AN OBSTACLE TO BROADBAND …. yeah, might be but the scene is lots prettier.
on 03/20/2010 at 01:03 PM
Geo Networks already had a duct under the canal for which it paid a rent to the Bridgewater Canal Company.
Lawyers for the fibre optic company argued it only had to pay for the right to lay the extra cable. Under the electronic communication industry code, it could ‘’buy one get one free’’ and did not have to pay extra rent.
I’m not a lawyer, but I think this is the crux of the issue. Are they paying rent for the existing duct? If so, then they can put whatever they want through the duct sans extra rent. Depends on the terms in the existing rental contract.
Based on this sparse info, I’m with Geo Networks.
"Mr Justice Lewison” is a tard.
Agree with Christopher 100%. They’re already renting the duct, so they can put whatever the heck they want in it. One cable or 5000, as long as they fit.
Of course, I’d just put a phone pole on either side of the canal and string the cable across it. Screw renting. As if the canal company is still in business, and charging people by the mule? Puh-leez.
03/21/2010 at 07:17 AM
