Kevin Martin To AT&T: Okay, Now Feel Free To Ignore Those Concessions You Just Promised

from the say-what? dept

Tue, Jan 2nd 2007 5:28am — Mike Masnick

There was a lot of controversy on Friday after the late Thursday agreement by AT&T to offer some concessions in order to get its merger with BellSouth approved. There was a fair amount of disagreement over whether or not those concessions actually let through a big loophole that would let AT&T effectively ignore the spirit of the concessions, though many people felt that the concessions really were significant. The argument on that side is that, at least AT&T agreed to some basic definition of net neutrality, and if they dared to actually break it (either in spirit or letter of the concessions), there would be an immediate uproar to the FCC. Of course, that only matters if the FCC cares -- and it appears that they don't.

As Kevin Werbach notes, a statement issued by FCC chair Kevin Martin (who apparently was already on vacation, but still voted on the deal by email) basically said that AT&T's concession promises are meaningless, and even though they helped convince Commissioners Copps & Adelstein to change their vote to favor the deal, Martin has no intention of holding AT&T to their word. In fact, he makes it very clear that if AT&T wants to violate the net neutrality they just promised, they're absolutely free to do so: "to the extent that AT&T has, as a business matter, determined to take certain actions, they are allowed to do so." It is true that the concession letters are hardly binding and plenty of things could change over the next few years (or even months). However, it does seem fairly ridiculous that Copps & Adelstein changed their vote on such short notice, especially if the concessions are meaningless fluff that the FCC doesn't actually care about. If that's the case, why did the two commissioners change their votes?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

15 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Bumbling old fool, 2 Jan 2007 @ 6:17am

Why be suprised?
Hasn't that been how all Telco-Gov deals have gone down in the past?

(Think about that...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Corruption at its finest..., 2 Jan 2007 @ 6:32am

I guess it just took that long to find they're price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sanguine Dream, 2 Jan 2007 @ 6:50am

Money can't buy everything...yet.
It really bothers me that companies can now make empty promises and toss around some cash and they can suddenly get away with anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Cheeky Monkey, 2 Jan 2007 @ 7:16am
  
  Re: Money can't buy everything...yet.
  Money can buy almost everything, and it's not a new thing. In fact, one of the things money has bought is our notion that corruption is new. Corruption is extremely old, there never were any good old days, in fact, I'd say that well in some sense ultimately more effective at chilling dissent, undermining net neutrality is substantially less brutal then machine gunning unionizing mine workers...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Sanguine Dream, 2 Jan 2007 @ 10:35am
    
    Re: Re: Money can't buy everything...yet.
    Yes you are correct in noting that corruption is a very old concept. I just wanted to chime in
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Bum, 2 Jan 2007 @ 7:24am

I'm going to blog this!

Hopefully I will get a laptop from microsoft.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The infamous Joe, 2 Jan 2007 @ 7:36am
  
  Re:
  I thought MS asked for all the laptops back because that kid made a big deal about it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brian Page, 2 Jan 2007 @ 8:19am

The Ivory Tower Will Fall AT& T
Do you recall the AT&T Broadband meltdown? If you missed it the first time, you will have a chance to see it again. Watch where you invest your money, the hype will cost you in the long run with these guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Laudanum Milkshake, 2 Jan 2007 @ 8:57am

It amazes me that some people still seem to think that "principles" matter to politicians and bureaucrats. At least the corporates openly admit all they want to do is make money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The infamous Joe, 2 Jan 2007 @ 9:12am

My Milkshake brings...
It amazes me that some people still seem to think that all politicians and bureaucrats are corrupt. They're just people, like your mother, or the weatherman. You don't assume all weathermen are corrupt, do you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jan 2007 @ 9:35am

Why did they change their vote? Because the checks from ATT cleared their offshore bank accounts...

Duh!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Back to the Future, 2 Jan 2007 @ 9:54am

Hello 1980 and AT&T's monopoly. Wonder how long it will take for an anti-trust suit to be brought against AT&T again? Five years? Ten years? Fifteen years?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bill Pinsky, 2 Jan 2007 @ 10:04am

I am not surprised
Never believe the initial hype. Its all smoke and mirrors intended to delude the average Joe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Frink, 2 Jan 2007 @ 2:53pm

here we go
So they have their new monopoly now. The concessions they made are not legally binding as near as I can see. AT&T will do whatever they need to do to maximize quarterly profits and offer nothing to the consumers (victims) as far as better service at affordable prices. Competition will not be an issue in many areas, innovation will stagnate and there will be no coverage to unprofitable areas. Some areas will never see broadband. There will be no place for the consumer to look for help now that the government agencies have been paid.

Welcome to the brave new world of communications.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- battery, 1 Dec 2008 @ 4:25am
  
  Re: here we go
  It amazes me that some people still seem to think that "principles" matter to politicians and bureaucrats. At least the corporates openly admit all they laptop AC adapter want to do is make money.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]