FCC chief considers forcing cable TV competition

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
Date: August 23, 2005 10:01:44 AM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] FCC chief considers forcing cable TV competition
Reply-To: dewayne () warpspeed com


 FCC chief considers forcing cable TV competition
By Leslie Cauley, USA TODAY
<http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20050823/bs_usatoday/ 
fccchiefconsidersforcingcabletvcompetition>

One little-noticed provision of the 1992 Cable Act could give the  
Federal Communications Commission the power to compel cities to let  
the regional Bells compete head-on with cable TV operators. And to do  
so quickly - no foot-dragging allowed.

At least that's what FCC Chairman Kevin Martin thinks, and if he's  
right he may try to use that authority to widen broadband's reach  
across the USA.

Martin, in a written statement for USA TODAY Monday, confirmed that  
he is considering taking such action.

"Several weeks ago I asked the staff to explore what the commission  
can do to ensure that local authorities are not unreasonably refusing  
to award additional competitive licenses" for video, he said.

Granting additional franchises, he added, "would promote competition  
and stimulate broadband deployment."

The chairman's comment is a not-so-veiled reference to a short  
passage in the 13-year-old Cable Act. The provision - Section 621(a) 
(1), to be exact - states that local franchising authorities "may not  
unreasonably refuse to award an additional competitive franchise" for  
video.

By some readings, that means cities can't erect obstacles to keep out  
video competitors.

One city wanted Verizon to install a fiber-optic ring to connect its  
traffic lights. Another wanted it to provide a wireless connection  
for a local library.

Verizon and SBC are spending billions to deploy advanced broadband  
services - voice, data and video - across the country. Before they  
can deploy video, however, cities want them to submit to the cable TV  
franchising process.

The problem? There are thousands of local franchising authorities,  
and each has its own licensing process and timetables.

Verizon has only a few video licenses. SBC says that its Internet TV  
service isn't "cable TV" so it doesn't need a license.

It remains to be seen if the FCC will act. But the mere fact that  
Martin is even considering pulling rank like that is bound to alarm  
local franchising bodies, which are loath to cede power to Washington.

"The cities are already upset" about ongoing attempts to curb their  
authority, notes Paul Glenchur, an analyst at Stanford Washington  
Research Group. "What you're talking about here is the usurpation of  
local authority."

Blair Levin, who was an assistant to former FCC chairman Reed Hundt,  
agrees. But he also thinks Martin's straight shot across the bow  
could aid broadband's expansion.

"It's smart for the chairman to use the FCC's bully pulpit to warn  
the cities against log rolling the Bells" on broadband, says Levin,  
an analyst at Legg Mason Wood Walker in Washington. "The only  
question is at what point does he think he should intervene."

Martin isn't saying. But he clearly intends to stay on top of the issue.

Says Martin: "I intend to do whatever I can to help meet the  
president's goal of 'universal and affordable access for broadband  
technology' by 2007."

Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/