The FCC has regulatory
oversight over all U.S. telecoms.
One week after a seemingly decisive appeals court victory,
AT&T/@Home is facing yet another challenge to its
control of Portland's cable broadband market. On June
21, a federal appeals court ruled that the city could
not force AT&T to give competing companies, most offering
Internet services, open access to its cable system.
On Monday, however, a small suburban ISP told WW
that it will formally request such access on its own,
using the court ruling to bolster its claims.
"If they say 'No,' we'll file a protest with the Federal
Communications Commission," says Ted Mittelstaedt, technical
services director of Internet Partners, a five-person
company based in Hillsboro.
In shooting down the city's effort to open up AT&T's
cable system, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
that the company's broadband service, AT&T/@Home,
is not a cable company and is therefore free from the
city's cable regulations. Instead, it ruled that the company
must be treated like a telecommunications system.
What many industry observers argue is that federal law
requires telecom companies to make their lines available
to any company that requests access. They say the same
is now true of AT&T/@Home: It must provide open access
to any ISP within nine western states, including California.
"The path to the lines is now clear," says City Commissioner
Erik Sten.
Internet Partners will make its request June 29. "Now
they've got a right to petition when AT&T turns them
down," says Sten.
Although it's the first, Internet Partners' request is
unlikely to be the last.
"We have let AT&T know many times that we'd like
to be on its system," says Dave Baker, vice president
for law and public policy at Earthlink, the nation's second-largest
Internet service provider behind America Online.
Baker says his company is still trying to unravel the
changed environment, but that its intent "in the big picture"
is to issue a new request in the short-term.
Last week's appeals court ruling reversed a lower court
decision of June 3, 1999. That decision held that the
City of Portland could require AT&T/@Home to provide
open-access to its cable broadband system.
For its part, AT&T interprets the ruling as making
it an "information service," according to a statement
by Mark Rosenblum, AT&T vice president law.
The company has no immediate plans to make its cable
system available to Internet Partners or any other company,
according to Kevin Mulligan, an AT&T spokesman.
No matter what it is providing, Sten says AT&T must
now file for a telecommunications franchise permit to
provide broadband service. The company, which does not
have such a permit, began rolling out service in Portland
June 22.
Sten says that, by June 30, the city will formally request
that AT&T file for a permit, requiring it to pay franchise
fees.
After 18 months of court fights over open-access, some
of the warriors are peeved by AT&T's attitude.
"They're pounding their chest and declaring victory,
and as part of that they are saying, 'You guys can't make
us do anything,'" says Sten.
Mulligan admits that AT&T is "scrambling" to land
customers fast. That's because four competitors--"overbuilders"--will
be offering cable broadband service in Portland by early
2001.
Despite Portland's now-chaotic market and AT&T's
head start, Open Access Broadband's chief Dave Maney says
his company is in the Portland market to stay.
Representatives of other overbuilders told WW
they won't retreat from Portland either.
