Comments began coming in to Congress Friday on...
Comments began coming in to Congress Friday on competition policy. House Republicans asked stakeholders to weigh in by that deadline, in a white paper issued last month as part of their effort to overhaul the Communications Act. The committee hasn’t…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
publicly released any comments, but some stakeholders made theirs available. Competition “should be based on the existence of market power, not tied to the use of a particular technology, protocol, business model, or class of service provider,” Sprint told Congress. One key principle is “nondiscriminatory interconnection and access to bottleneck facilities at just and reasonable rates, terms and conditions,” Sprint said. “The current regulatory paradigm” of the act “has significant value” for small- to mid-sized cable companies, despite regular review and revision required of the 1992 Cable Act, said the American Cable Association. “The Commission needs to consider the aggregate effect of its regulations, which can inhibit competition, on small firms.” ACA warned against reclassifying broadband as a Title II telecom service and the uncertainty that would cause. Broadband for America also slammed that possibility and warned against regulations designed for monopoly (http://bit.ly/1qc4hiC). The Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance urged Congress to be careful in considering what competition really is, suggesting it shouldn’t be based on number of service providers alone. Take into account level and quality of service, it recommended. The FCC needs to account for “facilities-based, cross-platform intermodal competition, enabled by the rise of digital and Internet Protocol-based services,” said the Free State Foundation (http://bit.ly/1sciwFW), calling for the end of the “indeterminate” public interest standard. There should be “carefully delineated authority to address interconnection practices that might pose significant consumer harm if the agency finds that marketplace competition is not adequately protecting consumers,” Free State said of a potential exception.