AT&T and union workers asked a federal court to bar Louisville from enforcing a one-touch, make-ready ordinance. Wednesday, AT&T amended its complaint against the city in U.S. District Court in Louisville; Thursday, the Communications Workers of America supported the company in an amicus curiae notice. The law, meant to speed the pole attachments process for new entrants like Google Fiber, attracted a separate lawsuit -- on similar grounds -- by a Charter subsidiary earlier this week, and AT&T sued over a similar rule in Nashville (see 1610040069 and 1609230039). The suits illustrate the risk for cities considering one-touch, make-ready laws, but better broadband may be worth the fight, said attorneys and advocates for local broadband.
The FTC released a long-awaited report Thursday on its study of the business practices of patent assertion entities, as expected (see 1610040082). The agency proposed several reforms in the report, aimed at mitigating what it called “nuisance infringement litigation” brought by PAEs. The recommendations are largely aimed at balancing the rights of defendants during the early stages of patent lawsuits brought by PAEs, the FTC said. The commissioners approved the report 3-0. The report's scope was narrower than the FTC originally envisioned, but its data provide a strong basis for future patent litigation revamp efforts in Congress and federal courts, stakeholders told us.
A one-touch, make-ready ordinance in Louisville attracted a second lawsuit from industry. Following AT&T, Charter Communications subsidiary Insight Friday challenged the Metro Government law in U.S. District Court in Louisville (Case No. 3:16-CV-625). The federal court should "disallow Louisville’s action allowing competitors to trespass on, convert, take possession of, and potentially damage, Insight’s property,” said the cable complaint (in Pacer). Only the Public Service Commission may regulate privately owned utility poles in the state, said Insight. It said the Louisville policy allows Google to take actions “without prior notice and puts strict limitations on Insight’s ability to uncover any possible damage caused to its plant by its competitor or even to assure that it is able to recover the costs of necessary cures. The One-Touch procedures also could allow Insight’s competitors (intentionally or unintentionally) to damage or disrupt Insight’s ability to serve its customers, creating an inaccurate perception in the market about Insight’s service quality and harming its goodwill.” Google pushed for one-touch policies meant to speed new pole attachments as it tries to increase deployment of its competitive fiber network. But existing pole riders opposed such policies. In February, AT&T sued Louisville, saying the city was pre-empted by state pole attachment rules; and last month, it sued Nashville, saying the city was pre-empted by the FCC (see 1609230039). Insight’s suit echoed in part AT&T’s challenge of one-touch, but the Charter company also claimed AT&T and Google benefit from less local regulation of their competitive video services. The court should "bring parity in regulation to Louisville by applying the same regulatory burdens on Insight that it applies to AT&T and Google so that all similarly situated speakers are treated equally in their ability to communicate,” Insight said. "Fair competition requires that the government, whatever its motives, treat similarly situated speakers the same and not unfairly weight one side of the regulatory scale.” Mayor Greg Fischer’s (D) office, AT&T and Google declined comment Tuesday. The city must file an answer to the separate AT&T complaint by Thursday, said a Sept. 20 court order (in Pacer).
Nine wireless providers asked to become "Lifeline Broadband Providers" (LBPs) under the FCC's new federal process for designating carriers eligible for the low-income USF subsidy support program. Assist Wireless, Blue Jay Wireless, Easy Telephone Services, Free Mobile, i-Wireless, Karma Mobility, Telrite, TruConnect Communications and Ztar Mobile filed LBP applications posted Tuesday in docket 09-197. All of the applicants said they met the requirements for streamlined, 60-day treatment designating them as LBP eligible telecom carriers (ETCs). Lifeline's new broadband-oriented support begins Dec. 2 under rule changes the FCC adopted in March, the effective dates for which were announced Monday (see 1610030040). NARUC and individual states are challenging the FCC's LBP process -- which allows providers to become eligible in multiple states or even nationally -- as circumventing state ETC authority under the Communications Act (see 1606030053 and 1607010057). Meanwhile, USTelecom asked the commission for a limited waiver of certain rules in order to permit Lifeline providers to "continue enrolling consumers in the federal Lifeline program based on state-specific program and income eligibility criteria" in 25 states, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. The waiver should expire at the earlier of 18 months from its grant or 60 days after the state notifies the FCC and all ETCs in the state that it has aligned its eligibility criteria with the federal criteria, the ILEC group's petition said.
