Sampling of prefiled bills for 2003 state legislatures shows advanced services, telemarketing, consumer disclosure, spam, slamming and wireless services to be among concerns facing states’ lawmakers next year.
Minn. PUC hearings on allegedly secret and preferential agreements between Qwest and selected CLECs are to resume next month. PUC Administrative Law Judge Allan Klein plans hearings Aug. 6-8 to examine additional unfiled oral agreements that Minn. Dept. of Commerce in June said it had uncovered. New agreements differed from those that already were part of case record, Commerce said, and would shed further light on allegations. New discoveries caused original procedural schedule to be suspended. Commerce in Feb. filed complaint (Case P-421/C-02-197) alleging Qwest made secret deals with certain CLECs, giving them preferential rates and terms in return for CLECs’ dropping their opposition to Qwest regulatory initiatives such as its merger with U S West and its Sec. 271 interLATA long distance entry bid. Qwest denied improper conduct, saying agreements at issue didn’t have to be filed because they dealt with dispute settlements and administrative mechanics. Qwest had petition pending at FCC asking whether its interpretation of filing laws was correct. Final Minn. briefing cycle will conclude around end of Aug., with ALJ’s recommended decision expected in mid-Sept. In related matter, Minn. Dist. Court, Ramsey County, is to hold July 26 hearing on Qwest motion seeking information from Minn. Commerce Dept. about its relationships with AT&T. Qwest charges that state Commerce Dept. has been biased toward AT&T in major cases involving Qwest. It submitted data request to Commerce in March under state’s open govt. law but said agency hadnt responded fully, say many requested documents contained proprietary trade secrets, so Qwest filed suit in May to compel disclosure. Qwest said Commerce then changed grounds for withholding documents, saying they related to active investigation as well as containing trade secrets. Qwest said Commerce had taken positions that deprive carrier of its statutory right-to-know basis for Commerce’s adverse positions against Qwest in at least 2 major cases. First was 2001 case in which AT&T alleged Qwest had violated interconnection agreement by not allowing AT&T to test Qwest’s unbundled network element platforms. That case ended in May with Qwest being fined $900,000. Second case was Feb. complaint by Commerce about unfiled Qwest interconnection agreements.
U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) office urged FCC to approve proposed U.S.-Mexico settlement rates only for 2002 for now. USTR said Commission should consider deferring approval of 2003 rates “until it becomes clear whether and when the Mexican government intends to reform its long distance rules.” USTR submitted comments June 17 on requests for waivers by WorldCom and AT&T on Commission’s international settlements policy to change accounting rate for services with Telmex. Telmex, WorldCom and AT&T reached agreements to change settlement rates for 2001 through 2003. Agreements introduce 3 new rates for 2002 and 2003 based on final destination of call, with weighted average of 8-9 cents per min. “These rates appear a positive step,” USTR said. “However, the new average rate still appears to be at least double the actual cost of terminating these calls in Mexico and differs only marginally from the single 10 cent rate proposed for 2003 in the WorldCom-Telmex agreement that was filed with the Commission last year.” In March, WorldCom petitioned FCC for waiver to lower accounting rate for international traffic it exchanged with Telmex. That would lower average 19-cent rate now in effect with Telmex. It would provide rate of 15 cents in each direction for 2001 and 13.5 cents in each direction for 2002. For 2003, different rates would apply based on whether traffic was northbound or southbound and, in some cases, in which cities it terminated. WorldCom argued that deal would be in public interest because it would move settlement rates “much closer” to cost-based levels on U.S.-Mexico route and would shift it to levels “far below” 19 cents benchmark rate set by FCC. AT&T petitioned FCC in April to implement similar rates. “While AT&T would like to obtain greater reductions, Mexico’s restrictions on competition continue to prevent the negotiation of competitive, cost-based rates on the U.S.-Mexico route,” AT&T said. USTR told FCC it was “particularly disappointing” that pacts don’t consider even deeper reductions for 2003. “Thus, while the rate reductions proposed in the petitions for waiver are a step forward, the proposed rates are still far above cost -- reflecting the power Mexico’s international long distance rules give to Telmex to negotiate these rates,” USTR said. It said Mexico needed to reform those rules to let competing suppliers negotiate rates and to promote “the public interest of achieving cost-based settlement rates.” Telmex in March filing asked Mexican regulator Cofetel to repeal critical provisions of what U.S. had termed anticompetitive international long distance rules. USTR said: “With this filing, the principal Mexican and U.S. telecom providers are now actively seeking to open the cross- border basic telecommunications market to competition.” But it said Mexican govt. hadn’t yet moved to reform rules and create competitive international telecom market. By approving only proposed rates for 2002, FCC could wait until it was easier to evaluate whether additional reductions for 2003 and beyond were likely, USTR said.
