...
首页> 外文期刊>Telecom A.M. >FCC Should Address 'Patently Unreasonable' Special Access Contract Provisions, CLECs Argue
【24h】

FCC Should Address 'Patently Unreasonable' Special Access Contract Provisions, CLECs Argue

机译:CLEC争辩说,FCC应该解决“专利合理”的特殊访问合同规定

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The FCC should bear down hard on incumbent providers of special access services, said CLECsnand purchasers in response to the long-awaited order seeking data on the state of the special access marketplacen(CD Dec 19 p1). ILECs have long abused their monopoly positions at the cost of competitivenproviders and their customers, and now is the chance for the commission to step in and declare invalid thenILECs' exclusionary contract provisions, CLECs argued. ILECs defended their contracts, and urged thencommission to dismiss CLEC arguments over the relevancy of legacy Time-division multiplexing-basednservices. In any market analysis, the commission must recognize that consumers are moving away fromnlegacy special access services toward IP-based broadband services, they said. “Dial-up era talking pointsnhave no place in today’s gigabit-per-second world,” said CenturyLink.
机译:CLECsnand采购商表示,FCC应该严厉打击现有的特殊访问服务提供商,这是对期待已久的寻求特殊访问交易平台状态数据的订单的回应(CD Dec 19 p1)。 CLEC争辩说,ILEC长期以来一直在以竞争性提供商和其客户为代价滥用其垄断地位,现在,委员会有机会介入并宣布无效的ILEC排他性合同条款。 ILEC为自己的合同辩护,并敦促当时的委员会撤销关于基于时分多路复用的传统服务的相关性的CLEC论点。他们说,在任何市场分析中,委员会必须认识到消费者正在从传统的特殊访问服务转向基于IP的宽带服务。 CenturyLink表示:“拨号时代的谈话要点在当今每秒千兆的世界中已无处可寻。”

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号