(Forwarded from Interesting People list) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IP] Court Rules F.C.C. Erred in Decision on Net Access Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 04:14:12 -0400 From: Dave Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Court Rules F.C.C. Erred in Decision on Net Access October 7, 2003 By MATT RICHTEL SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 6 - In a setback for the Federal Communications Commission, a federal court issued a ruling on Monday that may force cable companies to share their high-speed Internet, or broadband, networks with competing Internet service providers. The decision, issued by a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, found that the F.C.C. erred in an earlier ruling that effectively absolved cable companies of any obligation to make their lines accessible to competitors. The decision was hailed by Internet access providers who sued to get the right to lease those lines and offer competing services over them. They said the court decision would give consumers more choice when shopping for a provider of high-speed Internet service. "This will help drive prices down and quality of service up; it will drive broadband deployment," said Dave Baker, vice president for law and policy at Earthlink, an Internet service provider and a plaintiff in the lawsuit. The F.C.C. said it would appeal the case. Michael K. Powell, the chairman of the F.C.C., said in a statement that the decision would hurt efforts to develop a national policy on high-speed Internet services. The court decision is another blow to the F.C.C., which has been under attack from Congress for its decisions permitting greater media consolidation. Despite claims of victory by the cable industry's competitors, telecommunications lawyers said the implications of the 39-page ruling might not be clear for some time. They said the decision did not specifically require cable companies to lease their lines to competitors. Rather, the court ruled that the F.C.C. was wrong in the way it categorized cable broadband services for regulatory purposes. In March 2002, the commission ruled that it would regulate cable broadband providers as "information services," a definition that applies to companies that process data. Companies that fall under that definition are subject to much less stringent regulation. The F.C.C.'s approach toward broadband regulation - for both cable companies and telephone companies - is to permit the major players to build their high-speed Internet infrastructure without requiring them to open their networks to competitors. The F.C.C. has said the best way to expand deployment is to give the big companies incentive to invest in new networks. The appellate court, however, found that cable broadband service providers were in part providing "telecommunications services," a definition that could subject them to the greater obligations of "common carriers" under federal law. The court indicated in a footnote in the ruling that "the practical result of such a classification is that cable broadband providers would be required to open their lines to competing" Internet service providers. Mr. Baker of Earthlink asserted that the court's language meant that his company "should be able to buy transport from all cable companies." That result is by no means certain. In a preliminary decision in February, the F.C.C. said it would not force the telephone companies to lease their high-speed Internet access, or digital subscriber lines, to rivals. The commission could apply that ruling to cable companies as well. Even before the ruling, some cable companies reached agreements with Internet service providers to lease their high-speed cable lines. For instance, Comcast Cable, one of the largest cable companies, has agreements to share its network with several national Internet service providers, including America Online and Earthlink, as well as regional providers. Mr. Baker said Earthlink's cable agreements give it access to about 25 percent of the homes in the United States that are served by cable. The National Cable and Telecommunications Association, a trade group, said the court decision was one step in a long process and that it did not yet have an opinion on the case. David H. Fiske, a spokesman with the F.C.C., said the agency did not know whether the decision could force a change in direction or policy. He said the agency was reviewing the access issues raised by cable modem and D.S.L., but said it is unclear whether the same legal analysis would apply to both technologies. F.C.C. lawyers also said that even if cable broadband providers were regulated as telecommunications services, the agency could choose not to impose a regulation that required them to lease their lines to competitors. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/07/technology/07CABL.html?ex=1066513861&ei= 1&en=0696695271778a0b ------------ ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization*** To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: <http://www.edc.org/GLG/gkd/>
