Commissioners Remain Undecided on Apartment Video Order
Commissioners remain undecided on how to vote on an order set for consideration at the Oct. 31 FCC meeting that would ban exclusive video contracts between pay-TV companies and owners of multiple dwelling units, said agency and industry sources. No commissioners have reached final opinions on the order other than Chairman Kevin Martin, who circulated it in late August, said an FCC source. Eighth- floor negotiations over the item may go down to the wire, said an agency source and an industry source. In contrast, they said, commissioners seem largely set in their positions on another order set for a vote next week that would guarantee cable operators the same video franchise deregulation Bells got in March, but only when cable contracts expire.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Commissioners also are to vote on number portability rules for VoIP providers and a rulemaking notice on pole attachments, the agency said late Wednesday. A hearing on how well broadcasters serve their communities will begin after the FCC meeting, the agency also said. (See separate report in this issue.) Both the commission meeting and the localism hearing are in the FCC headquarters in Washington. The likely vote on the cable franchise order remains 3-2, with Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps dissenting on grounds that in taking that action the FCC would interfere with local decision making, said an agency official. Other commissioners are considering minor changes to the order, said the source. Cable operators have resisted the order because it would mean that some would have to wait years, after existing franchises expire, to capitalize on caps on public access, data and other fees. The March FCC order applied the rules immediately to telecommunications companies and other new video providers.
Martin’s draft order barring apartment video exclusives drew questions from all other commissioners. Some voiced concern about whether the regulator has authority to abrogate existing contracts (CD Oct 22 p4). It’s impossible to say what the final order will say, since talks are ongoing, said an FCC source. Judging by a last-minute deluge of cable operator and Bell lobbying of commissioners on the subject and letters from many groups on the rules, the apartment video issue remains hotly contested, said a cable lawyer. Officials from AT&T, Comcast, Corning, Embarq and NCTA this week discussed the order with commissioners or aides, ex parte filings show.
Cable and Bells continued feuding in FCC filings over the need for a ban. Comcast sees no basis for Martin’s argument that an exclusive ban would help minorities because a higher percentage of people of color live in apartments than other Americans, it said. “The evidence on the record shows that these households will suffer a net loss because they will lose the benefits associated with negotiated exclusive access agreements, and they simultaneously lose competitive choice in the voice marketplace” and for broadband, said Comcast. USTelecom countered with data showing that far more poor people, seniors and minorities occupy apartments than other groups in the same cities. “There is simply no good policy reason to deny consumers the benefits of video competition just because they live in a multiple dwelling unit,” said USTelecom President Walter McCormick.
VoIP Porting, Pole Attachments Also on Agenda
The FCC also plans to act on number portability rules for VoIP providers at the meeting, entering an area seeing more disputes about how quickly VoIP providers port phone numbers to other providers. Verizon told the FCC in an Oct. 23 ex parte letter that although number portability rules already apply to VoIP providers, the FCC should clarify them, especially in situations where wholesale carriers receive a porting request for a number used by a VoIP provider.
On another telecom issue, the FCC will consider revising pole attachment rules, an issue increasingly controversial as telecom carriers complain about rates and terms offered by the electric utilities owning many of the poles and much of the conduit (CD Oct 10 p9). Keller and Heckman, a law firm that represents electric utilities, issued a statement expressing fear that the FCC has “bought into” telecom industry concerns that aren’t “grounded in reality.” - Jonathan Make, Edie Herman