Light Reading

SBC Sees IPTV Interference

Light Reading
News Analysis
Light Reading
1/4/2005
50%
50%

Legal battles over cable franchising may add a hurdle to SBC Communications Inc.'s (NYSE: SBC) planned rollout of IPTV service later this year (see SBC: 'Let Us Entertain You!').

Attorneys and industry advocates from SBC, the cable industry, and municipalities are already jousting over whether TV channels piped through the Internet are bound by franchise law, and the courts seem to be where the debate is heading.

The battle is worth watching because SBC and other phone companies could wind up forfeiting 5 percent of their return on investment to local authorities if the franchising rules are shown to apply.

The franchising agreements formed between TV providers and municipalities typically include standard provisions for reliability, customer service, billing cycles, public access channels, and the payment of a franchise fee.

National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) president Robert Sachs fired the first salvo in the IPTV debate in a speech to the Washington Cable Club on December 14. Sachs said there is no distinction between the technology used to deliver cable television in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the law which set forth the franchising rules.

The business plan for SBC's Project Lightspeed, Sachs said, aims to target what it calls “medium-“ and “high-value” customers -- those willing to pay $110 per month for services -- with its IPTV offering. “To protect against ‘cherry picking’ certain neighborhoods based on income, the Communications Act requires local franchising authorities to ‘assure that access to cable services is not denied to any group of potential residential cable subscribers because of the income of the residents of the local area in which such group resides’,” Sachs says.

SBC says the NCTA’s motives are not really rooted in serving the public. “It’s not surprising that the head of the cable association would speak out against what we’re doing, because he’s afraid of the competition,” says SBC spokesperson Mike Balmoris (see MSOs Yawn at Lightspeed).

SBC argues that its TV service isn't the same as a broadcast or cable-provided service. To make that point, SBC’s lawyers are relying on a November ruling by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) exempting the VOIP carrier Vonage Holdings Corp. from the jurisdiction of state utilities regulation and placing it under federal jurisdiction. The FCC’s central reasoning behind the decision was that Vonage’s VOIP service was not affected by state borders in any way and should not be regulated as such (see FCC Shields VOIP From States and Vetting SBC's VOIP).

“This is an IP platform,” Balmoris says. “It’s the same as when the cable companies provide telephone service over IP; there is no regulation at the local level.” Balmoris says SBC last year filed a forbearance petition with the FCC which states its view that IPTV should be exempt from the franchising agreements. The agency recently extended its deadline to respond, and is now expected to give its view by May 2.

But SBC isn't waiting that long to start digging up neighborhoods. Construction is set to begin this quarter to deploy SBC fiber close to customer locations to provide new, feature-rich, IP-based services, including IP television, VOIP, and fast Internet access. Project Lightspeed is expected to reach 18 million households by year-end 2007.

Balmoris said SBC’s response to any legal challenge from municipalities -- those potentially losing out on franchise revenues -- depends on the circumstances and timing. “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it,” he says.

For the cable industry, the connection between the Vonage decision and an SBC exemption from local TV franchise rules is too big a stretch. “That decision was specific to voice,” says NCTA spokesman Brian Dietz.

The cable industry, and some localities, are citing language in the Telecommunications Act to support their argument that TV is TV, whether IP or not, and the franchising rules apply to phone companies. “The Act is really very clear on franchising; there is really no need for further interpretations on that.”

“City officials have said they will file injunctions [against SBC] if they don’t abide by the franchising rules,” Dietz says. “At federal level, the Congress could draft new language specifying that phone companies must enter franchise agreements."

Balmoris says some cities welcome the phone companies entrance in the local TV market because of the downward pressure they may place on rising cable TV prices. The NCTA’s Dietz, on the other hand, points out that many cities are more interested in collecting the franchising fees the phone companies might bring to city coffers.

“If SBC continues with their plan to roll out cable television service without entering into the franchising agreement, the law is very clear under Title 6 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act,” says Marilyn Morhrman-Gillis, director of federal relations at the National League of Cities.

Morhrman-Gillis says the situation could play out in a number of ways, depending on SBC’s rollout. “How cities choose to respond would depend on what they announced and in what locations and when,” she says. “But I wouldn’t be at all surprised if cities filed injunctions against SBC.”

One of SBC’s competitors, Verizon, has chosen to form traditional cable franchising agreements with cities and has already entered agreements with Beaumont, Calif. and the Dallas suburb of Sachse.

— Mark Sullivan, Reporter, Light Reading

(14)  | 
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
OldPOTS
50%
50%
OldPOTS,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:08 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
I found this interesting as I have been following the whole franchising activity, including Sachse, with my city council (in the Dallas Area). Things are heating up leagally;

Not mentioned was that Comcast cable is now claiming that the satellite business has 15% of the TV business in the Dallas area and therefore is operating in a competitive area according to the Cable Act. As a result it is asking to be free of Cable Act and the franchise restrictions of all cities in the Dallas area!

Who has to Franchise???
jim_smith
50%
50%
jim_smith,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:07 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
I think this legal battle is different from the VoIP one. Here's why:

The RBOCs collected the "toll". So the VoIP folks simply had to fight it out with essentially one entity (RBOCs) in front of the FCC.

