Tech companies are buying small AI startups without antitrust scrutiny, which could have long-term, negative impacts on consumers, Public Knowledge said Monday in comments to the FTC and DOJ. Tech associations argued empirical evidence shows there aren’t competition concerns in the sector and said antitrust enforcers should rely on statistics, not conjecture. DOJ and the FTC on Friday closed public comment on their inquiry into “serial acquisitions and roll-up strategies” that they believe harm competition. Public Knowledge, in joint comments with the Responsible Online Commerce Coalition, cited the strategic investment of companies like Microsoft, Google and Amazon. Companies in recent years have purchased hundreds of small tech startups, including those offering AI services, and the deals are so small they often don’t trigger antitrust review. “This has allowed Big Tech to shape numerous digital markets and expand their dominance unchallenged,” said PK. Tech companies already enjoy dominant positions in their respective markets, but purchasing AI companies further entrenches their dominance, said PK: “The lack of competition in technology ecosystems can lead to stagnation in innovation and service improvement and presents significant hurdles for consumers seeking to explore different products.” The Computer & Communications Industry Association said in comments that enforcers failed to show “how and why these business strategies raise particular competitive concerns.” The agencies’ annual Hart-Scott-Rodino report for fiscal 2022 showed enforcers don’t identify competition concerns in “most notified mergers.” The agencies requested additional information on 47 of the 3,029 notified merger transactions in the report, or fewer than 2% of the deals, said CCIA. NetChoice urged enforcers to keep their focus on “demonstrable consumer harm rather than abstract structural concerns or protection of competitors.” The association recommended the agencies rely on “grounded analysis in rigorous economic evidence rather than anecdotes or political considerations.”
While FCC commissioners will vote at their September meeting on allowing non-geostationary satellite use of the 17 GHz band (see 2409040053), nothing in the record supports NGSO operations at up to the ITU power flux density (PFD) limits in the 17.7-17.8 GHz slice, according to AT&T and Verizon. In a docket 22-273 filing posted Friday, the companies said more measures are needed to ensure protection of incumbent fixed service (FS) operators in the band. NGSO operators have "abdicated their burden" of showing that current and future NGSO, geostationary orbit (GSO) and FS systems can coexist in the slice, they said. AT&T and Verizon urged that the FCC require NGSO applicants seeking to operate in the slice have their PFD threshold capped at a certain level unless they submit an aggregate interference analysis showing they will protect FS when operating at a higher level. Cheering the proposed opening of the 17 GHz band to NGSO operations, SpaceX said there's no need to apply equivalent power flux density limits to the band to protect GSO operators. But the FCC should make clear that any EPFD protections adopted will be subject to the outcome of international efforts to modernize EPFD limits and to the outcome of FCC updates of GSO/NGSO spectrum sharing rules, it said. SpaceX said it met with the offices of all five commissioners. AT&T and Verizon said they met with Space, Wireless, and Consumer and Governmental Affairs bureaus and Office of Engineering and Technology staff.
Legislators, broadcasters, cable groups, the Heritage Foundation and civil rights groups disagree on whether the FCC can or should require disclosures for political ads created with generative AI, according to comments filed in docket 24-211 by Thursday’s deadline.
The FCC gave the green light to extended milestone deadlines for EchoStar's 5G network buildout Friday, three days after the company filed its request (see 2409190050). EchoStar called the approval "a significant step to promote competition in the wireless market."
CostQuest will offer NTCA members its broadband fabric data location "at exclusive member pricing" for the FCC's broadband maps and NTIA's broadband, equity, access and deployment program, the group announced Thursday. NTCA members will receive a "10% discount off list pricing," it said. In addition, CostQuest will provide data on network cost, competition and demographics for each broadband serviceable location (see 2211180062). NTCA and CostQuest will host a webinar for the group's members Oct. 30 at 1 p.m. EDT.
