Showing posts with label video franchise. Show all posts
Showing posts with label video franchise. Show all posts

Thursday, October 08, 2015

Local governments seek federal preemption of Internet regulation

In the early 2000s as legacy cable companies contemplated offering Internet-protocol (IP) based services including Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP), they feared local governments that franchised their decades-old cable television services would demand they offer IP services to all neighborhoods within their jurisdiction. That prospect was very real possibility given their residents had other options for television service including over the air broadcast and satellite, but would need landline infrastructure built out in order to provide universal Internet access as demand for Internet service jumped. Also, by offering voice service via VOIP, cablecos began emulating telephone companies that are required to offer universal service to any premise requesting it.

To head off what to them appeared to be a costly prospect, cablecos heavily lobbied state governments to preempt the locals by giving state public utility commissions franchise authority over IPTV. While nominally limited to video services, for both cablecos and phone companies the move forestalled for many years any local requirements they upgrade and build out their Internet infrastructure since their video services are typically bundled as part of landline premise Internet service.

Now more than a decade later, local governments are getting in on the preemption game. Since their oxen were gored by their states at the behest of the legacy incumbent cablecos and telcos, they are looking to the federal government for relief. An example is the Federal Communications Commission’s order earlier this year to preempt statutes in two states barring local governments from building their own infrastructure. Doing so would allow local governments to get around the state sanction of the incumbents’ redlining practices.

In Arizona, local governments appear to be looking to the feds to resolve a dispute involving the city, a legacy cableco and Google Fiber over the city’s regulation of video services. “The City believes these questions will more likely be resolved more definitively in the future by the Federal Communications Commission or a similar authority,” said Scottsdale Chief Information Officer Brad Hartig in a statement. (H/T to DSLReports).

In California, two legacy telcos are making an argument that would place Internet services in a regulatory non man’s land, subject to neither state nor federal jurisdiction. Frontier and Verizon contend regulation of Internet service falls under federal jurisdiction per the FCC’s order classifying Internet as a common carrier telecommunications service under Title II of the federal Communications Act. But at the same time, they argue that order does not preempt California law giving the California Public Utilities Commission jurisdiction over legacy (non IP-enabled) telephone service but not Internet services. (Item here at Steve Blum’s Blog)

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Qwest abandons IPTV in Colorado

Qwest, the former Baby Bell US West spun off from AT&T two decades ago, has abandoned plans to deploy Internet Protocol TV in Colorado next year. At the same time, the Denver Post reports, Qwest has shelved lobbying efforts like those pursued by AT&T in its 22-state operating territory to get a statewide video franchise bill enacted preempting local governments and their irksome demands that telcos deploying advanced telecommunications services including video service to compete with cable be available to everyone and not just selected neighborhoods.

The build out issue apparently figured into Qwest's decision:

Ken Fellman, former mayor of Arvada and a local communications lawyer, said he respects the company's decision to back off of its video plans. Fellman has asked that Qwest be required to offer video services to all members of a city or town, not certain select neighborhoods.


"It was a concern that Qwest didn't have the financial resources to widely deploy service," said Fellman, who also represents the Greater Metro Telecommunications Consortium. "We would have ended up with pockets of competition. Perhaps in some ways, (Qwest CEO Ed) Mueller came to a similar conclusion."

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

California PUC receives several franchise applications from cable providers

The California Public Utilities Commission has received several new applications for broadband video franchises from cable companies. Among the new applicants are Charter Communications and several of its operating units as well as Seattle-based Northland Cable Television.

Time Warner Cable, which was issued a franchise in October by the California PUC, also submitted several new applications for subsidiary operations in the state.

Verizon, which received a franchise earlier this year, filed an amended application reflecting an expansion of its service area in Southern California.

The applications can be viewed at the CPUC's Web site by clicking here.

Friday, November 02, 2007

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.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Local governments in federal courts to block telcos' end run to the FCC

Telcos adamant to avoid local government broadband infrastructure build out requirements went to Congress last year seeking legislation preempting local government authority to award "video franchises" and place it in the hands of the feds.

When that failed, the telcos then directed their efforts at state legislatures to get the locals off their backs. They have been successful in at least a dozen states, getting legislation with limited build out requirements that allow them to bypass local areas they don't want to serve, effectively making the digital divide law.

The telcos apparently want to buy insurance at the federal level despite their failure to get Congress to go along. So they're doing an end run around Congress by going to the Federal Communications Commission. Earlier this year, the FCC went along with them and promulgated regulations barring local governments from requiring telcos to build out their broadband infrastructure to serve an entire community and also giving the locals a short time frame to act on telco applications for franchises.

Not so fast, a coalition of local government and non-profit groups say. This week, they filed briefs in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit arguing the FCC lacks statutory to do so since the telcos failed to get federal legislation enacted last year.