In this case, the "toll" is collected by each municipality. As such, SBC may have to fight it out with every municipality in the local courts and fight it out with the cable cos. in front of the FCC. That sounds like a much, much bigger legal battle.

Makes sense?
materialgirl
50%
50%
materialgirl,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:06 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
Perhaps this is all an arguement for municipal fiber. Let them lay it and charge for transit. It has to be new and different anyway. Now is their chance. Then, the archaic arguements over who has what transit goes away. Munis just get their cut of the action from any bits crossing their tollway.
nowhereman
50%
50%
nowhereman,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:05 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
http://www.usatoday.com/money/...
rjmcmahon
50%
50%
rjmcmahon,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:05 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
Perhaps this is all an arguement for municipal fiber. Let them lay it and charge for transit. It has to be new and different anyway. Now is their chance. Then, the archaic arguements over who has what transit goes away. Munis just get their cut of the action from any bits crossing their tollway.

It does seem like the only way the last mile will ever get properly upgraded will require municipal action.

The question I have is what conditions must be in place before the municipalities will act? You say, "Now is their chance." But yet in the US only a rare few have acted and, of those few, many remain in a trial status. What are the pieces to this puzzle that remain missing?

(Note: many believe the muni's should stop at leasing ROW access to private industry. Why hasn't that model proven itself?)
flyingsausage
50%
50%
flyingsausage,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:04 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
I think it's not so different from the VoIP story if you look from a market & competition point of view.

Voice providers like SBC are subject to some regulations/restrinctions on voice services (things like serving everyone, ...).

Cable operator jumped into the voice market with VoIP (VoIP is different from traditional PSTN Voice switching from technical perspective, but from a market and end-user perspective it's the same, just a phone line), and started an aggressive priving strategy to gain marketshare.
But, they are not subject to the same regulations/restrictions as traditional voice providers.
It's a kind of "unfair" competition.

Looking at TV, Voice providers (like SBC) are now entering the cable companies homemarket with IPTV, so to be fair they should not be subject to the same regulations.

I mean, either voice & TV regulations applies to everyone, either to no-one. Otherwise cable companies get an unfair competitive advantage.

On top of that, while VoIP & PSTN Voice are very similar from a end-user experience, IPTV is very different from traditional Broadcast TV. It offers interactivity thanks to the 2 way communication nature of an IP network, in term of services it's things like : programs "a la carte", video on demand, network VCR, news/show replay, interactive EPG (can memorize genre, channels, ...), a customizable interface for each family member, online gaming on TV, email/web on TV, and much more. And still the good old broadcast TV.

Looking at all that, it's definitly a big move ahead from traditional TV, and a "premium" kind of service. Should such a premium service be subject to the same restrictions/regulations as the basic BTV service ?
Voice providers are making huge investments (look at the SBC numbers) to deploy this new technology, far ahead from traditional cable & satellite offers.
So, if some companies are making such huge investments (means it creates jobs somewhere), they should get in exchange fair competitive conditions.
jim_smith
50%
50%
jim_smith,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:03 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
What are the pieces to this puzzle that remain missing?

I'll take a guess: the missing piece is the "drive". Something that can drive the humans who are in charge to get stuff done. It's got to be something basic. Like Sex. Or Money. Or Power. Or Fear. Or a combination of one or more of the above.

Please surrender your lofty egalitarian ideals to the immigration official.

Welcome to America.
dwdm2
50%
50%
dwdm2,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:02 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
"Please surrender your lofty egalitarian ideals to the immigration official."

I thought I already did it years ago... but they may think I didn't ;-). Just because one wishes to see an equitable and a better way of information transmission, one that is not bullied by the status quo (RBOCs et al.), doesn't mean one is dogmatic (I know you didn't say that). It is the essence of American way to try better approach in an equitable way. When that spirit is hurt by a narrow interest like the story in the USA TODAY, that only shows what's puzzling is that the status quo will try to stop competition by whatever means they can.
wuvicija
50%
50%
wuvicija,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:31:00 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
The real issue is that the regulations that govern both cableco's and telco's are a totally antiquated hodge-podge of local, state and federal rulings and bodies.

With convergence (yes, the most over-used word in this industry) the entire regime is inadequate. The regulatory bodies see only declines in power (and revenue), while the service providers find themselves trying to compete head-to-head while each of them are playing under different rules.

I'm not a big fan of either the RBOC's or the cableco's but at the end of the day they should be playing under the same rules. Maybe the new Congress will get around to trying to revamp the Telecom Act and bring it into this century.
rjmcmahon
50%
50%
rjmcmahon,
User Rank: Light Beer
12/5/2012 | 3:30:59 AM
re: SBC Sees IPTV Interference
The real issue is that the regulations that govern both cableco's and telco's are a totally antiquated hodge-podge of local, state and federal rulings and bodies.

