From: D. Hugh Redelmeier via Talk <talk@lists.gtalug.org>
Teksavvy and other ISPs ought to be viable. After all, that was the government policy.
Here's a 2009 US Supreme court decision that goes against an ISP in its fight against unfair competition from their supplier. They are talking about a "price squeeze" between the wholesale and retail prices. <https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/555/438/> As I understand it, the court's idea (which sounds goofy to me) is that from an anti-trust standpoint, the incumbent (PacBell) had no obligation to deal with the plaintiff (LinkLine Communications). The fact that the FCC mandated such an obligation (no doubt for anti-trust reasons) didn't count. In anti-trust terms, since they weren't obligated to deal, they weren't obligated to be fair. This feels typical of the author of the opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts. In Canada, we clearly have a "price squeeze": the CRTC mandated wholesale price is not much below retail price offered by the flanker brands or specials of the incumbents.