A win for the FCC in its Court of Appeals battle with content companies over releasing confidential programming and retransmission consent contracts could push back a decision in the Comcast/Time Warner Cable and AT&T/DirecTV transactions, said communications attorneys on both sides of the dispute. Oral argument in CBS et al v. FCC was Feb. 20 (see 1502200051). “They would have to give parties a chance to review the information,” said American Cable Association Senior Vice President-Government Affairs Ross Lieberman. ACA supported the FCC in filings with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and Lieberman was blocked from access to the Video Programming Confidential Information (VPCI) at the request of the content company petitioners, which include CBS, Disney, Time Warner and Univision.
A win for the FCC in its Court of Appeals battle with content companies over releasing confidential programming and retransmission consent contracts could push back a decision in the Comcast/Time Warner Cable and AT&T/DirecTV transactions, said communications attorneys on both sides of the dispute. Oral argument in CBS et al v. FCC was Feb. 20 (see 1502200051). “They would have to give parties a chance to review the information,” said American Cable Association Senior Vice President-Government Affairs Ross Lieberman. ACA supported the FCC in filings with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and Lieberman was blocked from access to the Video Programming Confidential Information (VPCI) at the request of the content company petitioners, which include CBS, Disney, Time Warner and Univision.
The FCC Enforcement Bureau’s Market Disputes Resolution Division granted a stay request Monday from Duke Energy, which had asked the commission to pause its proceeding between Frontier Communications and Duke until both companies can complete arbitration in their dispute over the amount of money Frontier owes Duke as part of their joint use of each other’s utility poles in North Carolina. Frontier had filed a complaint with the FCC in January 2014 seeking a reduction in the rates included in its joint use agreement with Duke pursuant to the FCC’s 2011 pole attachment order. Duke had previously filed an arbitration demand in October 2013 over what it claims are unpaid invoice amounts. Frontier had sought a ruling from the U.S. District Court in Raleigh in November 2013 that the FCC had primary jurisdiction over the dispute; the court dismissed Frontier’s complaint in August and compelled the parties to arbitrate. The Raleigh District Court has scheduled a hearing on the arbitration for the week of June 15, the FCC said. The ongoing arbitration process means a stay in the FCC’s proceeding is necessary, because it will “preserve the time and resources of the Commission and the parties by preventing duplicative proceedings addressing the same issues,” the FCC said. “Moreover, Frontier's Complaint is governed by the Arbitration Clause, which applies to ‘disputes aris[ing] between the parties concerning matters pertaining to [the Agreements].’ The parties' dispute as to whether the Agreements' rates are unlawful is a dispute ‘pertaining to’ the Agreements.”
The FCC paused 180-day shot clocks for the AT&T/DirecTV and Comcast/Time Warner Cable transactions while it waits for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to issue an opinion on a petition for review brought against the agency by a group of content companies over the release of contract information. It’s “prudent” to pause the transaction clocks because the FCC “would be advantaged” by knowing the court’s decision before the clocks run out, “which both are slated to do by the end of March,” the FCC said in a public notice Friday. The Comcast clock is stopped at Day 165 while the AT&T clock is stopped at Day 170, said the FCC transaction webpages. Though the public notice points to the court case as the rationale for stopping the clock, Georgetown Law Institute for Public Representation Senior Counselor Andrew Schwartzman said it’s likely the FCC also has other reasons. At least on Comcast/TWC, the transaction review team sent out information requests that have been fulfilled only recently, and they may not have been in a position to meet the deadline even without the court delay. The FCC had no comment. Comcast said it's fine with the pause. "We understand the FCC's decision to pause the informal review clock while the court continues to review a procedural matter related to the transaction,” Comcast said. “A decision is expected shortly.” The FCC “appears to be making significant progress in the review of our transaction in order to bring it to a conclusion,” Comcast said. The commission was more measured. “The clock carries with it no procedural or substantive rights or obligations but merely represents an informal benchmark,” the PN said. Oral argument was heard in the case Feb. 20 (see 1502200051), and it’s not clear when a decision in the matter could be issued, Schwartzman told us. Though the court usually tries to keep within a 120-day time limit, expedited cases such as the FCC’s are on a faster track, and could arrive much sooner, he said. The D.C. Circuit could also issue an order in one side’s favor or another and then follow it with a written opinion much later, Schwartzman said. Representatives for the content company petitioners, which include CBS, Disney and Viacom, declined to comment. AT&T expects "issues surrounding the litigation between the FCC and the programmers to be resolved quickly so the FCC can complete its review of our transaction," a company spokesman emailed. "We continue to look forward to closing our deal in the first half of the year."
