I was recently asked to explain how non-profit Community Networks are better than for-profit run ones. Below are a quick half-dozen points that I pulled together for the article.

There are many reasons why community networks are the superior choice in many circumstances. Here's a half-dozen ideas on the pros of community networks:

Read More... [1]

• Leveraging pre-existing infrastructure: if a community already has a synergistic infrastructure in place (e.g., phone, TV cable), adding data communications to this pre-existing infrastructure is far more efficient and cost-effective than building out a new corporate-owned one.
• Superior Services: local constituencies have far more control over the services, applications, and pricing structures if they own their own network. I'm not sure if you've ever attempted to negotiate with a corporate provider for a non-standard service package, but it's unbelievably difficult. Local communities can better tailor services to their individual needs. In addition, when was the last time an ISP offered intranet services to their customers? In fact, if one reads through most acceptable use policies (AUPs) from corporate providers, they disallow most intranet systems on their connections. In essence, they prevent sharing efficiencies in order to maximize their own profits.
• Service Costs & Pricing: for-profit corporations obviously have "profit" as their fundamental goal. As such, they are interested in resource-extraction from local communities. Community-owned networks more often cite "public service" as their foundational mission. Local communities are more interested in sustaining the endeavor, not profiting from it. Anyone that has ever done grocery shopping knows that when you buy in bulk, the per-unit price drops -- and bandwidth is the same way. Thus, for example, a community that buys in bulk saves its users a considerable amount of money. The cost savings from community networks allow them to operate for cheaper or to engage in additional public services (see the next point).
• Access & Public Service: communications networks become stronger (and their utility increases) the more people who are connected to them. Community networks often focus on achieving universal access, while corporate networks tend to focus on the most lucrative constituencies. If you want universal access, then you've got to be pro-community networks -- because there are some circumstances where private companies will never build out broadband networks (unless compelled to do so by laws and regulations); but many of these unserved communities are becoming interested in building their own networks to provide these vital services.
• Control: local ownership means local control. Local control means local accountability. With complaints over poor communications services skyrocketing, it's no wonder that many constituencies want a level of control and accountability over their networks and services. If you've ever had problems with your cable or DSL service, you know exactly what I'm talking about.
• Innovation: ISPs are interested in one thing -- "Internet Service Provision." Community Network developers are working on an enormous number of additional services that could be integrated into their communications infrastructures. For example, put an Asterix server on your network and you've just enabled everyone to make free local phone calls. Add a streaming server and everyone can podcast. Add conferencing programs and a video stream and anyone can host a live video chat room. And all of these would be available on the local network -- no need to use the expensive (paid for) bandwidth to the outside Internet.

Feel free to provide feedback, additional ideas, commentary, etc. on these ideas. Obviously there are many more pros to Community Networks -- and I'd be interested in hearing other takes and experiences.