Skyrocketing retransmission consent fees paid to broadcasters as local news viewership plummets show the need for the FCC to revisit its rules on retrans consent, must-carry and exclusivity since those regulatory advantages are responsible for the retrans fee growth, the American TV Alliance said in news release Tuesday. Pointing to Pew Research data about declining audiences for local TV news since 2007, ATVA said during that time, retrans fees grew 2,426 percent, topping $7.9 billion last year. It said broadcasters use the threats of blackouts to coerce higher fees. NAB said ATVA "is rehashing tired arguments favoring heavy-handed government intervention in a free market. On two previous occasions, the FCC has determined it has no authority to intervene in private negotiations between giant cable companies and local TV stations over the value of broadcast TV programming. ATVA should focus attention on fixing pay TV’s notoriously bad customer service issues rather than continue to fixate on a phony retransmission consent crisis.”

A California bill that would require ISPs to get express consent from consumers to use, disclose and sell personal data survived a Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee hearing Tuesday, despite opposition from industry. By a 9-1 vote with one member abstaining, the committee advanced AB-375 with several saying the legislation needs work before it reaches the Senate floor. The bill, which unanimously passed the Assembly in May, faces scrutiny by the state Senate Judiciary Committee, scheduled to hold a hearing at our deadline (see 1707060052). A spokeswoman for the Energy Committee emailed that even if Judiciary votes down the bill, it would be held there and "is not officially dead."

Acting FTC Chairman Maureen Ohlhausen announced several changes to how the Bureau of Consumer Protection will conduct investigations in an effort to speed up information requests and enhance transparency, the commission said in a Monday news release. They will "reduce unnecessary and undue burdens" of probes but not affect consumer protection, Ohlhausen said. The changes are: (1) providing "plain language descriptions" of the "civil investigative demand" process, which is an investigation into possible unfair or deceptive acts or processes at an organization; (2) developing materials to help small businesses better comply; providing a more detailed scope and purpose of an investigation for companies, if appropriate; (3) limiting "relevant time periods" to lessen burdens on companies and reducing the length and complexity of instructions to provide electronically stored data, where appropriate; and (4) increasing the time for recipients to respond. The FTC said the changes were made in part after concerns were raised by congressional lawmakers and by a report from the American Bar Association Antitrust Section on investigational burdens to companies.

Dish Network and the FTC and states that complained about the company's telemarketing practices are at odds about a permanent injunction ordered against Dish last month as part of a judgment regarding Telephone Consumer Protection Act violations. Dish had years' worth of opportunity during the litigation to propose its own injunction but instead "put all of its eggs in the 'no injunction' basket" and now can't try to craft a new injunction that eases its burden, the federal and state TCPA complaint plaintiffs said in opposition (in Pacer) Friday in U.S. District Court in Springfield, Illinois. Plaintiffs said inclusion of inbound calls wasn't a mistake because such calls are related to outbound calling since they are how consumers ask to be added to Dish's do-no-call list and complain about telemarketing. They said exempting retailers' inbound call activity would let those retailers engage in the same conduct that resulted in tens of millions of illegal calls on which the court imposed liability. Dish separately plans to appeal the $280 million fine (see 1706270061). Separately, Dish is appealing (link in Pacer) a 2016 U.S. District Court ruling obviating Ace American Insurance from having to indemnify it from damages related to that TCPA litigation. In its brief (in Pacer) filed Friday with the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Dish said U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn of Denver erred when he found the damages in the Ace policies to cover only actual damages, since insurance terms are to be interpreted broadly (see 1610140019). The insurer didn't comment Monday.

The FCC listed counties where some Lifeline providers will get forbearance relief from the duty to offer Lifeline-supported voice service, effective Sept. 15. By our count, 931 counties or county equivalents are receiving "conditional forbearance" in a list attached to a Wireline Bureau public notice Monday in docket 11-42. "This forbearance applies only to the Lifeline voice obligation of eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) that are designated for purposes of receiving both high-cost and Lifeline support (high-cost/Lifeline ETCs), and not to Lifeline-only ETCs," said the PN, which cited implementation of a 2016 overhaul order. The commission in 2016 "granted forbearance from high-cost/Lifeline ETCs’ obligation to offer and advertise Lifeline voice service in counties where the following conditions are met: (a) 51 percent of Lifeline subscribers in the county are obtaining broadband Internet access service; (b) there are at least three other providers of Lifeline broadband Internet access service that each serve at least five percent of the Lifeline broadband subscribers in that county; and (c) the ETC does not actually receive federal high-cost universal service support." The listed counties "meet the first two conditions; and for ETCs that are receiving high-cost support in these counties, the forbearance applies only in areas within the county where the ETC does not receive high-cost support," it added. "Forbearance does not grant relief from the Lifeline voice service obligation as to those Lifeline subscribers that the high-cost/Lifeline ETC serves as of the date of this Public Notice."

