In teleconferences with reporters scheduled half-hour apart Thurs., CLEC coalition squared off against group of economists over why FCC’s proposed broadband deregulation was bad -- or good -- idea. Today (May 3) is deadline for comments on agency’s proposal to free Bell companies’ high- speed data services from regulatory requirements such as unbundling. Many parties are expected to file comments in what is considered one of most significant common carrier proceedings pending before FCC. Bell companies have complained that it wasn’t fair that cable companies could provide broadband cable modem services without similar regulations.
NCTA told FCC in its 3rd progress report on compatibility between cable systems and consumer electronics equipment that “significant progress” was being made on technical specifications in 3 areas agency originally asked about: (1) Unidirectional receiver capable of direct connection to cable system. (2) Receiver that also could support advanced and interactive services. (3) Bi- directional receiver that could do all of above. NCTA said it and CEA had negotiated and agreed to specifications for analog TV and DTV programs transmitted in clear and use of security module supplied by cable operator that would allow pay-per-view and subscription programming to be unscrambled. Report didn’t address CEA complaints that cable operators hadn’t set timetable for implementing standards or resolved CE manufacturers’ problems with Point of Deployment-Host Interface License Agreement (PHILA). Main sticking point on PHILA is that CEA feels it allows cable operators undue control over content and would violate consumers’ home recording rights. NCTA Gen. Counsel Neal Goldberg said that issue wasn’t addressed in progress report because that wasn’t what FCC had asked about in its report and order. “It sounds like their filing addresses a much broader set of issues,” Goldberg said. Nevertheless, he said, cable operators want “tools, not rules” on content and want to negotiate best, most liberal deal possible on home recording of programs because that would most satisfy cable subscribers. However, copy protection tools must be in place, he said, because otherwise program providers wouldn’t negotiate with cable, and cable wanted to compete with DBS operators, which already had such licensing provisions in place. Goldberg said document wasn’t meant to be status report on whole DTV transition, but instead was on finite subject matter. Still, he said he was optimistic that NCTA and CEA were moving toward resolution on those other outstanding issues. CEA, in its response, took note of fact that only 3 manufacturers -- Motorola, Scientific-Atlanta and Pace Micro Technology, which already were working with cable -- had signed PHILA. CEA spokesman also said NCTA was asking CE manufacturers to simply trust that cable operators would use copyright tools appropriately. “We need to have some assurances,” he said.
Farm Business Council endorsed EchoStar acquisition of DirecTV, Pres. Ken Boem said in FCC filing. He said deal would provide improved service in rural areas.
WorldCom’s MCI Communications unit asked Ga. PSC to require BellSouth to provide its retail DSL service over loops WorldCom leased and to unbundle voice-frequency portion of its DSL loops for sale to CLECs as unbundled network element platform (UNE-P). WorldCom said BellSouth’s refusal to place its DSL services on CLEC-leased loops or to unbundle voice portion of its DSL loops was anticompetitive, discriminatory and breach of carriers’ interconnection agreement. BellSouth urged PSC to reject plea, saying WorldCom could resell BS DSL to its voice customers. It said its policies against subloop unbundling of DSL loops were consistent with FCC unbundling rules, and said Commission didn’t require it to provide its data services on loops leased by competitors. Fla. PSC, ruling on complaint by CLEC Fla. Digital Network ordered BellSouth to provide its retail DSL services on loops leased to CLECs but denied request for subloop unbundling of packet-switching functions of its DSL loops.
FCC Comr. Abernathy said there’s need for “clarity of scope” in “jurisdiction questions” between FCC and FTC on common carrier issues, including proposed FTC do-not-call list and on advertising and marketing questions. She told Direct Marketing Assn. (DMA) Wed. that FCC didn’t have expertise or mandate to regulate advertisement of communications services. While competition in telecom sector is good for consumers, she said, it also places “additional obligations” on users to be informed. “The effectiveness of functioning markets does depend on the ability of the system to limit externalities and facilitate informed consumer decision-making,” Abernathy said. FTC is considering national do-not-call registry (DNCR), but its officials have said DNCR probably wouldn’t cover common carriers and other telecom companies under FCC jurisdiction because of FTC’s legislative exemption from such jurisdiction. FTC Chmn. Timothy Muris has said he wants his agency to have jurisdiction over common carrier for advertising and consumer protection issues. Muris and other FTC officials have said FCC probably would have to amend rule that would cover telecom companies that engaged in telemarketing. Abernathy told us she wasn’t sure companion FCC DNCR would be needed. She did say FCC had considered DNCR in past but had rejected proposal. She said FCC would be “valuable resource” for FTC while engaged in decision-making process and would tell FTC why it didn’t establish DNCR. Abernathy said she “applauds” DMA for creating do-not-call list. She also told DMA that FCC was receiving many complaints from consumers on predictive dialers, which often leave consumers hanging in wait while telemarketer is on another line. Abernathy recommended industry devise solution before complaints led to regulation or legislation (she said no regulation was pending now.)