Gemstar-TV Guide International CEO Henry Yuen spoke to New America Foundation Wed. about sanctity of patents as company was expecting decision June 21 in its patent infringement case against EchoStar. Gemstar has charged that EchoStar, Pioneer Corp., Pioneer Digital Technologies, Pioneer New Media Technologies, Pioneer N. America, Scientific-Atlanta and SCI Systems imported set-top boxes with Interactive Program Guides that it said infringed on patents held by Gemstar and its StarSight Telecast subsidiary. In briefing with reporters at National Press Club in Washington, Yuen said he couldn’t predict which way International Trade Commission (ITC) judge would decide but said Gemstar could appeal if ruling came down on other side. He acknowledged case had affected company’s stock price adversely. Yuen said company had concluded 180 license agreements without litigation and bemoaned company’s reputation as being litigious. “We are a company that is quite misunderstood,” he said: “We have to sue infringers who are flagrant in these kinds of cases. Otherwise, it would be very, very unfair to licensees who paid.” Although company has 20-year interactive program guide agreement with Adelphia, Yuen said Gemstar’s bottom line wouldn’t be badly affected if Adelphia filed for bankruptcy. There are some accounts receivable, Yuen said, but they aren’t large enough to have significant impact on Gemstar’s balance sheet. He said he was hopeful FCC would change its mind on its decision that Gemstar’s electronic program guide (EPG) data wasn’t “program-related” and therefore wasn’t entitled to must-carry status when it was transmitted by broadcasters. Gemstar filed motion to reconsider, which is pending. Yuen said company officials had met with FCC commissioners. “I clearly cannot predict how they will make up their minds but we are satisfied with how we presented it,” he said. He acknowledged that arguments over transmission of data over vertical blanking interval (VBI) in analog might become moot in coming years as nation transitioned to digital, where there’s no VBI. Nevertheless, he said it was important to argue point because analog probably still would be available for many years.
Gemstar-TV Guide International CEO Henry Yuen spoke to New America Foundation Wed. about sanctity of patents as company was expecting decision June 21 in its patent infringement case against EchoStar. Gemstar has alleged that EchoStar, Pioneer Corp., Pioneer Digital Technologies, Pioneer New Media Technologies, Pioneer N. America, Scientific-Atlanta and SCI Systems imported set-top boxes containing Interactive Program Guides that it said infringed on patents held by Gemstar and its StarSight Telecast subsidiary. In briefing with reporters at National Press Club in Washington, Yuen said he couldn’t predict which way judge with International Trade Commission (ITC) would decide but said Gemstar could appeal if ruling came down on other side. He acknowledged case had affected company’s stock price adversely. Yuen said company had concluded 180 license agreements without litigation and bemoaned company’s reputation as being litigious. “We are a company that is quite misunderstood,” he said: “We have to sue infringers who are flagrant in these kinds of cases. Otherwise, it would be very, very unfair to licensees who paid.” Although company has 20-year interactive program guide agreement with Adelphia, Yuen said Gemstar’s bottom line wouldn’t be badly affected if Adelphia filed for bankruptcy. There are some accounts receivable, Yuen said, but they aren’t large enough to have significant impact on Gemstar’s balance sheet. He said he was hopeful FCC would change its mind on its decision that Gemstar’s electronic program guide (EPG) data wasn’t “program-related” and therefore wasn’t entitled to must-carry status when it was transmitted by broadcasters. Gemstar filed motion to reconsider, which is pending. Yuen said company officials had met with FCC commissioners. “I clearly cannot predict how they will make up their minds but we are satisfied with how we presented it,” he said. He acknowledged that arguments over transmission of data over vertical blanking interval (VBI) in analog might become moot in coming years as nation transitioned to digital, where there’s no VBI. Nevertheless, he said it was important to argue point because analog probably still would be available for many years.