The FCC paused 180-day shot clocks for the AT&T/DirecTV and Comcast/Time Warner Cable transactions while it waits for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to issue an opinion on a petition for review brought against the agency by a group of content companies over the release of contract information. It’s “prudent” to pause the transaction clocks because the FCC “would be advantaged” by knowing the court’s decision before the clocks run out, “which both are slated to do by the end of March,” the FCC said in a public notice Friday. The Comcast clock is stopped at Day 165 while the AT&T clock is stopped at Day 170, said the FCC transaction webpages. Though the public notice points to the court case as the rationale for stopping the clock, Georgetown Law Institute for Public Representation Senior Counselor Andrew Schwartzman said it’s likely the FCC also has other reasons. At least on Comcast/TWC, the transaction review team sent out information requests that have been fulfilled only recently, and they may not have been in a position to meet the deadline even without the court delay. The FCC had no comment. Comcast said it's fine with the pause. "We understand the FCC's decision to pause the informal review clock while the court continues to review a procedural matter related to the transaction,” Comcast said. “A decision is expected shortly.” The FCC “appears to be making significant progress in the review of our transaction in order to bring it to a conclusion,” Comcast said. The commission was more measured. “The clock carries with it no procedural or substantive rights or obligations but merely represents an informal benchmark,” the PN said. Oral argument was heard in the case Feb. 20 (see 1502200051), and it’s not clear when a decision in the matter could be issued, Schwartzman told us. Though the court usually tries to keep within a 120-day time limit, expedited cases such as the FCC’s are on a faster track, and could arrive much sooner, he said. The D.C. Circuit could also issue an order in one side’s favor or another and then follow it with a written opinion much later, Schwartzman said. Representatives for the content company petitioners, which include CBS, Disney and Viacom, declined to comment. AT&T expects "issues surrounding the litigation between the FCC and the programmers to be resolved quickly so the FCC can complete its review of our transaction," a company spokesman emailed. "We continue to look forward to closing our deal in the first half of the year."
While Q4 organic growth met or beat estimates for all major U.S. tower companies, New Street Research said in a report to investors Sunday that the companies forecast a sharp slowdown in 2015. SBA Communications has had the largest moderation in growth, the analyst report said. The lower growth may be due to declining activity at AT&T, the report said. AT&T has slowed network investment in part because it paused activity leading into the AWS-3 auction and in part because it plans to repurpose newly acquired Leap sites rather than build new ones, the report said. Despite the guidance, the report doesn’t see any changes to long-term industry growth predictions.
Amid a flurry of activity over privacy concerns with Samsung connected TVs, including queries to Samsung by the ranking member of the Senate Privacy Subcommittee (see 1502110028), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) petitioned the FTC to investigate what it calls Samsung's “unfair and deceptive voice collection and transmission practices,” according to a 20-page complaint filed this week.
Amid a flurry of activity over privacy concerns with Samsung connected TVs, including queries to Samsung by the ranking member of the Senate Privacy Subcommittee (see 1502110028), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) petitioned the FTC to investigate what it calls Samsung's “unfair and deceptive voice collection and transmission practices,” according to a 20-page complaint filed this week.
Amid a flurry of activity over privacy concerns with Samsung connected TVs, including queries to Samsung by the ranking member of the Senate Privacy Subcommittee (see 1502110028), the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) petitioned the FTC to investigate what it calls Samsung's “unfair and deceptive voice collection and transmission practices,” according to a 20-page complaint filed this week.
The municipal broadband networks run by the Electric Power Board of Chattanooga and Wilson, North Carolina, demonstrate the First Amendment concerns with allowing more such networks, wrote Enrique Armijo, a member of the Free State Foundation's board of academic advisors and an assistant professor at the Elon University School of Law, in a paper released Monday. There is “good reason” to conclude free speech protections “are being sacrificed at the altar of the new," he wrote: That "certainly should give pause to those that want the FCC to preempt state restrictions on these networks and expand municipalities' power in the online communications space.” The FCC is expected to approve petitions from Chattanooga and Wilson Thursday to pre-empt anti-municipal broadband laws in those states (see 1502020037). Chattanooga’s acceptable use policy bars users from using the network to "’transmit, distribute, or store material" that is illegal, ‘obscene, threatening, abusive or hateful,’” Armijo wrote. It also bars users from posting messages on third party blogs that are ‘excessive and/or intended to annoy or harass others’ -- ‘regardless of [the] policies’ of the blogs on which the users post,” he wrote. Wilson has similar restrictions, said Armijo. “One does not need to be a free speech scholar, or even a lawyer, to be troubled by these provisions.” First Amendment "doctrine makes clear that outright government bans on protected speech -- even indecent speech, let alone ‘excessive,’ ‘derogatory,’ ‘harassing,’ ‘abusive,’ or ‘hateful’ speech -- are never narrowly tailored enough to survive strict scrutiny,” said Armijo. Chattanooga and Wilson officials didn't comment.