On things Courtly.

So, I just read the 59 page decision handed down yesterday by the Ultimate Fighting Jurists! (which can be found at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-277.pdf conveniently enough), and I find myself agreeing with Scalia in his dissent. I love the pizza delivery analogy he used.

I'm just curious, how is it that my cable company isn't a telecommunications carrier, since they carry both my voice and data communications? Seriously, my local phone service is provided by Cox, but they aren't a phone company if you ask the court and the FCC.

EDIT: They offer it on their own physical plant, unlike resellers (CLECs), which fall into their own class. Cable companies are also locally regulated monopolies, and the physical plant is running on municipal rights of way. In the event the local municipality decides to award the monopoly rights to another provider, that plant is left behind and inherited by the incoming provider (the plant is owned by the cableco, and the incoming carrier pays the exiting carrier for the plant normally, but in some areas the plant is actually owned by the municipality).

It's fascinating reading, and I also liked Scalia's interpretation of the long term results of yesterday's decision and his blatantly arrogant attitude that the rulings of lower federal district courts aren't binding on him. He's right of course, being a Supreme Justice and all.

I'm not sure what rock I should go hide under, since the world evidently is about to end as shown by my agreeing with Justice Scalia.

On things Courtly.

So, I just read the 59 page decision handed down yesterday by the Ultimate Fighting Jurists! (which can be found at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-277.pdf conveniently enough), and I find myself agreeing with Scalia in his dissent. I love the pizza delivery analogy he used.

I'm just curious, how is it that my cable company isn't a telecommunications carrier, since they carry both my voice and data communications? Seriously, my local phone service is provided by Cox, but they aren't a phone company if you ask the court and the FCC.

EDIT: They offer it on their own physical plant, unlike resellers (CLECs), which fall into their own class. Cable companies are also locally regulated monopolies, and the physical plant is running on municipal rights of way. In the event the local municipality decides to award the monopoly rights to another provider, that plant is left behind and inherited by the incoming provider (the plant is owned by the cableco, and the incoming carrier pays the exiting carrier for the plant normally, but in some areas the plant is actually owned by the municipality).

It's fascinating reading, and I also liked Scalia's interpretation of the long term results of yesterday's decision and his blatantly arrogant attitude that the rulings of lower federal district courts aren't binding on him. He's right of course, being a Supreme Justice and all.

I'm not sure what rock I should go hide under, since the world evidently is about to end as shown by my agreeing with Justice Scalia.

On things Courtly.

So, I just read the 59 page decision handed down yesterday by the Ultimate Fighting Jurists! (which can be found at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-277.pdf conveniently enough), and I find myself agreeing with Scalia in his dissent. I love the pizza delivery analogy he used.

I'm just curious, how is it that my cable company isn't a telecommunications carrier, since they carry both my voice and data communications? Seriously, my local phone service is provided by Cox, but they aren't a phone company if you ask the court and the FCC.

EDIT: They offer it on their own physical plant, unlike resellers (CLECs), which fall into their own class. Cable companies are also locally regulated monopolies, and the physical plant is running on municipal rights of way. In the event the local municipality decides to award the monopoly rights to another provider, that plant is left behind and inherited by the incoming provider (the plant is owned by the cableco, and the incoming carrier pays the exiting carrier for the plant normally, but in some areas the plant is actually owned by the municipality).

It's fascinating reading, and I also liked Scalia's interpretation of the long term results of yesterday's decision and his blatantly arrogant attitude that the rulings of lower federal district courts aren't binding on him. He's right of course, being a Supreme Justice and all.

I'm not sure what rock I should go hide under, since the world evidently is about to end as shown by my agreeing with Justice Scalia.