I believe fiber overbuilders could bypass many (most?) of these regulations. The question then becomes why aren't fiber overbuilds happening at a much greater rate? The fact that they aren't suggests antiquated regulations are only part of the problem.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Flash Poll
From The Founder
Network architects aiming to upgrade their networks to support agile, open, virtualized services in the 21st century need to consider new criteria when choosing between technology suppliers.
Live Streaming Video
BTE 2015 Sponsor Keynote: HP
Dr. Prodip Sen, CTO, Network Functions Virtualization, HP
LRTV Custom TV
Red Hat Demo

7|2|15   |   10:53   |   (0) comments


Red Hat's Nicolas Lemieux demonstrates how Red Hat is driving innovation through open source communities.
LRTV Custom TV
Red Hat's Approach to OpenStack Adoption

7|2|15   |   5:17   |   (0) comments


Red Hat's Radhesh Balakrishnan outlines his company's open source strategy for both enterprises and telcos.
LRTV Custom TV
The New IP Goes Mobile With vEPC

7|2|15   |   1:12   |   (0) comments


Heavy Reading's Gabriel Brown discusses results of a Light Reading survey sponsored by Brocade that shows a clear commitment by mobile operators to move quickly to virtual EPC deployment.
LRTV Custom TV
Making Business Sense of SDN

7|2|15   |   1:42   |   (0) comments


Results of a Brocade-sponsored survey show that CSPs have a clear sense of SDN use cases but are wrestling with the business case. Sterling Perrin of Heavy Reading looks behind the numbers.
LRTV Custom TV
NFV Will Be Here Sooner Than You Think

7|2|15   |   2:22   |   (0) comments


Forget the usual ten-year cycle for new technologies – NFV will be a core part of CSP networks in five years, based on results of a Brocade-sponsored survey, says Heavy Reading's Caroline Chappell.
LRTV Custom TV
The New IP Gains Traction With CSPs

7|2|15   |   1:42   |   (0) comments


Roz Roseboro of Heavy Reading analyzes results of a Light Reading survey sponsored by Brocade showing that CSPs are getting serious about making the transition to the New IP era.
LRTV Custom TV
It's (Real) Time for Analytics

7|2|15   |   1:42   |   (0) comments


Heavy Reading's Jim Hodges looks at how CSPs say they plan to use analytics to deploy new services in real time as part of The New IP, based on results of a survey sponsored by Brocade.
LRTV Documentaries
IoT in Action

6|30|15   |   1:39   |   (8) comments


Two co-workers discuss the benefits of IoT technology.
LRTV Interviews
Ericsson Opens Up on OPNFV

6|30|15   |   14:16   |   (1) comment


Martin Bäckström, VP and head of industry area Datacom at Ericsson, talks to Light Reading founder and CEO Steve Saunders about the emergence of OPNFV, the importance of standards and Ericsson's OPNFV plans.
LRTV Custom TV
NetNumber Founder Discusses NFV/SDN Impact on SP Networks

6|26|15   |   4:15   |   (0) comments


NetNumber Founder Doug Ranalli examines why SPs need a new network infrastructure for service agility. While NFV and SDN are the tools, the old ways of thinking about signaling control are inhibitors. Doug provides his recommendations.
LRTV Custom TV
Orchestrating NFV vCPE Services Across Multivendor Networks

6|26|15   |   5:46   |   (0) comments


Nirav Modi provides an overview of vCPE, the fastest-growing NFV use case, showing how Cyan's Blue Planet orchestrates vCPE services across a multivendor infrastructure to rapidly deliver new managed services for business customers.
LRTV Custom TV
ZTE at LTE Summit Amsterdam 2015

6|26|15   |     |   (0) comments


As one of the leading global telecommunications providers, ZTE presented its cutting-edge technology at LTE World Summit 2015 in Amsterdam. On display at ZTE's booth were the latest R&D achievements in wireless, 5G development, HetNet, deep convergence of FDD and TDD, and RCS/IMD/iSDN/vCN.
Upcoming Live Events
September 16-17, 2015, The Westin Galleria Dallas, Dallas, TX
September 29-30, 2015, The Westin Grand Müchen, Munich, Germany
October 6, 2015, The Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, GA
October 6, 2015, Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, GA
October 14-15, 2015, New Orleans Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, New Orleans, LA
November 5, 2015, Hilton Santa Clara, Santa Clara, CA
All Upcoming Live Events
Infographics
Hot Topics
Who's Feeding Fiber to LinkNYC Hotspots?
Mari Silbey, Senior Editor, Cable/Video, 6/29/2015
What's a Gigabit Good For?
Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 7/1/2015
Colt to Jettison Ailing IT Business
Iain Morris, News Editor, 6/30/2015
Eurobites: Activist Investor Takes Stake in AlcaLu
Paul Rainford, Assistant Editor, Europe, 6/30/2015
Like Us on Facebook
Twitter Feed
Webinar Archive
BETWEEN THE CEOs - Executive Interviews
Casa Systems has been going from strength to strength over the last couple of years. In 2013, it became the first vendor to ship an integrated CCAP device -- the ...
Cedrik Neike, SVP of Global Service Provider, Service Delivery, at Cisco, talks to Light Reading founder and CEO Steve Saunders about solving service provider customer problems in a virtualized, DevOps world, including multivendor support and the future of network procurement.
Cats with Phones