Saturday, December 04, 2004

Fed up with Adelphia?

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case this session on cable internet service deregulation. In 2002, the F.C.C. enacted a policy based on the 1996 Telecommunications act that classified cable internet service as an "information service" not a "telecommunication service." Classified as such, cable companies are not subject to the common carrier rules that mandate that phone companies must allow competition on their lines. If independent internet service providers like Earthlink and Brand X get their way, cable companies will be forced to compete with them on the same lines they use to deliver TV to homes. The Bush administration is appealing the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that reverses the F.C.C.'s policy. It mandates that cable companies are subject to the same rules that phone companies are subject to in providing internet, and that the F.C.C. incorrectly classifies cable internet as "information service." Currently, phone companies that provide broadband internet service are subject to regulation and must open their line up to competition from alternative service providers. This case is an example of where the government is more responsive to the wishes to special interests than it is to the interests of average citizens. If cable is regulated it will push prices down as companies are faced with competition. In the U.S., we pay up to 30 times more for broadband than Japanese customers do, and up to 10 times more than Koreans do. This is a clear cut case of special interest politics that allow companies to maintain a monopoly and extract rents from their customers. Interestingly enough, the cable companies' main competitiors are backing them in this case. Phone companies like Verizon have filed amicus curiae briefs in favor of deregulation. If the F.C.C. can win, phone companies stand to be able to seek less regulation in the future. Perhaps the F.C.C. would also then classify DSL lines, which are open to competition as "information service" and allow phone companies to block competiton as well. read about this at the NY Times or at the LA Times

No comments: