Vice-presidential hopeful and retiring Sen. Edwards (D- N.C.) has received many donations from prominent figures in the broadcasting and entertainment industry, as well as some in high-technology. But he has been all but ignored by telecom donors. Sen. Kerry (D-Mass.), the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, selected his chief primary rival, Edwards, to join his ticket Mon. Kerry also was strongly favored by mass media donors in his primary campaign.

This week’s markup of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act (SHVIA) in the House Judiciary Committee could include an amendment to speed local-into-local distribution through an antitrust exemption. Sources said Reps. Boucher (D-Va.) and Goodlatte (R-Va.) could propose the exemption. Industry sources said while DBS providers haven’t lobbied for the amendment, they won’t oppose it.

Public broadcasters failed last week to reach a consensus on a trust fund they are seeking from Congress in exchange for early return of public TV’s analog spectrum. PBS had called a meeting of officials of the Assn. of Public TV Stations (APTS), Corp. for Public Bcstg. and NPR to resolve differences over trust fund proposals (CD July 1 p6). Although the discussions were “very positive and very constructive,” no specific agreement was reached, a PBS spokeswoman said. The differences center on the voluntary nature of the APTS proposal and suggestions from PBS that a $5-10 billion payment to the trust fund from analog spectrum auction proceeds replace annual federal appropriations.

Sen. Lautenberg’s (D-N.J.) office has been informed by GAO that it will investigate possible illegality should the FCC proceed as expected and endorse a plan that would give Nextel spectrum at 1.9 GHz as part of an 800 MHz rebanding plan, Lautenberg’s office confirmed Thurs. Lautenberg wrote GAO Tues. raising questions about the proposal. At our deadline, the FCC announced that the order would be on the Commission’s agenda for the July 8 meeting.

FCC Media Bureau Chief Kenneth Ferree told a group of communications lawyers that there are several issues in the media ownership decision by the 3rd U.S. Appeals Court, Philadelphia, (CD June 25 p1) that could warrant Supreme Court scrutiny. Ferree stressed that the Solicitor Gen.’s Office, in consultation with the FCC’s Gen. Counsel, would ultimately make the decision on whether to appeal to the Supreme Court. He also said he had not yet consulted with the commissioners on whether the agency wanted to seek certiorari or take another course. But Ferree told a meeting of the Federal Communications Bar Assn.’s Mass Media Practice Committee that he did feel it was ripe for review. He said it wasn’t a perfect case, “but not a bad one” for the high court, given a number of inconsistencies and potential problems he sees in the ruling.

A recent U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., ruling on wholesale access rules will cost small and medium-sized businesses about $4.9 billion annually, according to a study released Tues. by CompTel/Ascent and NuVox Communications. The study said the decision “threatens to prevent” facilities-based CLECs from accessing high-capacity lines they use to deliver phone and Internet services to small and mid-sized businesses. CompTel CEO Russell Frisby and NuVox Vp- Regulatory Affairs Jake Jennings called on the FCC to act quickly to preserve access to DS-1 facilities at cost-based rates while new rules were developed. They said the new rules were “critical to the future direction of competition because the Bell companies already have indicated that they intend to raise wholesale rates unilaterally by the end of the year, if not before.” The study said unless the new rules ensured that CLECs retained “affordable” access to high-capacity lines, CLECs would be forced to pay “significantly more to provide the same service” by buying special access service, and the cost to business customers would rise 25%. It warned most CLECs would be forced to abandon the DS-1 market if required to pay special access rates. “Price increases for DS-1 services will add to inflationary pressures in the economy as small and medium businesses pass through at least some of cost increases in the price they charge for their own products,” it said. The study also estimated costs to small and medium-sized businesses could rise by $464 million a year in N.Y., $428 million in Cal., $351 million in Tex., $266 million in N.J. and $250 million in Ill. ALTS Pres. John Windhausen said in a statement he hoped the FCC would issue “new, permanent rules as quickly as possible to restore our companies’ rights to purchase the essential elements needed by facilities-based competitors. Failure to act soon could impose a dramatic rate hike on American small businesses across America, putting a stake in the heart of the nascent economic recovery.” But an SBC spokesman called the study “a series of guesses pulled out of thin air.” He said SBC’s wholesale customers would have “the same access to our network tomorrow that they have today. The sky hasn’t fallen and no one is taking anything away.” The spokesman said “the door remains open for business-to-business commercial agreements… That’s the best way to provide added certainty for our competitors’ businesses.”

The U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., affirmed the FCC’s June 2002 decision to allow increases in the cap on ILEC subscriber line charges (SLCs) to take effect as scheduled in the Commission’s CALLS order. Acting on the National Assn. of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA) v. FCC case (02- 1261) Tues., the D.C. Circuit denied NASUCA’s petition for review and held “the Commission acted reasonably and in conformity with the 1996 Act.”

Verizon Gen. Counsel William Barr, a former U.S. attorney general, warned in a letter to the FCC late Mon. that commissioners could open themselves to criminal prosecution if they sided with Nextel on its 800 MHz rebanding plan. The letter also argued that the FCC has no legal authority to expend federal dollars to support the relocation costs of public safety agencies or companies like Nextel.

The 11th U.S. Appeals Court, Atlanta, ruled Covad can pursue certain antitrust and tort claims against BellSouth despite the Supreme Court’s Verizon v. Trinko ruling(CD Jan 14 p1). Covad Gen. Counsel-Senior Vp James said his company intended to “vigorously pursue its claims.” He said “many, including BellSouth, believed that the Supreme Court’s Trinko decision made antitrust suits challenging monopoly abuses by incumbent companies impossible.” He said he was “pleased” the 11th Circuit reaffirmed that “phone companies will still be held accountable for such abuses under the antitrust laws.” Covad’s antitrust claims go back to 2000, when the CLEC alleged BellSouth used its monopoly power to try to thwart competition in the Internet access market. The claims were dismissed by the U.S. Dist. Court, Atlanta, on the grounds that they were barred by the Telecom Act of 1996. In Aug. 2002, the 11th Circuit reversed the dist. court ruling, reinstating Covad’s antitrust claims and remanding the case to the trial court for further proceedings. The Supreme Court subsequently issued a ruling in the Trinko case, which upheld the dismissal of an antitrust case alleging a single breach of an incumbent phone company’s duty under the Telecom Act to share its networks with competitors. The Supreme Court also remanded the 11th Circuit decision for further action to comport with Trinko. Covad said the parties had 21 days to ask the full court to rehear the case. A BellSouth spokesman said his company was “evaluating our position and what steps we will take next.” He said he was “happy” that “the bulk of the [Covad] claims” in the case had been thrown out. Telecom attorney Andrew Lipman said the 11th Circuit decision was “significant for Covad, but each [similar antitrust] case has to go forward on a case-be-case basis.” He said while the decision in Trinko “didn’t completely foreclose the ability of competitors to bring antitrust suits… it required [them to be] much more narrow. Complaints have to be drafted with surgical precision to avoid raising causes of action that otherwise could be raised under the Telecom Act.”

The Senate passed a bill designed to encourage collaborative research without fear of patent challenges, sending the legislation to the White House. President Bush is expected to sign the act.