Bar Exclusive ISP/Landlord Agreements, Say OTI, PK

to multiple-tenant buildings, adopted at the FCC's July meeting (see 1907100020), were due. PK and OTI said the FCC limited its own authority by classifying broadband as an information service, since its authority specific to MVPDs only goes so far and not all broadband providers are MVPDs. They urged the agency adopt a Telecom Act Section 706 classification to give it clear authority to promote multi-tenant access. Or use ancillary authority. Small indie ISPs are the only real competition to the big entrenched cable ISPs and telcos, and whatever steps the FCC takes here, at the least don't harm ability of those indies to access multi-tenant properties, the Multifamily Broadband Council said. It said prohibiting or limiting arrangements where a provider has exclusive right to use in-building wiring would essentially allow mandatory sharing of in-use wiring, inconsistent with other commission findings. The Safer Buildings Coalition urged seeking comment on how the NPRM could affect public safety in-building and rooftop systems and contracts. The Wireless ISP Association, in comments to be posted, said revenue-sharing arrangements between service providers and landlords hurt if not eliminate competition and broadband deployment and should be prohibited. It said public disclosure of revenue sharing agreements isn't a viable alternative since there's no consumer benefit to such disclosures. Bar exclusive wiring and marketing agreements that make competitive entry more expensive, WISPA asked. Exclusive rooftop access agreements are anticompetitive and deter broadband deployment to multi-tenant units, it said. It said some state and local mandatory access regulations and policies aren't technology neutral.