Judge Backs AT&T, Comcast Nuisance Suit Against Google Fiber In Nashville
from the why-we-can't-have-nice-things dept
There's numerous methods incumbent ISPs use to keep broadband competition at bay, from buying protectionist state laws to a steady supply of revolving door regulators and lobbyists with a vested interest in protecting the status quo. This regulatory capture goes a long way toward explaining why Americans pay more money for slower broadband than most developed nations. Keeping this dysfunction intact despite a growing resentment from America's under-served and over-charged broadband consumers isn't easy, and has required decades of yeoman's work on the part of entrenched duopolies and their lobbyists.
Case in point: Google Fiber recently tried to build new fiber networks in a large number of cities like Nashville and Louisville, but ran face first into an antiquated utility pole attachment process. As it stands, when a new competitor tries to enter a market, it needs to contact each individual ISP to have them move their own utility pole gear. This convoluted and bureaucratic process can take months, and incumbent ISPs (which often own the poles in question) often slow things down even further by intentionally dragging their feet.
So in cities like Nashville and Louisville, Google Fiber and other competitors have pushed for so-called "one touch make ready" utility pole reform. These reforms let a licensed and insured contractor move any ISP's pole-mounted gear if necessary (usually a matter of inches), as long as the ISP is notified in advance and the contractor pays for any damages. Under these regulatory reforms, the pole attachment process can be reduced from six months or more to just a month or so -- dramatically speeding up fiber deployment. ISPs like Verizon (in part because Google Fiber isn't encroaching on their East Coast turf) have supported the changes.
But because this would accelerate competitor broadband deployments as well, incumbent ISPs like AT&T, Comcast and Charter Spectrum did what they do best: they filed nuisance lawsuits against both Nashville and Louisville -- claiming they'd exceeded their legal authority in updating the rules. The companies proclaim they're simply concerned about the potential damage to their lines (ignored is the fact that the contractors doing the work are often the same people employed by ISPs), but the lawsuits are driven by one thing: fear of competition.
In Louisville this tactic didn't work so well, with a Judge ruling that the city was perfectly within its legal rights to manage the city's utility poles. ISPs had claimed that these cities' authority was over-ridden by FCC rules, though even the FCC itself backed Google Fiber and the cities in this fight (obviously this position, like most pro-competitive policies, were reversed when Trump appointed Ajit Pai to head the FCC last fall).
In Nashville however those same ISPs last week scored a major victory on the news that a Judge has backed incumbent ISP claims that the city did not have jurisdiction over utility poles -- and that the policy change violates contract law. Google Fiber, for its part, says it's reviewing the ruling:
"We're reviewing today's court ruling to understand its potential impact on our build in Nashville," a Google spokesperson said. "We have made significant progress with new innovative deployment techniques in some areas of the city, but access to poles remains an important issue where underground deployment is not a possibility."
There's several reasons Google Fiber announced last fall that it was pivoting toward wireless/fiber hybrid deployments. One was the high cost and slow pace of fiber deployment, but another was the kind of legal and regulatory roadblocks being erected by the likes of AT&T, Charter and Comcast, who are utterly terrified at the faintest specter of competition disrupting their all-too-cozy markets. Google Fiber has managed to avoid some of these obstacles via technologies like microtrenching, but the incumbent ISP goal of slowing the rise of competition has proven successful overall.
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
Filed Under: broadband, competition, google fiber, nashville, one touch make ready, utility poles
Companies: at&t, c harter, comcast, google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Everything Google does requires special privileges.
So TOO BAD! Google will just have to endure regulated to SAME conditions as all other corporations. BOO HOO.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Everything Google does requires special privileges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Everything Google does requires special privileges.
Do you ever wonder why your view never changes?
Perhaps if you pull your head out of your ass you might notice that Google isn't always the devil, and allowing incumbent providers to block competition by denying them access to the infrastructure & dragging their feet?
Same contractors touching the lines, any damages paid for... their complaints ring hollow.
It was about being able to make them wait 6 months or more to run wire from pole 1 to pole 2 then 6 more months for pole 3 then 6 months for pole 4....
Funny if AT&T & Comcast needed to fix things on each others poles, it doesn't take 6 months.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Everything Google does requires special privileges.
No, and that's not what happened in Nashville.
The FCC has jurisdiction there, so the FCC would have to change the pole attachment rules. Alternatively, Tennessee would have to opt out of FCC jurisdiction.
This FCC does not have jurisdiction in Louisville because Kentucky declined giving the FCC jurisdiction. Therefore, Louisville has jurisdiction.
source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/att-and-comcast-win-lawsuit-they-filed-to-stall-google-f iber-in-nashville/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Everything Google does requires special privileges.
It was about being able to make them wait 6 months or more to run wire from pole 1 to pole 2 then 6 more months for pole 3 then 6 months for pole 4....
So trying to pass a simple rule change that ends an obviously clear attempt to block new competition is bad.
So the FCC thinks that any new start up can survive the length of time the incumbents decide to take to move lines maybe a couple inches.
This is the FCC working against the free market & shoring up monopolies.
The current process isn't working, One Touch Make Ready with any damages coming out of the contractors pocket should be the law of the land.... but if anyone could put up lines consumers might have choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Everything Google does requires special privileges.
The hell, did I get called out for a comment that I didn’t even make? Am I in the Upside Down?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Everything Google does requires special privileges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
that doesnt sound correct - where these conditions present when the incumbents were given all this infrastructure on takpayers dime?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Leases
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Leases
I would also suggest that municipalities enact micro-trenching laws, making the value on owning poles much, much less.
E.g. if you don't want to cooperate, we will enact laws that enable competitors to bypass you....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
5% return over a decade is nothing compared to 25% today.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why is there such a stark difference in the eventual ownership -and control- of different types of privately-funded public infrastructure?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Campaign contributions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
shame corrupt fuckers like this cant get called out and dismissed from the bench!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Keep those heads in the sand... it's working out great for the Big Telco's!
What is worse most of you still don't even understand how you are reaping what you have sown! Keep laughing, hopefully it will provide you some small comfort in the days to come.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And a completely de-regulated telco sector, that would be better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If your only game is to regurgitate what your political leaders tell you to then you are obviously not able to think for yourself.
Get your head out of the sand so you can stop choking on the dirt and have a little fresh air. Maybe you will be able to think clearly enough and figure out how you have ignorantly brought about what you "claim" to seek to prevent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Considering how I have seen several anonymous commenters laughing at the mere idea of regulations being effective in any way whatsoever over the past few weeks…yes, that is what I parsed your statement to mean.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"You asked for it by laughing at the folks that told you it was coming because of your stance on regulation."
This comment makes absolutely zero sense. You seem to have a very tenuous grasp on the concept of cause and effect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Contract law is the interesting move here.
This is how Robert Moses, and his authorities, were able to ensconce themselves in the state of New York and build, without any regard for what legislators or executive branches wanted.
I think, however, the city still has eminent domain in its back pocket for extreme cases. Now's a good time to use it.
-C
[ link to this | view in chronology ]