FCC’s insistence in its March 2002 ruling that cable modem servic...

FCC’s insistence in its March 2002 ruling that cable modem service isn’t cable service has caused “extensive confusion” among consumers, cable operators and state and local govts., Commission’s Local & State Govt. Advisory Committee (LSGAC) said. It recommended agency clarify that decision didn’t interfere with state and local govt. authority to impose customer service requirements and address anticompetitive actions by cable modem service providers. Decision that cable modem service isn’t subject to Title 6 requirements has “frustrated” state and local govt. efforts to speed broadband deployment because it allows cable operators to question state and local authority to impose preconditions to deployment. Commission should recognize that state and local govts. have inherent police power authority over cable modem service to protect consumers and “unfair and unreasonable business practices,” LSGAC Chmn. Kenneth Fellman said. FCC should take action in pending rulemaking to acknowledge those state and local powers over deployment and marketing of cable modem facilities, he said. Also, state and local regulation is needed to ensure that service is rolled out “fairly” to everyone, he said, and local authorities should be able to address issues such as redlining in rollout and availability of service. Commission should clarify that its order didn’t interfere with state and local authority to require franchises, compensation and universal deployment for cable modem service in return for occupation and use of rights-of-way, Fellman said.