Some pay-TV providers are telling the FCC that a ban on early-termination fees (ETF) and a requirement for prorated refunds should be limited to residential subscribers, not business subs, and shouldn't be applied retroactively to existing contracts, according to reply comments this week in docket 23-405. FCC commissioners voted 3-2 in December to adopt the video service fees NPRM, which proposes banning ETFs and requires prorated refunds when service is canceled (see 2312130019). Verizon said that while only a small portion of its subscriber base is potentially subject to ETFs, a ban on them should be done prospectively, as eliminating the fees in existing contracts "would improperly upset the economic bargains reflected in those contracts and would impose an undue administrative burden on Verizon." It defended keeping ETFs for business customers, calling them "sophisticated actors who may individually negotiate their contracts with Verizon." Altice urged similarly for business subs and for not applying a ban on existing contracts. NCTA said a ban on "unjust" ETFs should apply only to practices that don't transparently disclose them or give consumers the option to go on a month-to-month plan without such fees. It argued against letting state and local governments apply other ETF and whole-month billing requirements to cable service. "A patchwork of state and local regulations would be unduly burdensome" and make competition with satellite TV and online video distributors a chore, it said. Dish Network also defended ETFs and said they need to be clearly and prominently disclosed. It called for transparency standards in the billing and onboarding process. Opposing the FCC proposal on ETFs and prorated refunds, NTCA said the FCC can accomplish its objectives via its all-in pricing proceeding "without the unintended consequences to consumers or impermissible rate regulation." The FCC proposal received some support. The pay-TV industry argument that ETFs and billing cycle fees benefit consumers "may shock some observers, who have come to know the pay TV industry as a reliable advocate for the Commission imposing new regulations on behalf of consumers," a sarcastic NAB said. Local governments, including Boston, the District of Columbia and Fairfax County, Virginia, said eliminating fees won't drive up prices. Instead, they said competition that enhances consumer choice "will promote lower prices and will permit consumers to choose the highest value products for their budgets."
ACA Connects "will take a serious look" at challenging the FCC's "all-in" video pricing rules, which are set for a vote during the commissioners' March 14 open meeting (see 2402210057), ACA President Grant Spellmeyer said. Commissioner Geoffrey Starks in an address Wednesday at the ACA Connects policy summit (see 2403060005) mentioned the all-in pricing draft order, saying it would curb the “indecipherable asterisks and fine print” that make comparison shopping difficult. Starks said the order is consistent with the TV Viewer Protection Act, which requires that MVPDs disclose the all-in price at the point of sale and within 24 hours of sign-up and let customers cancel without penalty. The item is part of a larger agenda with broad support against junk fees and favors greater transparency for consumers, said Best Best's Cheryl Leanza. She noted the Ticket Act (HR-3950), requiring greater transparency in prices for event tickets, and the No Hidden Fees Act, (HR-6543), which prompts greater transparency in hotel and motel costs. Leanza represented local government clients in the proceeding. Cable and satellite TV promotional materials and bills would prominently display an all-in price that covers programming-related costs, including broadcast retransmission consent fees and regional sports programming charges, under the draft order. The requirement would be only for ads where price is mentioned, according to the draft. Operators would have nine months to comply after the approved order is released. In advertising for bundled services, providers should have the option to either provide the full price of the bundle, including video fees, or separately list the bundle's all-in video portion, NCTA told aides to the five FCC commissioners and FCC Media Bureau staffers, according to a docket 23-203 filing Thursday. NCTA urged that franchise fees and public, educational and government programming fees be excluded from the all-in pricing. It also urged that the commission to give providers a year to implement the all-in rules. Joining NCTA in the meetings were representatives of Comcast, Charter Communications and Cox. In meetings with aides to Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioners Anna Gomez and Geoffrey Starks, Verizon reiterated its argument for exempting legacy plans no longer marketed or offered to consumers from the all-in pricing rule (see 2308010028). Pointing to existing federal transparency requirements as well as market forces, state cable associations said in a docket filing this week that the proposed all-in rules "rest on unsound legal footing, are unnecessary, and would produce results contrary to the Commission’s goals." Behind the filing were the Florida Internet & Television Association, Missouri Internet & Television Association, Ohio Cable Telecommunications Association and Texas Cable Association.
House leaders removed the NTIA Reauthorization Act (HR-4510) from floor consideration Tuesday amid other committees’ objections to it, the bill’s sponsors told us Wednesday. Chamber leaders previously scheduled consideration of HR-4510 under suspension of the rules (see 2403010073), along with two other telecom-focused bills. The House voted 339-85 Wednesday to pass H.Res. 1061, which amended vehicle HR-4366 to become the Consolidated Appropriations Act FY24 appropriations minibus package that includes reduced funding for NTIA and other Commerce Department agencies compared with FY 2023 but a slight increase for the DOJ Antitrust Division (see 2403040083).
