-60 Communications Marketplace ) To: Chief, Office of Economics and Analytics COMMENTS OF THE WIRELESS INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS ASSOCIATION Louis Peraertz, Vice President of Policy Stephen E. Coran S. Jenell Trigg Lerman Senter PLLC 2001 L Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 416-6744 Counsel to the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association April 27, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary ........................................................................................................................................ iv Discussion ....................................................................................................................................... 2 I. STATE OF THE FIXED WIRELESS INDUSTRY ........................................................... 2 A. WISPs Are Meeting The Challenges Of Increased Demand During The COVID-19 Pandemic .............................................................................................. 4 B. Access To Unlicensed And Licensed Spectrum Is Critical To The Growth Of Fixed Wireless Providers And Deployment Of 5G Technology ............................................................................................................. 6 C. WISPs Also Are Providing Competitive Broadband And Wi-Fi Services To MTEs Using Various Spectrum Bands And 5G Technology ............................ 7 D. Fixed Wireless Broadband Technology Continues
  • Carlton County Broadband Feasibility Study Report

    Carlton County Broadband Feasibility Study Report

    Carlton County Broadband Feasibility Study Report Final – 12/18/2016 Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1 Terminology and Background ............................................................................................ 4 Overview of Project and Service Area ................................................................................. 4 Overview of Sponsor .................................................................................................... 4 Carlton County Census and Demographic Information ........................................................... 5 U of M – Brain Drain/Gain & Carlton County .................................................................... 6 Why Broadband Isn’t Ubiquitous – Provider Classification ...................................................... 8 Price-Cap Carriers........................................................................................................ 8 Rate of Return Carriers ................................................................................................... 11 Mobile Wireless Providers .............................................................................................. 11 Fixed Wireless Providers ................................................................................................ 11 Cable TV Providers ...................................................................................................... 12 Satellite ISPs ..............................................................................................................
  • Recommendations for Expanding Internet Access and Supporting Net Neutrality

    Recommendations for Expanding Internet Access and Supporting Net Neutrality

    Recommendations for Expanding Internet Access and Supporting Net Neutrality A report to Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone of the Somerville Internet Access Task Force Draft report submitted to staff July 2019 Final report October 2019 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary 4 2. Problem Statement 6 3. Vision 6 4. Principles and Goals 6 5. Process 7 6. Definitions 8 7. Recommendations 11 8. Last Mile Access Technologies 13 8.1. Copper Cable 13 8.2. Fiber Optic Cable 14 8.2.1. Shallow Fiber 15 8.2.2. Case Study: Netly 15 8.2.3. Case Study: TRAXyL 16 8.2.4. Case Study: Google Fiber in Louisville, KY 16 8.3. WiFi Mesh Networks 16 9. Ownership Models for the Access Network 18 9.1. Municipally-Owned and -Operated Broadband 18 9.2. Municipally-Owned but Privately-Operated Network 19 9.2.1. Case Study: UTOPIA Fiber 19 9.3. Public-Private Partnership 19 9.4. Privately-Owned Network with Conditions Set by Municipality 20 9.4.1. Case Study: Netly 20 10. Policy Options 22 10.1. Statement of Values & Staffing 22 10.2. Negotiating with Service Providers 24 10.3. Purchasing Policies: Net Neutrality 25 10.4. Local Ordinances 26 10.4.1. Net Neutrality 26 10.4.2. Access to Affordable Internet 26 10.4.3. Dig Once Policy 26 10.5. Regional or Municipal Collaborative 28 10.6. MA Advocacy for Legislation 28 10.7. Complementary Approaches to Expanding Internet Access 29 10.7.1. Public WiFi 29 10.7.2. Community WiFi 29 10.7.3 Building Hosted Services 30 10.7.4.