FCC told 9th U.S. Appeals Court, San Francisco, that it had “reasonably” concluded that cable modem service was interstate information service. “The Commission’s reading of the statute makes good sense,” agency wrote court last week. Court is reviewing FCC’s classification of cable modem service, which is being challenged by Earthlink, Verizon, WorldCom, consumer groups and several others. In March, FCC said that cable modem service was interstate information service and that Internet delivered over cable wasn’t subject to common carrier regulations (CD March 15 p1). Ruling went to heart of questions about rights of local franchising authorities, their ability to levy taxes on such services, whether cable modem ever would be subject to universal service requirements and whether cable operators would have to offer “open access” to Internet service providers (ISPs). In its filing, FCC said court’s ruling 2 years ago in AT&T v. Portland, Ore., didn’t require agency to classify cable modem as telecom service, just that law classified telecom component of cable modem service as such. Because Telecom Act doesn’t define clearly how it should be classified, “this court must defer to the FCC’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutory terms,” Commission said. Agency said it believed cable operators were using telecom to provide end users with information service. Therefore, it said, it concluded that cable operators’ offering of telecom to ISPs constituted private carrier service, not common carrier telecom service. FCC said it asserted federal jurisdiction properly because Internet communications frequently crossed state and national boundaries. Court should reject any suggestion that agency’s order “somehow impairs the ability of local governments to manage their rights of way,” agency said: “The Commission has not yet decided how (if at all) its classification of cable modem service will affect local regulation of rights-of-way.” That question is subject of separate proceeding. FCC in March opened rulemaking to examine which govt. agencies, if any, had power to regulate cable modem service and invited comment on whether, “in light of marketplace developments, it is necessary or appropriate at this time” to require multiple ISP access. FCC asked court to dismiss challenge by Verizon, which said Commission should adopt same classification for wireline broadband services. Again, FCC said that question was part of separate proceeding and shouldn’t be considered by court.
Advanced Communications said opposition by FCC Enforcement Bureau, EchoStar, GM and Hughes to Advanced’s petition to intervene in DBS case was based incorrectly on legal proceeding that didn’t address its concerns. Advanced said its petition to intervene and seek continuance of 1995 order, which denied Advanced application for extension to construct, launch and operate DBS system, involved new evidence that Commission had based previous decision on “expectation of future auction revenues” and whether consideration of such expectations violated Communications Act. Opponents said decision U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., in 1996 dealt with issue, but Advanced quoted unpublished decision that said “we express no opinions as to whether the Commission was in fact barred from taking into account the expected impact on federal revenues.” Advanced also said new evidence on Commission decision was “tainted,” making 1995 order and court decisions “not controlling.”
Parents TV Council applauded call by FCC Comr. Copps for review of Commission’s indecency standards for radio and TV broadcasters (CD Nov 22 p1). “It has become clear that the Federal Communications Commission needs to transform itself from a lethargic, passive body into one that can address the needs of families and seriously engage in the effort to clean up public broadcasting,” PTC Pres. Brent Bozell said.
FCC International Bureau Chief Donald Abelson expressed concerns about Chinese govt.’s raising settlement rates for international calls. “This is just another vain attempt at stopping what will be inevitable -- that is, the cost of connectivity should go down,” Abelson said at news conference Fri. Noting progressive stance that China had taken in past on IP telephony, he said that was “exactly the kind of policy I thought that we were going to see from China going on in the future. This particular action… I am surprised by it.”
Verizon asked federal court to block new Wash. state telecom consumer privacy rules on ground they unconstitutionally interfered with its commercial free speech rights to communicate with its own customers. Verizon, state’s 2nd largest incumbent telco, asked U.S. Dist. Court, Seattle, for injunction to stay Jan. 1 effective date of rules adopted Nov. 7 by Wash. Utilities & Transportation Commission (WUTC) pending outcome of its lawsuit. Verizon said state’s rules also conflicted with FCC privacy policy adopted in July because state adopted opt-in policy, which holds that customer proprietary network information (CPNI) such as call detail data can’t be used for internal marketing purposes without customer’s prior consent. FCC adopted opt- out approach under which telecom carriers can use CPNI for internal marketing unless customer explicitly forbids such use. WUTC in its ruling said stricter opt-in standard was needed to prevent privacy invasions from data mining and consumer profiling that was based on very sensitive records of who customer had called. Agency said its opt-in rule represented fair balance between privacy interests of customers and business needs of carriers. Verizon told Judge Barbara Rothstein that opt-in approach to call detail data would make it unduly difficult to market new products and services to its 950,000 customers in Wash. Verizon said many customers were interested in information about services compatible with their calling patterns but few would bother to spend time and effort needed to opt in to CPNI access. Carrier said opt-out approach allowed those with privacy concerns to protect themselves. When FCC adopted its opt-out privacy policy in July on a federal court remand, it allowed states to adopt rules that might be more restrictive, reserving right of review. Verizon has asked FCC to reconsider that provision; request is pending.
Broadcasters and cable operators appear to have most to fear from tentative agenda announced by Sen. McCain (R- Ariz.), who will become Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. in next term of Congress (CD Nov 22 p1). He said committee would “assess whether broadcasters are meeting their public interest obligations.” Commerce Committee also will also examine cable rates.
European and other foreign-owned mobile companies seeking access to U.S. market “still face important barriers,” European Commission (EC) said in “Report on United States Barriers to Trade and Investment” released Wed. It said in spite of commitments U.S. made in World Trade Organization (WTO) pursuant to GATS Basic Telecom negotiations, mobile service sector still faced investment restrictions, lengthy and burdensome proceedings, “protectionist attitudes” in certain congressional circles and lack of access to frequencies for 3G services.
Aviation officials and regulators raised concerns Wed. that FCC rules could allow ultrawideband (UWB) devices to hamper critical avionics systems before potential interference was fully evaluated. FCC order in Feb. set what agency called “ultraconservative” emission limits for UWB. Based on concerns UWB could interfere with safety-of-life and other critical aviation systems, FAA began testing devices last week at its Technical Center in Atlantic City (CD Nov 18 p5). But Sally Frodge of Transportation Dept.’s Office of the Secy., also said at World Airline Entertainment Assn. (WAEA) conference in Washington that continuing resolution that expires in Jan. could tie up funding needed for follow- on evaluation of those test results.
Airline officials and technology developers urged federal regulators Tues. to back certification guidelines for how wireless devices could be used aboard aircraft without causing interference. FAA’s John Dimtroff said at World Airline Entertainment Assn. (WAEA) conference in Washington Tues. that proposal was pending to set up special advisory committee on safety of personal electronics devices on aircraft and possible testing standards. Because of funding considerations, FAA would have ultimate sign-off on such decision, but it is one that has backing of U.S. airlines and technology developers such as Intel.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) began testing ultra-wideband (UWB) devices last week in effort to make initial assessment by year-end on potential impact of new technology on avionics systems. FAA, along with Depts. of Transportation, Defense and NASA, is among agencies that expressed concerns about potential interference of UWB in safety-of-life frequencies. “We do anticipate that there will be some problems based on what we know about UWB types of devices,” FAA Program Mgr. George Sakai said: “To what degree, we don’t know. This is why we needed to do some actual testing.”