Comcast and AT&T asked FCC for 7-day extension to file reply comments on their proposed merger. Flurry of comments came in on Mon. deadline. Companies said they needed more time to make thorough analysis of issues raised by commenters. They said more than 25 comments totaling more than 700 pages were filed. “In view of the volume of the commenters’ fillings, the applicants request a brief extension,” companies said. FCC set reply deadline of May 14, and extension, if granted, would push that to May 21.
Additional groups voiced opposition to and support for broadband regulatory parity bill introduced this week (CD May 1 p1) by Sen. Breaux (R-La.) and Senate Minority Whip Nickles (R-Okla.). Bill, which would give FCC 120 days to eliminate regulatory distinctions between Bells and cable industry in provision of high-speed Internet access, is “a giant leap backward,” American ISP Assn. Exec. Dir. Sue Ashdown said: “The problem is that the giant Bell company monopolies refuse to abide by the law and allow competitors parity in access to our publicly subsidized networks as mandated by the ‘96 Act.” Frontiers of Freedom (FF), a group led by former Sen. Malcolm Wallop (R-Wyo.), said bill was “based on a false premise” and would harm consumers: “The problem is supply, not demand… [Consumers] will embrace broadband even more when the price drops and when more applications are made available.” Consumers’ Voice expressed similar concerns. Alliance for Public Technology said “disparate regulatory structure” among ILECs, cable, satellite and wireless companies was one of major causes for lack of broadband deployment. Communications Workers of America (CWA) also pledged support for Breaux-Nickles. CWA Pres. Morton Bahr said: “Competition to build multiple broadband networks using different technologies will spur job growth and will foster the development of new and lower priced Internet services for consumers.”
FCC Comr. Copps said Wed. that while current economy didn’t appear to be ideal time to hold 700 MHz auction, Congress was “pretty specific that there needs to be an auction.” He said at press breakfast that he was researching legislative record to see whether there were countervailing statutory mandates that FCC needed to take into consideration on timing issue. Commission now faces statutory deadline of Sept. 30 to deposit proceeds of Ch. 52-59 auction in U.S. Treasury. It’s considering CTIA request for review of Wireless Bureau decision last month to keep June 19 date for both Ch. 60-69 and Ch. 52-59. If auction were held on time, “I'm not terribly optimistic that huge sums of money would be raised,” Copps said. He also said he wasn’t “thrilled” about Ch. 52-59 and Ch. 60-69 spectrum “being thrown together in the same auction.” But he said his examination of statutory issues on auction didn’t mean he was backing delay. “I'm supposed to be implementing laws passed by Congress,” he said, and he’s in mode of looking at merits of various statutory requirements. While Copps said he had personal opinion about timing of auctions, he said “I'm not here to implement my personal opinion.” Meanwhile, National Emergency Number Assn. (NENA) weighed in on timing of 700 MHz auction, saying availability of 24 MHz in that band for public safety was “a reason worth some delay.” FCC already has allocated 24 MHz at 700 MHz for public safety, although availability of that spectrum also is subject to efforts to clear band of analog broadcasters as part of DTV transition. “We would not wish to put the already allocated 24 MHz at risk, but so far as we can tell, it is already at risk of tardy availability, given the slow pace of DTV implementation,” NENA told FCC in filing Wed. It said Commission’s Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee projected in 1996 that almost 100 MHz would be needed by 2010, although only 24 MHz had been allocated in former UHF TV spectrum. “With the Administration, the Congress and the FCC all recognizing that there are reasonable arguments for delay, it is unseemly and unnecessary for this issue to remain unresolved beyond the May 8 deadline for submission of notice of intent to bid at auction,” NENA said. It also urged FCC not to allow issue to remain in “limbo” even closer to June 19 auction date.
FCC agreed to extend deadline for reply comments on review of broadcast and cable EEO rules (MM 98-204) to May 29, from May 15. Extension was sought by Minority Media & Telecom Council.
Justice Dept. and FCC decisions on proposed EchoStar takeover of Hughes Electronics are expected by Sept., delay from midsummer, EchoStar CEO Charles Ergen said. Delay is tied to FCC’s decision to review EchoStar’s plans for 5th spot beam satellite that combined company would launch, he said. EchoStar has proposed buying Hughes and its DirecTV subsidiary for $26 billion.