"This evidence is encouraging, since it demonstrates that the benefits of these new services are not leaving behind most large segments of the population. To the extent that historical reports have identified a digital divide, this study provides evidence that that much of the divide has narrowed in most cases to statistical insignificance.

The exception, however, is that rural consumers appear to use more dial-up services and less broadband services, either because reasonably priced broadband services are still not available in some rural communities, or that rural consumers have less demand for broadband services.

VoIP use is growing, and has been used in over 10% of households. VoIP services are more apt to be used in low-income households (22% of households earning less than $25,000), non-Caucasian and non-African American households (18% of Hispanic, Asian and other races), and younger households (18% aged 29 or under)

As for other towns, they will have to first get the local phone company to sign off before they can offer the same service to their residents.

For now, Verizon is leaving open the question of whether it will say yes to such requests. The company is already offering broadband Internet service over its FiOS-brand high-speed fiber optic network in many areas and is busy expanding the network.

The law — Act 183 — requires phone companies to offer broadband throughout the state by 2015. But it also requires municipalities that want to offer broadband Internet service to first ask their local telephone company if that company plans to offer broadband in the area.

The phone company has 40 days to answer yes, in which case it then has 12 months to start offering broadband. If the answer is no, the municipality is free to start offering its own service.

For its part, Verizon declined to give municipalities a blanket green light to offer wireless Internet service.

“Any proposals Verizon would receive from a municipality would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis in accordance with Act 183,” said Verizon Pennsylvania spokeswoman Sharon Shaffer.

Verizon is widely seen as the driving force behind Act 183, which in earlier forms prohibited local governments from offering any form of telecommunications service.

“It was clearly an anti-municipality statute,” Upper Dublin's Leonard said.

But Verizon vehemently denies that. The company's official line is that Act 183 was a law requiring it to roll broadband service out faster, rather than a ban on municipal or “community” networks.

"The No. 2 U.S. telecommunications carrier petitioned the FCC seeking relief from requirements that included making connections to competing networks and negotiating just and reasonable terms for its services."