Amazon.com told FCC that it should impose open access requirement...

agency should consider rules that would bar parties (either cable operators or broadband ISPs using cable modem facilities) from impeding consumer access to information, products and services,” Amazon.com said. More than 80 companies, associations, and others commented in FCC proceeding on regulatory treatment of broadband delivered over cable. Comments were due Mon., replies July 16. ACLU said cable companies providing cable modem service should be viewed as “classic common carriers” with all attendant open access obligations. “Consumers -- they are really speakers and listeners -- should have an option to choose an ISP that will allow them to access and engage in free speech in a manner consistent with their own choices,” ACLU said. American Cable Assn.(ACA), which represents small and rural cable operators, told FCC that mandated multiple ISP access would “chill investment” and stall broadband deployment in smaller markets. If Commission does mandate any form of multiple ISP access, it should adopt exemption for small cable operators, ACA said. “In smaller markets, mandated multiple ISP access is a costly solution in search of a nonexistent problem,” ACA said. Also, Commission needs to protect smaller cable operators from “unreasonable and unnecessary” local regulations and fees, ACA said. ACA agreed with FCC’s conclusion that cable modem service is interstate in nature and that there should be restrictions on franchise fees and other regulations. Comcast, which has application pending before Commission to merge with AT&T Broadband, said in its comments that multiple ISP requirement isn’t needed to advance “any statutory requirement and would in fact contravene explicit legislative guidance.” Comcast said cable operators are already moving forward with multiple ISP arrangements, Comcast among them. Company also said consumers have unrestricted access to Internet and cable companies are doing nothing to hamper that. “Click-through access ensures that cable Internet customers can experience the full abundance and diversity of the entire Web,” Comcast said. Comcast said there’s no need to obtain local franchises to offer service and that customer service and consumer privacy are safeguarded “by the imperatives of a competitive market.” Charter told FCC it should provide “a regulatory incubator” for service, allowing market to regulate it. Charter said first ISPs it used, Excite@Home and High Speed Access Corp., both collapsed, so predictions of permanent “dominance” should be looked upon “warily.” Charter said provision of cable modem service imposes no additional burden on local rights-of-way except if you count “additional photons and electrons flowing through already- authorized cable system fiber, trunk, feeder and drop cables.” AOL Time Warner offers multiple ISPs as result of consent decree with FTC that allowed AOL to merge with Time Warner. Company told FCC it knows firsthand benefits of that business model, but said it would be “premature” to impose such requirement and would violate First and Fifth Amendments. AOL Time Warner also said no additional franchise should be required to offer cable modem service. USTA said FCC should ensure that small and rural telephone companies remain eligible to participate in pools associated with National Exchange Carrier Assn. (NECA) to offer broadband efficiently and cost effectively and be allowed to elect Title II regulation for their broadband services. National Telecom Coop Assn. said Commission should require all cable, satellite and wireless broadband Internet access providers to contribute to universal service fund. Assn. said not doing so would place existing wireline ILECs at competitive disadvantage. Motorola, which makes cable modems and broadband network routing equipment, said Commission’s policy of “vigilant restraint” should guide it as it considers proper regulatory treatment for all broadband- related services and equipment. Telecommunications For the Deaf (TDI) said Commission should ensure regulatory protections currently afforded to people with disabilities and that FCC should proscribe open access. “If a third party provider offers services, features or capabilities of special use to individuals with speech or hearing disabilities, it is critical that such persons have immediate access to those services at moderate cost without having to pay duplicative costs,” TDI wrote.