Competition/Antitrust

In testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Joseph Simons described the agency's enforcement of antitrust laws, advocacy work, and the public hearings it is hosting on a variety of competition and consumer protection issues. And he outlined a series of notable victories in stopping anticompetitive mergers and conduct. The widespread use of technology and data often offer consumer benefits, but may also raise new competition issues, according to the testimony.

I write on behalf of the American Cable Association (ACA) regarding your upcoming hearing on antitrust enforcement. [W]e believe we can provide a unique perspective on two sets of issues facing antitrust enforcement:

Verizon fixed 5G service officially launched Oct 1 in Houston (TX), Indianapolis (IN), Los Angeles (CA), and Sacramento (CA). The new residential broadband option could open up a new era in broadband competition. Or not. Built on Verizon’s own TF network standard, the fixed 5G service is gigabit capable and starts with an uncapped 300 Mbps tier for $70 per month to non-Verizon wireless customers and a discounted $50 per month to current Verizon wireless customers with a qualifying smartphone plan.

US customers pay some of the highest prices for broadband in the developed world, and broadband availability is sketchy at best for millions of Americans. But instead of tackling that problem head on, the Federal Communications Commission is increasingly looking the other way, relying on Internet service provider (ISP) data that paints an inaccurately rosy picture of Americans’ internet access. And as long as regulators are relying on a false picture of US broadband access, actually solving the problem may be impossible. 

The birth of wireless home internet has been so frustrating to observe. While major telecommunication companies like Verizon and T-Mobile make grand proclamations about disrupting home broadband with speedy 5G wireless internet service, the reality on the ground–or, rather, in the air–is harsher. Even with low buildout costs and limitless consumer demand, building out the wireless home internet of the future is a painstakingly methodical endeavor.

AT&T and Verizon are trying to convince the Federal Communications Commission that mobile broadband is good enough for Internet users who don't have access to fiber or cable services, in filings they submitted for the FCC's annual review of broadband deployment. The carriers made this claim despite the data usage and speed limitations of mobile services. In the mobile market, even "unlimited" plans can be throttled to unusable speeds after a customer uses just 25GB or so a month.

The National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA) has called on the Federal Communications Commission to prove its commitment to “closing the digital divide” by adding home broadband affordability, the broadband adoption rates of low income households, and the digital redlining of urban neighborhoods to the issues covered by the agency’s upcoming 2019 Broadband Deployment Report.

Charter Communications Chairman and CEO Tom Rutledge explained why 5G isn’t an existential threat to cable’s connectivity business. “We have a better platform to deploy [5G] technology, I think, than the cellular industry does because we are fully distributed from a high-capacity wireline perspective,” said Rutledge. “If you think about what 5G is, it is small cells,” Rutledge added. “Small cells mean you needs lots of wired line connectivity to make the small cells work. We think we are actually in a better position to do that than traditional cellular companies.

The debate over the right approach to privacy took center stage during the Federal Trade Commission’s inaugural hearing on competition. David Vladeck and Howard Beales, both former directors of the agency’s consumer protection bureau, clashed over whether the FTC requires a bigger stick when it comes to privacy enforcement. Vladeck argued the agency needs the power to impose civil penalties from the get-go. “I think that a civil penalty, for example, against Google or Facebook initially would have had a deterrent value,” Vladeck said. “Facebook is currently under investigation again.