Competition/Antitrust

In my Georgetown Law Technology Review article, I propose a new policy framework to restore an open Internet ecosystem.

When they set out on their own in 2012 after more than two decades working for one of the most revered names in the cable industry — the late Bill Bresnan, founder of Bresnan Communications — Jeff DeMond and Andrew Kober had a clear vision of where their respective futures lay. Broadband was the key. But not just any broadband. DeMond, CEO of Vyve Broadband, one of 2018’s Independent Operators of the Year, said he and Kober, Vyve’s chief financial officer, specifically looked for rural markets, territories that were essentially being shunned by larger, more established operators.

For years, the big internet service providers have striven to hamstring competition across the telecommunications landscape. And in June 2018, they essentially asked the Federal Communications Commission to finish the job by repealing a rule granting competing phone and internet companies wholesale access to their copper-wire phone infrastructure.

The Federal Communications Commission estimates 5.74 percent of Michigan's population - 573,426 people - have no broadband providers in their area, and only 62.32 percent have more than one option for high-speed Internet. Those who don't have access to broadband can sometimes opt for other options, such as satellite, a cellular hotspot or dial up, but those are generally slower, face larger data caps and can be affected by weather or other interference more than traditional cable.

As many of you know, on June 12 Judge Richard Leon of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled against the US government and in favor of AT&T’s application to merge with Time Warner, without the imposition of any conditions. From the viewpoint of many, both the Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice have been stuck in administrative molasses, seeking to apply sectoral market analysis, preserve questionable bright line tests, and continue the imposition of rigid restrictions as part of transactional reviews the same way now as in 2008, 1988, or 1958.

If regulators approve their merger proposal, Sprint and T-Mobile promise to offer in-home internet services to roughly 9.5 million American households by 2024, or about 13% of the country. The company said that figure would give it a market penetration of around 7%, making it the nation’s fourth largest in-home ISP based on current subscriber counts.

When Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai decided to do away with the widely popular “network neutrality” rules that governed the Internet, his justification was that the regulations were slowing deployment. But a new analysis by the Center for Public Integrity plus other factors cited by industry experts show that reasoning to be shallow at best and ridiculous at worst.

The two events in Washington (net neutrality June 11 and AT&T/Time Warner ruling June 12) could lead to further consolidation of wireless, cable and content giants, public-interest advocates say. And they fear that behemoths like AT&T might someday prioritize their own TV shows and other content over rivals’. Internet service providers (ISPs) deny that they would engage in such a practice — yet consumer watchdogs worry that people would have little legal recourse if they did.

I want to harness your energies this morning to talk about three things we can work on together. First, broadband deployment and the infrastructure challenge it presents for cities. Second, broadband adoption and the challenge it presents for students stuck in what I call the Homework Gap. And third and finally, an update on net neutrality.

Gov Chris Sununu (R-NH) signed a bill this that supporters say will improve high-speed Internet access in rural areas like the Monadnock Region. NH Senate Bill 170 allows municipal governments to issue bonds for building broadband infrastructure in areas not served by a commercial provider. NH State Sen Jay V.