Vermont In Support of Open Cable Access

At the eleventh hour, the Vermont Department of Public Services filed comments with the FCC in support of Internet Venture, Inc.'s petition seeking a ruling on leased cable access.

by Ted Stevenson ISP-Planet Managing Editor [July 15, 1999]

Counsel for the Vermont Department of Public Services (VDPS) Tuesday submitted comments in support of the petition filed June 2, 1999 before the Federal Communications Commission by Internet Ventures, Inc. and its subsidiary, Internet On-Ramp, Inc., requesting a declaratory ruling confirming the right of ISPs to leased cable access.

The filing was accompanied by a detailed affidavit prepared by William Shapiro, Telecommunications Planner for the VDPS.

The Communications Act of 1934, as amended, requires cable operators to set aside a portion of their channel capacity for "commercial use" (i.e., video programming) by other entities. The stated purpose is "to promote competition in the delivery of diverse sources of video programming, and to ensure that the widest possible diversity of information sources are made available to the public."

The VDPS's argument rests on three main points:

• Cable Internet service is comparable to broadcast television.
• Cable operators offering video programming—or leased access—to traditional broadcast-style providers, but not to ISPs, are being discriminatory.
• The Commission must "harmonize" its stance on leased access with its goal of promoting competition, particularly in rural areas, where xDSL isn't a viable alternative and won't be for a number of years.

Convergence
In support of its first point, the VDPS filing observes that while cable video programming and Internet access aren't identical, the technologies are rapidly converging and the differences quickly disappearing. In this connection, the VDPS cites the Commission's own recently established definition of comparability, asserting that IVI's proposed service offerings fall clearly within that definition.

Competition
Reviewing the competitive landscape, the VDPS makes the case that Adelphia, the cable operator holding the dominant franchise in Vermont, effectively has a monopoly on broadband capability. In addition to supplying traditional cable television programming, Adelphia is an Internet service and presence provider. Its Powerlink service is the only cable modem service available in the state. Other ISPs will have a difficult time competing with Adelphia's Powerlink, the VDPS contends.

Previous to preparing its FCC comments, the VDPS conducted a survey of all 45 LECs operating in Vermont regarding their plans to offer DSL service, the only viable broadband alternative to cable modem access. Only two have current plans to deploy DSL, and none has filed tariffs with the FCC—a prerequisite to such deployment.

Technical issues
The technical problems associated with DSL—distance limitations from the LEC central office, the inability of most DSL signals to travel over digital loop carriers (DLCs), and poor transmission over aging copper lines—further limit the potential role of DSL as a broadband connectivity option, the VDPS contends. This leaves Adelphia as the only broadband choice for the vast majority of Vermont homes.

Finally the VDPS underscores the technical feasibility of independent ISPs connecting to existing cable systems. It cites a recent trial project in Florida performed by GTE Services Corp., in which end users were able to gain cable access to the Internet via multiple ISPs.

The FCC's replies to public comments regarding IVI's petition are due by July 28, 1999.

—End

Related stories
FCC Petitioned for Cable Access Ruling
Cable Access War Rages on Multiple Fronts
Broadband Access Bulletin # 1
Broadband Access Bulletin # 2
Broadband Access Bulletin # 3