Totally non-lawyer answer…. 

Much of this is about property and land rights and it's a subject that is left 
to the States, not the federal government.   Each State makes it’s own rules 
regarding access or delegates that authority down to the local level.   Each 
State also gets to decide who gets to use public right of way and what the 
qualifications are.  The FCC declaration that BIAS providers are Title II and 
hence common carriers only means that for federal legal purposes you are now a 
common carrier subject to all the rules of a telecommunications company.   
That’s all well and good - but it’s not binding on the states, nor does it 
automatically make you a public utility in your state.

Many States already have laws in place that address right-of-way for broadband 
providers (Ohio being one) and that predate the FCC action.   Some will defer 
to the FCC on the subject, and some won’t.  

If you are in a State that doesn’t think as a broadband provider you are 
eligible to occupy right of way then you can try to convince them to go along 
with the FCC’s reasoning that you are a telecommunications provider, or you can 
take another route such as obtaining a CLEC license or be a video service 
provider.   Either way it’s not an issue that is settled by the FCC’s action.


Mark Radabaugh
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
fcc_ch...@wispa.org
419-261-5996

> On Dec 1, 2016, at 9:18 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> there is law then there is LAW
> would it require somebody contesting a lowly wisp and a win in court to 
> establish a caselaw specific to the industry?
> i dont know how that stuff works at all, criminal law im pretty familiar, but 
> this stuff is outside my scope for sure
> 
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 8:14 PM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com 
> <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote:
> Yeah, about then.  I posted fragments as well as a link the whole 800 page 
> document.
>  
> From: Josh Reynolds <>
> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:11 PM
> To: af@afmug.com <>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms
>  
> I think it became law in June from what I remember.
> 
>  
> On Dec 1, 2016 8:01 PM, "That One Guy /sarcasm" <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com 
> <>> wrote:
> when does any of this become a set in stone thing
>  
>  
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <fai...@snappytelecom.net <>> 
> wrote:
> Thanks... does anyone know what would be the process to 'test' the waters.
> 
> say, we would like to install a pole on the ROW....
> 
> Suggestion ?
> 
> 
> Regards.
> 
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 7266 SW 48 Street
> Miami, FL 33155
> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232>
> 
> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:%28305%29663-5518> Option 2 or Email: 
> supp...@snappytelecom.net
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mark Radabaugh" <m...@amplex.net <>>
> > To: af@afmug.com <>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 3:07:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms
> 
> > In theory - yes.
> >
> > But keep in mind ROW is a state, county, city, or {insert political entity}
> > designation and that the FCC’s decision doesn’t actually get you anything 
> > until
> > the authority having jurisdiction {AHJ} decides to honor the FCC’s decision.
> > As far as I know there have not been any legal cases to test the issue yet.
> > With the current state of political affairs it’s hard to say if the FCC’s
> > Title II decision is going to stand.
> >
> > While you are filing that 477, make sure you make all the required 
> > disclosures
> > and filings that go with it.  You have about another 2 weeks worth of 
> > filling
> > out papers before you serve those 4 customers.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >> On Dec 1, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Jay Weekley <par...@cyberbroadband.net <>> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Here is a stupid question.  What is the official designation of an ISP?  
> >> Can I
> >> get a cable connection, re-distribute it to 4 people wirelessly,  file 
> >> form 477
> >> and get access to the right of way?
> >>
> >> Chuck McCown wrote:
> >>> Works everywhere.  If the CATV has pole access you do too.  Same thing 
> >>> with
> >>> streets and other public places.
> >>> They may charge you a franchise fee, but it has to be the same as 
> >>> everyone else.
> >>> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser
> >>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 12:26 PM
> >>> *To:* af@afmug.com <>
> >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms
> >>> Does that even work in the municipal boundaries not just rural? I was 
> >>> thinking
> >>> about deploying fiber in the city here and didn't know if the city could 
> >>> stop
> >>> me if they wanted too.
> >>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com <>> 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>    What Chuck said.
> >>>
> >>>    On Dec 1, 2016 1:22 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com <>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>        Absolutely.  You are a BIAS provider and the FCC explicitly
> >>>        defined BIAS providers as being eligible for ROW access equal
> >>>        to a public utility.
> >>>        *From:* Ben Royer
> >>>        *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 12:20 PM
> >>>        *To:* af@afmug.com <>
> >>>        *Subject:* [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms
> >>>        Get out your can openers. Does me, the ISP, being classified
> >>>        as a common carrier, mean I get right of way access?
> >>>        Thank you,
> >>>        Ben Royer, Operations Manager
> >>>        Royell Communications, Inc.
> >>>        217-965-3699 <tel:217-965-3699> <tel:%28217%29%20965-3699> 
> >>> www.royell.net <http://www.royell.net/>
> >>>        <http://www.royell.net <http://www.royell.net/>>
> >>>
> >>> No virus found in this message.
> >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> <http://www.avg.com 
> >>> <http://www.avg.com/>>
> >>> Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4664/13518 - Release Date: 12/01/16
> >>>
> 
> 
>  
> -- 
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
> part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Reply via email to