BY CHRIS DONNER
Associate Editor, CTI magazine

Congress Gets Cracking

So, if we still aren't seeing any offerings, what is happening? As elections approach, Congress has finally decided to stop talking to the press about getting involved and start talking to each other - in the form of bills being presented that affect the public's ability to access the Internet and the ability of various providers to offer Internet access.

First, Representatives Rick Boucher (D - VA) and Bob Goodlatte (R - VA) introduced the "Internet Freedom Act," which addresses several issues regarding the Internet, including the unbundling of cable networks and easing restrictions on the RBOCs' ability to enter the broadband market. As it stands, the bill would require all broadband access transport providers to unbundle their networks, with the allowance of claims under the Sherman Act for violations of this requirement. The text of the bill reads as follows:
"It shall be unlawful for a broadband access transport provider to engage in unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts or practices, the purpose or effect of which is to discriminate in favor of a service provider that is affiliated with a broadband access transport provider or to restrain unreasonably the ability of a service provider that is not affiliated with a broadband access transport providers...."
(to download an Acrobat file of the bill, go to this link: www.cybertelecom.org/cr/goodlatte.pdf)

Additionally, under Title II of the bill, LECs would be required to file a "plan to provide broadband telecommunications service in all local exchange areas in which such carrier has telephony exchange service customers as soon as such broadband telecommunications service is economically reasonable and technically feasible." The LEC would then be obligated to meet the terms of its projected plan, but would otherwise be able to offer these service free from state and federal regulation.

What does all of this mean? At the most basic level, it means immense freedom for ILECs in delivering and pricing broadband Internet access, while it also ensures that any broadband initiative taken by a cable company (such as AT&T/TCI) must be unbundled in the same way that telephone companies must unbundle their networks. These steps are being taken in order to, among other things, "get the FCC out of the business of regulating the Internet."

While I am very interested in seeing the cable broadband network being made available to multiple ISPs, rather than just the cable company's Internet service, I am skeptical of this proposed bill. The representatives proposing the bill are based in Virginia, home to both AOL and Bell Atlantic, and the bill certainly reads as if it were written by the RBOC and the mega-ISP. AOL gains access to the cable network's transport and any DSL networks that the ILECs might roll out, while Bell Atlantic (and the other RBOCs) are given several good-size carrots to "lure" them into providing broadband access.

But this isn't all the action taking place on Capitol Hill. There has been talk of a proposal by Senator John McCain, titled the "Internet Regulatory Freedom Act of 1999." This bill would prohibit the FCC from regulating or taxing the Internet or Internet services. Additionally, the bill would provide incentives to phone companies to roll out advanced Internet services (understood to mean broadband).

Of course, there needs to be a lot of activity before any broadband services start taking shape, and we can't really expect things to happen overnight, but it is remarkable to me that, with everyone talking about competition, no one is willing to put a foot forward until everything has been made neat and clean and safe. The Internet itself has always been competitive - and vibrant and a bit unmanageable. As I watch all the activity surrounding the (supposed) rollout of broadband access, I can't help but think that some of that life and competition is about to disappear with the advent of broadband.

Ownership seems to be more important than competition to these big players, at least from my vantage point. If Congress really does feel the need to get involved, I can only hope that they are really concerned with the Internet and the end users, and not just putting more cash into the hands of companies that hardly need it, at our expense.

For more information on antitrust law, please visit the following sites:
www.law.cornell.edu/topics/antitrust.html
k7moa.gsia.cmu.edu/antitrst.htm
www.begglaw.com/monopolist.html

Chris Donner welcomes your comments at lguevin@tmcnet.com.