At occasionally emotionally charged meeting of Public Safety National Coordination Committee (NCC) in Brooklyn Fri., public safety officials, including several who themselves had responded to attacks on World Trade Center and Pentagon, laid out for policymakers critical spectrum needs in wake of Sept. 11. At top of many lists was clearing analog TV incumbents from 700 MHz to make way for public safety users to operate in 24 MHz that FCC has set aside from them in that band. In first days following N.Y. attack, TV stations went off air after their equipment on top of World Trade Center was destroyed, said Peter Meade, chief of Nassau County, N.Y., Fire Dept. “I didn’t hear anybody saying, ‘I need Channel 2 back,'” Meade said. “But there are literally millions of people in the New York metropolitan area who cannot live and who will not live without an augmentation to the existing public safety communications channels. So television be damned.” Other key issues that surfaced repeatedly in day-long meeting included need for better interoperability between jurisdictions, for redundant wireless data network that could function during disasters and for more govt. funding. Several new proposals were put on table as well, including one by Nextel that was receiving kudos from public safety community and would relocate users in 700 MHz and 800 MHz bands for more efficient operations.
FCC electronic filing requirements and procedures once again are under attack by attorneys and engineers who are required to use Consolidated Database System (CDBS) for most of their filings on behalf of clients. Making matters worse, according one lawyer, is that “there’s a complete lack of communication” on electronic filings between bureaus. Such communication is “absolutely necessary” for system to work, lawyer said, because, for example, Wireless Bureau handles broadcast auxiliary applications while Mass Media handles all other TV-radio applications. Principal complaint of lawyers was that attachments to electronically filed documents weren’t properly put with applications they referred to until days, sometimes weeks, later. Electronic filing system was criticized year ago (CD July 5 p1/00), and recently was shut down for overhaul (CD June 15 p10).
FCC concluded certain wireless carrier practices, such as charging customers for dead time and for unanswered or unconnected calls, weren’t per se unjust or unreasonable under Sec. 201 of Communications Act. Commission responded to petition for declaratory ruling filed by plaintiffs in class action complaint against GTE. At issue were practices of: (1) Charging customer for dead time, which includes “noncommunication” air time such as after party has ended call but before subscriber pushes “end” button. (2) Charging for unanswered or unconnected calls. (3) Measuring time of call from time “send” button is pushed. (4) Rounding up charges to next min. Class action suit in U.S. Dist. Court, Tampa, had charged violation of Fla. Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Court referred billing practice complaints to FCC for declaratory ruling and stayed rest of proceedings until Commission could act. While FCC denied plaintiff’s petition Fri., it didn’t rule out possibility that in certain cases “in the context of the related contractual services and marketing practices of the CMRS [Commercial Mobile Radio Service] provider, these practices may be found to be in violation of Section 201.” FCC agreed with carriers that charging “for the time a network is engaged but no actual conversation occurs is related to the costs associated with the network functions that occur even if a call is not completed.” Such costs can include those related to setting up trunk or interconnecting with LEC, order said. Agency acknowledged wireline carriers didn’t charge for unconnected calls when line was busy or unanswered nor for call setup time. For wireless service, on other hand, charges typically start from moment that “send” button is pressed. Commission said: “It appears that in this instance, a competitive, deregulated market has enabled carriers to adopt different types of services and billing practices.” In competitive market, consumers can factor in different practices carriers use for when call begins to make service decisions, it said. FCC said it already had found that practice of rounding up rates to next min. for completed calls was not per se unjust or unreasonable. Complaints against GTE, now part of Verizon Wireless, didn’t provide details that indicated rounding-up practices at issue were unjust or unreasonable, it said.