Andrew Colclough

Finland has become the first country in the world to make broadband internet access a legal right for all citizens.

The legislation, which came into effect Thursday, forces telecom operators to provide a reasonably priced broadband connection with a downstream rate of at least one megabit per second (mbs) to every permanent residence and office, the Finnish government said in a statement.

"From now on a reasonably priced broadband connection will be everyone's basic right in Finland," said Finnish communications minister Suvi Linden. "This is absolutely one of the government's most significant achievements in regional policy and I am proud of it.

"Reasonably priced" ...That sounds like a really solid and objective base for just law...

Think of what is really going on here. Imagine if it were my legal right to force you to provide me a service at whatever price I determine is "reasonable?" You don't have to imagine this if you live in Finland. The Law, better described as the collective force, is being directed by the vast majority of Fins, against a minority group (telecoms). The Law, which is supposed to be an instrument of justice and defense, is perverted into on offensive weapon of plunder.

And the Finnish government is an utter disgrace, promoting this concept as a "significant achievement." It is a digression and perversion of the high concepts of Rule of Law, Individual Rights, and Justice for which generations of men have struggled and died to advance.

What is next? "Reasonably priced" computers? Automobiles and Fuel? Food? Clothing? As soon as the law ceases to be just - where do you draw the line?

But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.

[...]

But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

The person who profits from this law will complain bitterly, defending his acquired rights. He will claim that the state is obligated to protect and encourage his particular industry; that this procedure enriches the state because the protected industry is thus able to spend more and to pay higher wages to the poor workingmen.

Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests. The acceptance of these arguments will build legal plunder into a whole system. In fact, this has already occurred. The present-day delusion is an attempt to enrich everyone at the expense of everyone else; to make plunder universal under the pretense of organizing it.

-The Law, Frederick Bastiat

Yes, I had to add the quotes in the headline, since Reuters' writers apparently don't understand how the price system works. See comments below excerpt.

The FCC provided few details about how it would carry out such a plan and who would qualify, but will make a recommendation under the National Broadband Plan set for release next week. The agency will determine details later.

One way of making broadband more affordable is to "consider use of spectrum for a free or a very low cost wireless broadband service," the FCC said in a statement.

Contrary to popular belief - There is a way to make something "free" or "very low cost":

Refuse to pay the cost.

Or perhaps pass a law that mandates a "very low price".*

So this leaves us with a few options. Which of the following seems the most just?

a) You evaluate the price of a service vs. the quality of a service, and choose whether that price is worth the trade off.

Or...

b) You are compelled by law to have a cost taken from you, and let a third party, who the cost won't effect, determine the value of the trade off, as well as the quality of service you will receive.

Or..

c) You choose to force someone else** by law, who you don't particularly like for some arbitrary reason, to pay the costs of the service.

----- 
*Inevitably, the regulated "free" or "very low" price will cause demand to exceed supply -> leading to a shortage. A shortage, which could easily have been avoided had the price system been free to fluctuate and act as an indicator of the relative supply, demand, and cost of providing and maintaining a broadband WiFi network.
Unless, of course, the FCC rationed the supply of broadband access - as they already allude to doing by mentioning "...who would qualify." Those, "who qualify" likely won't be paying the real cost either. This scenario is option "c", managed by the third party from option "b", by the way.

**Whoever this person is, they are not like you. They could be a different race, sex, or occupation, but just for this example, let's pick a random, high sounding level of yearly income. Higher than what you make, at least...