Cable Access War Rages on Multiple Fronts

The struggle between independent ISPs and giant cable TV conglomerates is being carried on simultaneously in the federal courts, local PUC hearings, the FCC, and the U.S. Congress

by Patricia Fusco ISP-Planet Managing Editor [June 18, 1999]

ISPs everywhere may be celebrating in the wake of an Oregon ruling that would make open access a condition of AT&T Corp.'s purchase of cable giant Tele-Communications Inc. But the federal court's decision is just the first foray in what is likely to be a protracted court battle.

AT&T has already filed for an appeal of the Portland ruling on the grounds that the decision is preempted by federal statutes regulating cable television. That's right, cable television, not Internet access.

While AT&T fights the battle for cable access in court, other skirmishes have broken out among the "haves" and the "have-nots" of cable access.

Another county heard from
This week GTE Services Corp. announced they had completed tests demonstrating that cable modem systems can readily operate on an open access basis. The $60,000 upgrade of their Clearwater Fla., cable network permitted 80,000 customers to select the Internet service provider of their choice over the GTE cable network.

American Online, CompuServe and GTE.net participated in the testing. George Vradenburg, AOL senior vice president for global and strategic policy said, "we know now that when the cable industry says it can't open its network, it really means it won't."

If the tests debunked cable companies arguments that network upgrades to provide open access were cost prohibitive, then surely the path would be cleared for regulators and legislators to provide customers with cable access options?

Disputed verdict
Not so says Milo Medin, founder and chief technology officer of Excite@Home. "I'm not saying that what GTE did can't be done. I'm saying it's not true."

Excite@Home believes that the GTE recommendation does not address many of the real-world problems that would need to be solved to make universal ISP access to broadband cable systems viable. The broadband provider contends that the Clearwater tests fail to address service provisioning and management, customer support, and traffic engineering. Each element they say is a critical factor in a volume rollout of cable modem services.

Meanwhile, few U.S. markets have more than one company offering high-speed Internet access. The less competition, the greater the price of high-speed services and of course, the greater the profits for established cable service providers @Home and RoadRunner.

First of 30,000 hearings?
Although the Portland ruling signals an encouraging regulatory trend, it also means that we could experience innumerable hearings before local franchise committees in the U.S. Each hearing could produce a different result, and chaos would reign over cable access issues.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman William E. Kennard told members of the National Cable Television Association that he was surprised no local franchise committee had requested regulatory relief from the FCC this week.

Kennard called on the cable industry to "act responsibly" and open their networks to competition. Kennard added that the best way to serve consumers is to create incentives for industry to build broadband networks.

So far, AT&T has forgone the dangling tax break and headed for the high courts to maintain their local monopolies on cable modem services. AT&T has already earned the nickname "Ma Cable" among industry analysts.

Internet Ventures Inc., has been successful in getting their request for a declaratory ruling from the FCC on a rocket docket. A FCC ruling could be made as early as mid-July that could provide ISPs with what they desire in the form of leased access to cable networks.

Congress gets into the act
The Internet Growth and Development Act of 1999—introduced in May by Representatives Rick Boucher (D-Virginia) and Bob Goodlatte (R-Virginia)—is gaining support, but that's Congress, so ISPs could see a protracted battled on this front also.

The legislation is designed to eliminate the exclusive service agreements that are currently being forged by cable Internet providers, you know, what the local franchises were supposed to be doing in the first place.

While Congress attempts to assure that all platforms providing transport to the Internet remain open and accessible to all ISPs, it still boils down to a matter of consumer choice.

Declaration of peace?
Courts and Congress aside, it appears that the FCC is going to have the first opportunity to end the war for open and leased access to cable networks soon. Should decisiveness strike, the FCC could make the declaratory ruling revolutionizing cable access competition as soon as ten days after the 4th of July.

Perhaps the FCC should issue their ruling more like a declaration? Something along the lines of "We the federal regulators, in order to form more perfect competition, hold these truths to be self-evident; that all consumers are created equal, that they are endowed by their cable modem with certain inalienable rights, that among these are universal ISP access."

—End

Want to see what ISPs had to say about the Portland Ore./Multnoma County AT&T decision? Check the Best of the ISP-Lists article, AT&T Ruling: Pro- or Anti-Competitive?