CONSUMER GROUPS START NEW BID FOR OPEN ACCESS TO BROADBAND
Public interest advocates began fresh push for open access to cable modem, DSL and interactive TV (ITV) networks Wed. with calls for “dot-commons” movement that would press for sweeping changes in national broadband policy. In half-day conference at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, about 100 advocates met to rally support for federal open access mandates on both cable operators and phone companies. They also discussed ways to counter prevailing deregulatory mood in Washington, debating new regulatory and legislative thrusts against media concentration, new rhetorical approaches on diversity issue and budding local efforts to foster competitive broadband networks. “It’s an uphill struggle but I think there are opportunities,” said Gene Kimmelman, co-dir., Consumer Union’s Washington office.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Jeffrey Chester, former exec. dir., Center for Media Education (CME), used occasion to introduce his latest nonprofit venture, Center for Digital Democracy (CDD). Chester, whose new group co-sponsored conference with CME, urged attendees to battle efforts by such large media companies as AOL Time Warner to restrict unlimited Internet access on their high-speed lines by erecting “walled gardens” of proprietary content for their data subscribers. He also called for “public interest safeguards” to keep cable and phone companies from discriminating against outside ISPs, ITV content providers and Web sites. “We have a window of opportunity before the new [broadband] systems are fully installed,” he said.
Chester brandished resolution favoring open broadband networks from Transatlantic Consumer Dialog (TACD), coalition that includes both U.S. and European consumer groups. Resolution, which was approved Fri., recommended that U.S. and European Union member states “enact the appropriate policies to ensure open and nondiscriminatory access for broadband Internet services on all major platforms.” It also backed requiring digital and ITV systems to “operate in a similarly open and nondiscriminatory manner” and said policies should be adopted to “ensure that noncommercial content providers receive favorable treatment on broadband platforms, including access to bandwidth, EPGs [electronic program guides] and other essential delivery services.” TACD termed it “essential that the broadband Internet reflect the qualities of diversity and democracy that have made the narrowband Internet such an important tool of communications.”
Stanford U. Law Prof. Lawrence Lessig said public interest advocates must change terms of debate in Washington by reframing their calls for preserving the diversity of media voices. Thanks largely to cable industry’s “extremely strong” First Amendment rhetoric, he said, federal courts are increasingly extending full free speech protections to cable operators, shielding them from content or network regulation. Lessig urged advocates to shift their proregulation arguments away from diversity and common carrier status and toward nondiscrimination. “The diversity rhetoric is dead for the current political culture,” he said. “We've got to start talking about discrimination.”
FTC Comr. Mozelle Thompson said his agency’s consent decree for AOL-Time Warner merger should serve as model for rest of cable industry. He said decree, which required AOL Time Warner to offer access to at least 3 outside ISPs when it began AOL’s online service on its high-speed cable lines, “essentially broke cable monopoly model for the future provision of high-speed Internet service” and precluded company from discriminating against outside content providers. “I think at the minimum, it represents a standard for the top 20 cable markets for the time being and at least the next 5 years,” Thompson said. “They [AOL Time Warner] have to be responsive to the marketplace,” he said, because public “now has legitimate expectations of open access.”
ACLU Assoc. Dir. Barry Steinhardt called walled garden “a very real free speech issue,” saying that was why his group intervened in AOL-Time Warner merger review. “This is an extremely important free speech issue for the 21st century,” he said. He contended that MSOs such as AOL Time Warner shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate against other service providers when they were “acting in a common carrier role,” especially because they had received “the government-conveyed benefits of cable monopolies.”
Timothy Denton, Ottawa lawyer and consultant promoting open access in Canada, said new, viable option was for cities, regional govts., school boards and other entities to build competitive fiber networks. While such option was impossible 10 years ago and untenable even 3 years ago, he said it was do-able now because of steep reductions in fiber and other costs. “Many institutions are now finding it cheaper to build their own facilities,” he said.
David Farber, former FCC chief technologist and now telecom prof. at U. of Pa., warned advocates against “polarizing” FCC Chmn. Powell so early in his term. Arguing that Powell had “an open mind” on issues, he called him “an opportune person to go talk to rationally.” Farber also contended that U.S. should shift its spectrum policy so that others could use owners’ vacant frequencies. “We have a very strange view of spectrum in this country,” he said. “We treat it like property and put fences around it.”