Brought to you by broadband: TV viewing via connected devices up 65% since 2016

Brought to you by broadband: TV viewing via connected devices up 65% since 2016: Connected devices have made video streaming easy and ubiquitous -- 74% of U.S. TV households now have at least one internet-connected TV device, including smart TVs, streaming media devices (like Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Chromecast or Apple TV), connected video game systems, and Blu-ray players. Similarly, households with over-the-top video service are expected to exceed 265 million by 2022. Given the tremendous growth of broadband-powered devices, USTelecom remains committed to supporting policies that foster the innovation and investment necessary to keep pace with consumer demand.

This is an important trend driving the vertical integration of advanced telecom infrastructure with content such as this month's merger of AT&T and Time Warner.  It represents the "cable-lization of the Internet" as some have termed it and a return to the "walled gardens" of the early 1990s such as AOL and CompuServe. These services functioned as integrated platforms for content as well as communications such as email for a recurring monthly fee. We are witnessing a revival of the model, this time with bundled video content those early platforms couldn't deliver.

It's a regressive trend and counter to the move toward Internet protocol-based telecommunications since then that enables access to innumerable information and communication services (including Voice Over Internet Protocol or VOIP), obsoleting the walled garden model of a generation ago. It also represents a misplaced emphasis on entertainment over telecommunications. Capital is diverted to purchasing content rather than constructing and upgrading infrastructure. That reinforces neighborhood redlining as the big ISPs concentrate on affluent, high density neighborhoods where they can maximize ARPU and ROI with their video bundles.

Cable companies facing enormous shifts in market, regulatory environments

Cable companies like Comcast, Time Warner and others are facing enormous shifts in the market and regulatory environment that are likely to prove very challenging to navigate going forward. Earlier this year, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission subjected cable companies to Title II of the Communications Act in its Open Internet rulemaking deeming Internet service providers -- cable companies top the list measured by total customer premises served -- common carrier telecommunications utility providers under Title II. 

That's hugely incompatible with cable's business model based on offering subscriptions to bundles of TV channels to selected -- and not all -- customer premises in their service areas. At the same time as this regulatory sea change is occurring, the marketplace is also being disrupted as consumers increasingly shun these offerings.

Cable's subscription-based model is far better suited to the FCC's previously adopted classification of Internet service as a specialized information service -- and the cablecos' market positioning of themselves as entertainment and not telecommunications providers. Now it's gone except in the unlikely event the courts step in and restore it. Meanwhile, consumers are turning elsewhere for video entertainment.

Time Warner Cable applies for California franchise

Nearly two months after the Southern California city of Carlsbad accused Time Warner Cable of operating in a regulatory no mans land because it lacked either a franchise from the city or a statewide franchise issued by the California Public Utilities Commission, Time Warner has applied for a statewide franchise. That will enable it to avoid build out requirements that Carlsbad or other local California governments might seek to impose on providers.

Cable company in regulatory no man's land, SoCal city charges in lawsuit

This type of situation may begin to crop up frequently in California, where cable companies can opt to remain under local government franchise agreements or get a statewide franchise from the California Public Utilities Commission under new legislation that took effect this year, the Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, the city of Carlsbad believes Time Warner is operating outside the law because it doesn't have a franchise from the city nor has it received a statewide franchise. Nor has it even applied for one according to the CPUC's Web site.

Holding up a city franchise with Time Warner is Carlsbad's insistence on higher fees to fund broadcasts of city council and other government events.

It's probable there will be other such lawsuits brought by local governments over this and, more likely, when negotiations stall over buildout requirements in which the locals insist cable companies serve their entire communities instead of leaving parts in the dark on the wrong side of the digital divide. The likely targets include telcos and other cable players -- like Comcast for example -- that have so far not applied for or received statewide franchises.