Submission + - CPUC Decision on Comcast/TimeWarner Merger
Lord Flipper writes: The California Public Utilities Commission decision on the Comcast/Time-Warner proposed merger has just been released. It's not an exciting read, BUT, the 25-bullet-point Appendix to the decision is a shocker. Example:
"19. Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California, nor any CASF or CTF application within its service territory that otherwise meets the requirements of CASF or CTF."
- Whoa! Trust me, Comcast was NOT expecting this at all. Here's one more, as an example:
"8. Comcast shall offer Time Warner’s Carrier Ethernet Last Mile Access product to interested CLECs throughout the combined service territories of the merging companies for a period of five years from the effective date of the parent company at the same prices, terms and conditions as offered by Time Warner prior to the merger."
What #8 means, was confusing to me, at first, as it appears they are saying Comcast has to let current TW customers continue to use, or take advantage of, something they already have. But that's not the case, at all. "CLECs" is CPUC shorthand for Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. And the ruling by the CPUC covers all customers, now, or in the future of the combined entity, here in California. What they're talking about here, simply, is opening up Last Mile Access.
Personally, I see this as a much larger "step, but step only, in the right direction, but the ruling today is definitely a total shocker. It could nix the merger, in California, only, or... it could light a fire under the asses of the FCC, or, the "codified" long-shot: it could bring real competition to Internet access, here in California, pronto.
The CPUC is basing their entire decision on Common Carrier law (Setion 706, as opposed to Title II), and, unlike the projected FCC decision (coming around the 26th of the month) the CPUC's decision has all kinds of "teeth" as opposed to the FCC's "Title II, with forbearance" approach. It could very interesting, very soon.
Here's the link to the PDF of the Decision: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Publis...
"19. Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California, nor any CASF or CTF application within its service territory that otherwise meets the requirements of CASF or CTF."
- Whoa! Trust me, Comcast was NOT expecting this at all. Here's one more, as an example:
"8. Comcast shall offer Time Warner’s Carrier Ethernet Last Mile Access product to interested CLECs throughout the combined service territories of the merging companies for a period of five years from the effective date of the parent company at the same prices, terms and conditions as offered by Time Warner prior to the merger."
What #8 means, was confusing to me, at first, as it appears they are saying Comcast has to let current TW customers continue to use, or take advantage of, something they already have. But that's not the case, at all. "CLECs" is CPUC shorthand for Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. And the ruling by the CPUC covers all customers, now, or in the future of the combined entity, here in California. What they're talking about here, simply, is opening up Last Mile Access.
Personally, I see this as a much larger "step, but step only, in the right direction, but the ruling today is definitely a total shocker. It could nix the merger, in California, only, or... it could light a fire under the asses of the FCC, or, the "codified" long-shot: it could bring real competition to Internet access, here in California, pronto.
The CPUC is basing their entire decision on Common Carrier law (Setion 706, as opposed to Title II), and, unlike the projected FCC decision (coming around the 26th of the month) the CPUC's decision has all kinds of "teeth" as opposed to the FCC's "Title II, with forbearance" approach. It could very interesting, very soon.
Here's the link to the PDF of the Decision: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Publis...