Industry widely opposes the FCC's proposal to adopt additional reporting requirements for providers as part of the commission's efforts to combat digital discrimination. Commissioners sought comment on an NPRM proposing to adopt annual reporting and internal compliance program requirements following a November order adopting rules to curb discrimination (see 2401310052). Comments were posted Tuesday in docket 22-69. Consumer advocates and state officials urged the FCC to adopt the proposed requirements and establish an Office of Civil Rights within the commission.
Fox Corp. CEO Lachlan Murdoch said Monday he's unconcerned that the Fox/ESPN/Warner Bros. Discovery streaming joint venture (see 2402070006) could face regulatory challenges. At a Morgan Stanley conference Monday, he said the JV is "pro-consumer" and focused on an audience segment of cord cutters and cord nevers not currently served. The pricing will be "at the higher ranges" of estimates that have floated around and should have 5 million subscribers within five years, said Murdoch. He said over time the streaming platform could add capabilities such as betting.
The House is expected to vote as soon as Wednesday on the 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act, a “minibus” funding bill that includes reductions for NTIA and other Commerce Department agencies but a slight increase for the DOJ Antitrust Division. President Joe Biden signed a continuing resolution (HR-7463) March 1 that extended federal appropriations for those agencies through Friday, March 8 (see 2403010072). The chamber is also set to vote this week on the 988 Lifeline Cybersecurity Responsibility Act (HR-498) and NTIA Reauthorization Act (HR-4510) under suspension of the rules (see 2403010073).
Meta is violating the EU data protection law by requiring users to pay for ad-free service or consent to the use of their personal data, eight European consumer groups alleged Thursday. Meta didn't immediately comment. The groups, from the Czech Republic, Denmark, Greece, France, Norway, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain, are European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) members. In complaints filed with their national data protection authorities (DPAs), they charged the tech giant with failing to comply with GDPR principles of fair processing, data minimization and purpose limitation. Moreover, they said Meta has no valid legal basis to justify the massive data sweep it carries out on Facebook and Instagram users because the choice it gives them can't lead to free and informed consent. "Meta has tried time and time again to justify the massive commercial surveillance it places its users under," said BEUC Deputy Director-General Ursula Pachl. "Its unfair 'pay-or-consent' choice is the company's latest effort to legalise its business model." In recent years several DPAs have tried to force Meta to change the legal basis for collecting and processing people's data, and the company's "last resort" is to obtain users' consent for those activities by offering them the choice to either pay to see a supposedly ad-free service or consent to the company's full commercial surveillance with ads, BEUC said. Asked why BEUC didn't file the complaint with the DPA in Ireland, where Meta is headquartered, a spokesperson said the organization wanted to involve national data protection authorities that can then take ownership of the issue when those authorities transfer the matter to the Irish authority. In addition, he said, BEUC wanted to involve its members because they know the procedural rules of their own DPAs and to maximize coverage of the issue to show that it affects all Europeans.
The Wireless ISP Association petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for review of the FCC’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order on grounds that it’s contrary to law, an abuse of discretion and violates the Administrative Procedure Act, said the petition Wednesday (docket 24-1047). It becomes the 15th such petition consolidated in the 8th Circuit once it’s transferred there under the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's Feb. 9 order (see 2402120077). The order “undermines” congressional intent “by diverting limited human resources and investment from deployment to compliance with burdensome and overbroad regulations,” said the petition. It imposes a novel disparate-impact test that allows the FCC “to micromanage a host of legitimate business practices, including network buildout decisions, pricing, promotions, advertising, contract renewal, and customer service,” it said. If the order is allowed to stand, the FCC could enforce it “with its full range of tools, including civil penalties,” it said. The order “will deter innovation and investment in broadband,” including among WISPA’s small and rural members who may lack adequate resources to “absorb” the order’s compliance and potential enforcement costs, it said.
Streaming-related revenue will surpass pay-TV subscription revenue in the U.S. this year, Ampere Analysis blogged Monday. That tipping point comes as streaming continues growing and traditional pay TV declines. In addition, the value of pay TV in 2028 is expected to be half of the value of its 2017 peak, Ampere said. Streaming subs overtook pay-TV subs in 2016 in the U.S., but streaming has far lower average revenue per user, meaning streaming revenue is only now catching up, it said. Ampere said streaming revenue benefited recently from password-sharing crackdowns and hybrid advertising tiers.
Don't adopt a "model carrier" approach for determining rates for incarcerated people's communications services, Securus parent Aventiv told the FCC. The company met separately with Commissioner Anna Gomez and staff, aides to Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and aides to Commissioner Brendan Carr. The FCC "must take into account the increased costs of labor and services resulting from inflationary pressures in recent years" when setting permanent rate and ancillary service charge caps, Aventiv said in a filing posted Tuesday in docket 23-62 (see 2205240056). It also urged the commission to allow "alternative pricing structures" and "experimentation with bundling arrangements."