What's the legality of an ISP monopoly over an apartment building?
I recently moved into a brand new apartment building in Murray, UT. To my dismay, I discovered that for hardwired internet access, my only option was to pay the renting company to gain access to CenturyLink's services (that should have been a dealbreaker right there, but the rent was just too good). I pay $40/mo. for 3 mbps. The infrastructure is supposedly fiber, and is set up in a way where each unit has a locked box, accessible only to apartment staff, in which a modem (or perhaps some other networking device) is placed, upon starting the month-to-month payments. I then plug my own devices (router, direct line to computer, etc.) directly into an Ethernet plug in the wall. The building has probably about 100 or so apartment units. If I wanted to upgrade, I could pay $55/mo. for 5 mbps, or $70 for 7.
I'm no IT expert, but it seems to me that if the building is connected with "state-of-the-art" fiber, it should be able to handle a much higher traffic load than 700 mbps for an entire building... no? I don't know how those things work or are set up, though. Anyway.
My main concern is the price gouging. It seems to me that CenturyLink has entered into a contract with my building with the sole purpose of limiting our choice of internet providers, so they could then take the abysmal speeds and charge us up the ass for them... This is obviously detrimental to the consumer, and I feel it's potentially an illicit way of operating. I wasn't sure if me being a renter vs. owner changes anything. I still feel like I should have rights as a consumer... Even if technically speaking the infrastructure couldn't handle it, I still know I'm overpaying for what I'm getting. (My last place charged $30/mo. for 18 mbps as a comparison.) What are your thoughts, questions, or current situations?