North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 22:54:37 PDT, JC Dill said: > I also believe that Cogent has a valid argument that Level 3's behavior > is anti-competitive in a market where the tier 1 networks *collectively* > have a 100% complete monopoly on the business of offering transit-free > backbone internet services. As such, L3's behavior might fall into > anti-trust territory Please enumerate the tier 1 networks who comprise this collective monopoly. Seriously. Somehow, although civil lawsuits do occasionally name John Does when the actual name is expected to be revealed during pre-trial discovery (usually when the action is known, but the person isn't, as in "John Doe, the upper manager in Sales who authorized the tortable activity"), I don't see much hope for a lawsuit claiming abuse of a monopoly when you can't name who is a member up front....