The FCC and DOJ said an appellate court should deny industry appeals of a ruling upholding the commission's 2015 net neutrality and broadband reclassification order. The three-judge panel carefully examined industry objections to the order and "rejected them in their entirety," said the FCC/DOJ response (in Pacer) Monday to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in USTelecom et al. v. FCC, No. 15-1063 and consolidated cases. The panel's ruling was "entirely correct" and consistent with Supreme Court analysis in its 2005 NCTA v. Brand X decision and the D.C. Circuit's precedent in two previous net neutrality decisions, Comcast v. FCC in 2010 and Verizon v. FCC in 2014, the government said.
The FCC asked a court to suspend its review of the agency's Lifeline USF overhaul, pending agency resolution of petitions to reconsider its order. When such petitions are filed for an order being challenged in court, "it is a common practice for the reviewing court, on request by the agency or other parties, to hold its review proceeding in abeyance pending agency action on the petitions for reconsideration," said an FCC motion (in Pacer) Thursday to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to hold in abeyance NARUC v. FCC, Nos. 16-1170 and 16-1219. The commission said the usual court considerations "are especially weighty in this case" because some recon petitions implicate two questions that judicial petitioners plan to raise before the D.C. Circuit: whether the agency should phase down stand-alone voice support and on state authority to designate USF "eligible telecom carriers" (ETCs). State judicial petitioners Thursday made a filing (in Pacer) saying they would oppose the abeyance motion and proposing a briefing schedule and format agreed to by all the parties, "subject, of course, to this Court's ruling" on the motion. The FCC March 31 adopted an order extending Lifeline low-income support to broadband service and streamlining program administration (see 1603310056). NARUC and individual states challenged the decision to create a federal Lifeline broadband provider designation process that bypasses state ETC reviews (see 1606030053 and 1607010057). CTIA, General Communication Inc., Joint Lifeline ETC Petitioners, the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates, NTCA/WTA, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, TracFone and USTelecom petitioned the FCC to reconsider or clarify aspects of its order (see 1608090023).
The FCC Public Safety Bureau extended to Dec. 31, 2018, the construction deadline for 77 UHF T-Band licenses for the Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS). The commission granted the waiver request by Los Angeles County, it said in a letter released Wednesday in DA 16-1099. The FCC agreed the system is a large undertaking and said the extension wouldn’t harm potential new applicants. Enforcing the previous Dec. 21, 2016, deadline “would be inequitable and contrary to the public interest, as cancellation of the County’s licenses would strand investment of tax and federal grant dollars and would squander facilities already under construction,” it said.
Congress likely will see legislation next year that would require organizations that suffer a data breach to notify the public in a timely manner, experts told us Wednesday. If history is any indication, they don't expect any such legislation to move. That's even after Yahoo's announcement last week that personal information of its more than half a billion account users was stolen nearly two years ago (see 1609220046 and 1609230026). And two of the FTC's three members have told us that the commission unanimously wants a national law.
Small carriers bemoaned the shrinking number of states paying 911 wireless cost recovery to carriers. After Delaware Gov. Jack Markell (D) signed a bill Aug. 10 to end compensation for wireless carriers’ 911 costs, we could find only nine other states' with laws requiring annual payments. Delaware said it will use the saved money to fund 911 systems, but the Competitive Carriers Association said ending wireless cost recovery is an example of fee diversion. National Emergency Number Association CEO Brian Fontes urged states to seek carrier transparency on 911 costs and to consider reducing payments with depreciation. The money adds up to millions of dollars annually.
AUSTIN -- “It’s really a small minority” of communities making it tough for the wireless industry to install small cells for 5G, said a Wireless Infrastructure Association official Thursday at the NATOA conference. He, CTIA and Mobilitie officials said industry wants a dialogue with local governments as companies roll out tens of thousands of 5G small cells. Throughout the conference, local officials and attorneys objected to the tone of recent comments by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler about speeding local siting of small cells, with some warning attendees to be worried about possible commission action.