T-Mobile and UScellular jointly filed data at the FCC about their spectrum holdings, broken down on a cellular market area (CMA) basis. The filings were posted Tuesday in docket 24-286, one day after the companies filed a public interest statement and other documents about T-Mobile’s proposed buy of “substantially all” of the smaller carrier’s wireless operations, including some spectrum (see 2409160029). “Based on the FCC’s criterion, out of these 157 CMAs, there are 33 CMAs where T-Mobile or UScellular (or both) are considered to lack a competitive presence,” they said. AT&T has a “competitive presence” in each of the 124 CMAs T-Mobile or UScellular serve and Verizon [has] a competitive presence in 116, according to the filings (see here and here). “Based on this analysis, it should be evident that robust competition will continue to exist in all CMAs overlapped by the proposed transaction.”
Charter Communications is making a series of service commitments and benchmarks for its Spectrum broadband service. It said Monday that those commitments include a full-day credit for any neighborhood outage that lasts more than two hours and no annual contracts for any residential service. Within 15 minutes of identifying a neighborhood outage, the company said, it will notify affected customers and give an estimated restoration time. It said it would provide full refunds for any service within 30 days if a subscriber isn't completely satisfied. Charter rolled out Spectrum internet packages with guaranteed pricing for up to three years.
T-Mobile and UScellular made the case why T-Mobile’s proposed buy of “substantially all” of the smaller carrier’s wireless operations, including some of its spectrum (see 2405280047), makes sense for customers. In a public interest statement on the proposed transaction, they wrote, “The Transaction will increase competition across the UScellular footprint and not result in any competitive harm.” T-Mobile has “a well-established track record of using improvements in network performance and increased capacity to deliver greater value to consumers and enhance competition." The statement was posted Monday in docket 24-286, which the FCC created last week (see 2409110059). “Customers of both companies will experience significant benefits from increased network capacity, higher speeds, and reduced congestion within the UScellular footprint,” the companies said: “UScellular customers will have the choice to switch to a lower-cost T-Mobile plan or remain on their current UScellular rate plan, all while enjoying a world-class 5G network.” The filing said the deal won’t affect T-Mobile pricing, “which is generally lower than prices for comparable UScellular plans.” It emphasizes that about 40% of UScellular subscribers live in rural markets and the buy “will result in an enhanced user experience and faster and better 5G service for the rural customers of both companies.” Nearly all of UScellular’s customer devices are compatible with T-Mobile’s network and “migration of the vast majority of UScellular customers can be accomplished almost immediately after closing via an over-the-air software update,” the filing said. Much of the data was redacted from the public filing, including estimated monthly savings for UScellular customers, the combined capacity of the network that will be available to those subscribers and the number of households expected to gain access to T-Mobile’s Home Internet service. The companies told the FCC they don’t “have an overlapping competitive presence” in 74 of the cellular market areas (CMAs) affected, which is 37% of the markets involved in the transaction. “Both before and after the Transaction, at least three nationwide facilities-based carriers (including T-Mobile) will provide competition in almost all CMAs in the UScellular footprint.” The filing comes ahead of T-Mobile’s Capital Markets Day, scheduled for Wednesday.
Title I or Title II of the Communications Act would bar the New York Affordable Broadband Act (ABA), said amici supporting ISP groups in briefs Friday at the U.S. Supreme Court. NCTA, a cable industry group that didn’t join the original May 2021 challenge that several national telecom associations filed in a district court, said the ABA “would impose unprecedented and unlawful rate regulation on broadband services.” The Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council (MMTC) also condemned the state law. “If the ABA becomes effective, it will achieve the opposite of what it purports to accomplish, making it harder for communities of color to subscribe to broadband.”
The FCC defended its decision to reclassify broadband as a Title II telecom service under the Communications Act in a reply brief to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday (docket 24-7000). It argued the court's decision staying the order pending review was done "without showing adequate statutory support." Moreover, the motions panel lacked "the benefit of the full briefing presented here" (see 2408130001).