Reply comments in the two FCC infrastructure dockets, wireless 17-79 and wireline 17-84, demonstrate that deep divisions remain between industry and local governments with no détente in sight. Replies were due Monday in both dockets: 17-79 and 17-84. “Removing barriers to wireless broadband infrastructure -- small cells in particular -- is essential to maintain U.S. leadership in advanced wireless broadband services and to realize the numerous benefits that 4G densification and 5G offer,” said Verizon, the largest U.S. wireless carrier. “Government action to speed deployment will unlock transformative economic and social benefits -- from smart cities and access to education and healthcare to gains in productivity, sustainability, and public safety,” said comments filed in both dockets. The Wireless Internet Service Providers Association commented that the record "makes clear that the Commission has broad statutory authority to remove regulatory barriers to the deployment of fixed broadband networks, even if broadband Internet access service is restored to 'information service' classification" under Communications Act Title I. Google Fiber commented that there is "broad support" for a "one-time make-ready" pole-attachment process. But the U.S. Conference of Mayors' comments included joint resolutions calling on the FCC to: "preserve local zoning over cell towers and small cell sitings," "protect local police powers over rights-of-way and preservation of the right of a fair rental return on the use of public assets," expand the agency's Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee to include more local government representatives, and "refrain from acting on infrastructure NPRMs until the new and expanded BDAC" issues recommendations. Industry is making it clear it has a clear agenda in both the wireless and wireline inquiries, said the cities of San Antonio, Texas; Eugene, Oregon; Bowie, Maryland; Huntsville, Alabama; and Knoxville, Tennessee. Industry wants the FCC to become “a national land use zoning board to oversee local land use authorities” as well as a “national right-of-way access and rate regulation oversight board,” the cities commented. NARUC told the FCC any rules should “be careful to respect the clear limits on its authority imposed by the plain text of the federal telecommunications law.”

T-Mobile will compensate low-power TV stations and translators that have to move multiple times after being displaced from spectrum purchased by T-Mobile in the TV incentive auction, the wireless carrier said in a letter to the FCC posted in docket 16-306 Monday. T-Mobile will “pay the reasonable costs” for stations that are displaced from its spectrum to move from a temporary channel to a permanent one, the letter said. “T-Mobile recognizes that some of these stations may need to move twice, and T-Mobile is willing to go beyond what is required and compensate these stations for the additional move,” the letter said. The LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition said it “applauds” T-Mobile for “doing the right thing” considering the wireless carrier’s plans for rapid deployment, which will cause some LPTV stations to be displaced earlier than expected. T-Mobile expects to have “at least ten megahertz of 600 MHz spectrum clear and ready for deployment across an area covering more than one million square miles by the end of 2017,” the letter said. In the letter T-Mobile characterized the offer to pay for the relocations as a way to “further accelerate” broadband deployment using the spectrum it acquired in the incentive auction. “Only translator and LPTV licensees that must terminate existing operations due to T-Mobile’s 600 MHz band deployments that occur prior to the Special Displacement Window are eligible,” T-Mobile said. The program will exclude costs “necessary to resolve mutual exclusivity among licensees as well as other ancillary or consequential expenses that might be associated with relocation,” the filing said. The reimbursements also may not be available if the repacking timeline is “significantly altered or delayed,” T-Mobile said. T-Mobile previously offered up funds to help public television low-power facilities relocate (see 1706290066). NAB is "gratified" by the T-Mobile announcement, an NAB spokesman emailed. The reimbursement plan "recognizes the important role that low power TV stations play in providing quality entertainment and lifeline news and information to millions of TV viewers,” the spokesman said.

The FCC issued rural call completion and slamming-cramming rulemaking notices Friday that were unanimously adopted Thursday (see 1707130054). The rural call completion Further NPRM proposes to require covered providers of long-distance service to meet performance monitoring and accountability requirements, including as they hand off calls to intermediate carriers. It proposed to either change or eliminate 2015 data-collection and reporting rules. The slamming and cramming NPRM proposes to bolster consumer protections against carriers making unauthorized changes to their preferred telecom providers or inserting unauthorized charges onto their phone bills.

Corrections: A filing window for displaced low-power TV stations will be for all eligible LPTV stations, not just those displaced early (see 1707130060) ... The area an FCC draft public notice proposes to use as the minimum geographic area for bidding in a Connect America Fund Phase II reverse auction of broadband subsidies is census block groups (see 1707130059) ... The proposal to maintain CPB in FY 2018 at $445 million from the House Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Subcommittee is considered programmatic and comes via an advance funding allocation for FY 2020 (see 1707130051).

FCC staff kept a Monday reply comment deadline for wireless and wireline infrastructure rulemakings. A Wireless and Wireline bureau order in Friday's Daily Digest denied the request of the National League of Cities and other local groups for a one-month reply extension in dockets 17-84 and 17-79 (see 1707070047). The groups cited the volume and complexity of initial comments and other reasons (see 1706160015 and 1706160041). Noting many commission rulemaking notices "raise complex issues involving a broad array of rules and attract large number of initial comments," the bureaus said to grant an extension on those grounds, absent other significant factors, would thwart the agency objective of conducting orderly proceedings and promptly resolving disputes.