FCC Web Documents citing 76.1003

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-577A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-577A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-02-577A1.txt
  • reply, if desired. If the maximum rate established on Form 1230 does not exceed $1.24 per channel, the burden shall be on the franchising authority to show the reasonableness of its order. If the maximum rate established on Form 1230 exceeds $1.24 per channel, the burden shall be on the operator to show the unreasonableness of the order. ***** Section 76.1003 is amended by revising paragraph (h)(3)(iii)(C)(2) to read as follows: � 76.1003 Program access proceedings. ***** (h)(3)(iii)(C)(2) Issues concerning the amount of damages may be designated by the Chief, Media Bureau for hearing before, or, if the parties agree, submitted for mediation to, a Commission Administrative Law Judge. ***** Section 76.1502 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(2) and (e)(2) to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4077A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4077A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-03-4077A1.txt
  • the Kansas City metropolitan area, but none of the Comcast cable systems competes with the Kansas City Cable. Id. at n.3. Everest Reply at 12, 15. Kansas City Cable alleges that Everest's Complaint is procedurally defective because Everest never requested to purchase the relevant programming from Metro and, therefore, Metro never refused such request as required by 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(c)(6)(iii). Kansas City Cable Answer at 18. Kansas City Cable was notified of Everest's interest in obtaining the third tier Missouri men's basketball games. See Complaint at Exhibit G -- Letter to Kansas City Cable, Mizzou Sports, and The University of Missouri from Rachel Lipman Reiber, Vice President of Regulatory and Government Affairs, Everest Connections (December 3, 2002). As Everest has
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1136A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1136A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1136A1.txt
  • ) CSR-6414-P ORDER Adopted: April 26, 2005 Released: April 27, 2005 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: On October 8, 2004, a program access complaint was filed on behalf of Rainbow DBS Company LLC (``VOOM'') against iN DEMAND, L.L.C. (``ID'') pursuant to Sections 628(b) and (c) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 76.7(a) and 76.1003(a) of the Commission's rules. VOOM alleged that ID violated Section 628(b) of the Act because it refused to negotiate a non-discriminatory, commercially reasonable agreement with VOOM for carriage of ID's INHD1 and INHD2 high definition television programming channels. VOOM also alleged that ID violated Section 628(c) of the Act and Section 76.1002(c)(2) of the Commission's rules because ID made its
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.txt
  • video programming distributors to satellite cable and satellite broadcast programming. Need: These rules implement section 19 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, which adds section 628 to the Communications Act of 1934. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 152(a), 154(i), and 303(r). Section Number and Title: 76.1000 Definitions. 76.1001 Unfair practices generally. 76.1002 Specific unfair practices prohibited. 76.1003 Program access proceedings. SUBPART Q -- REGULATION OF CARRIAGE AGREEMENTS Brief Description: These rules govern agreements between multichannel video programming distributors and video programming vendors. Need: These rules implement section 12 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, which adds a new section 616 to the Communications Act of 1934. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 152(a), 154(i),
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1784A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1784A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1784A1.txt
  • L.L.C. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Adopted: September 8, 2006 Released: September 11, 2006 By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: On July 5, 2005, a program access compliant was filed on behalf of EchoStar Satellite L.L.C. (``EchoStar'') against iN DEMAND L.L.C. (``ID'') pursuant to Section 628(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 76.1003(a) of the Commission's rules. EchoStar alleged that ID's fee structure for the sale of INHD programming violated Section 628(c)(2)(B) of the Act and Section 76.1002(b) of the Commission's rules because it discriminated in its price, terms and conditions. EchoStar also alleged that ID's fee structure constituted an unfair practice in violation of Section 628(b) of the Act and Section 76.1001
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-333A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-333A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-333A2.txt
  • Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA) Pending OMB Approval 3060-0865 Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Universal Licensing System Recordkeeping and Third-Party Disclosure Requirements 03/31/07 3060-0874 FCC 475, FCC 475B 11/30/08 3060-0876 USAC Board of Directors Nomination Process, Sec. 54.703 and Review of Administrator's Decision, Secs. 54.719 - 54.725 06/30/06 3060-0881 Sec. 95.861 09/30/08 3060-0882 Sec. 95.833 01/31/09 3060-0888 Secs. 76.7, 76.9, 76.61, 76.914, 76.1003, 76.1302, and 76.1513 05/31/08 3060-0893 Universal Licensing Service (ULS) Pre-Auction Database Corrections 02/28/07 3060-0894 Certification Letter Accounting for Receipt of Federal Support, CC Docket Nos. 96-45 and 96-262 06/30/07 3060-0895 FCC 502 03/31/07 3060-0896 Broadcast Auction Form Exhibits 12/31/08 3060-0897 MDS and ITFS Two-Way Transmissions 07/31/07 3060-0900 Compatibility of Wireless Services with Enhanced 911 - CC Docket No. 94-102 03/31/06
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4354A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4354A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4354A2.txt
  • Unserved Households for Purposes of the Satellite Home Viewer Act (SHVA) 04/30/09 3060-0865 Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Universal Licensing System Recordkeeping and Third-Party Disclosure Requirements 07/31/10 3060-0874 FCC 475B, FCC 2000 Series 09/30/10 3060-0876 Sec. 54.703 and Secs. 54.719, 54.720, 54.721, 54.722, 54.723, 54.724 and 54.725 09/30/09 3060-0881 Sec. 95.861 09/30/08 3060-0882 Sec. 95.833 01/31/09 3060-0888 Secs. 76.7, 76.9, 76.61, 76.914, 76.1003, 76.1302, and 76.1513 05/31/08 3060-0894 Secs. 54.313 and 54.316 and Certification Letter Accounting for Receipt of Federal Support and Rate Comparability Review and Certification 09/30/10 3060-0895 FCC 502 05/31/10 3060-0896 Broadcast Auction Form Exhibits 12/31/08 3060-0900 Compatibility of Wireless Services with Enhanced 911 - CC Docket No. 94-102 02/28/09 3060-0901 Reports of Common Carriers and Affiliates 04/30/09 3060-0905 Secs. 18.213
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-4849A1.pdf
  • methods of competition or unfair or deceptive practices that hinder or prevent anyMVPD from providing programming to consumers. See47 C.F.R. � 76.1002. Small Entity Compliance Guide Manual 4 OCBO Telephone (202) 418-0990 �The Commission's rules provide that anyMVPD harmedbyconduct that it believes constitutes a violation of the Commission's program access rules mayfile a complaint at the Commission. See47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. What has changed? �The Commission in the Report and Orderin MB Docket No. 07-29 modified the rules pertaining to program access complaints in the following manner. �Submission of Documents with Answer. The Report and Ordercodifies the requirement that a respondent to a program access complaint that expresslyrelies upon a document within its control in asserting a defense to include the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2227A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2227A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2227A1.txt
  • the Commission will grant AT&T's request for an extension of time and permit Cox to file its Answer on or before October 27, 2008. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 4(j) of the Communications Act as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i) and (j), Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption; and We GRANT Cox Enterprises, Inc. and Cox Communications, Inc. an extension until October 27, 2008 to file its Answer to the Complaint filed by AT&T Services, Inc.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1967A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1967A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1967A1.txt
  • the Commission will grant AT&T's request for an extension of time and permit Cablevision to file its Answer on or before September 17, 2009. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 4(j) of the Communications Act as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i) and (j), Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption; and We GRANT Madison Square Garden, L.P. and Cablevision Systems Corp. an extension until September 17, 2009 to file its Answer to the Complaint filed by AT&T Services,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-530A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-530A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-530A1.txt
  • 9, 2009 By the Senior Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Media Bureau: introduction On October 6, 2008, Complainant Pacific Bell Telephone Company d/b/a SBC California d/b/a AT&T California and AT&T Services, Inc. (``AT&T'') filed a program access complaint against CoxCom, Inc. (``Cox'') pursuant to Sections 628(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the ``Act''), and Sections 76.7(a), 76.1001 and 76.1003(a) of the Commission's rules. AT&T alleges Cox's withholding of channel Cox-4 from carriage by AT&T on its U-verse TV system in San Diego, California constitutes an unfair practice under Section 628(b) because the purpose or effect of Cox's actions has been to significantly hinder AT&T's ability to provide satellite-delivered programming to consumers. In addition, AT&T seeks an injunction requiring Cox
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-73A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-73A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-73A1.txt
  • for six years to all program carriage agreements between Time Warner and TWC or WealthTV's proposal that we consider Time Warner and TWC to be vertically integrated for the duration of the existing contracts and renewals thereof, or for a period of five years, whichever is greater. See RCN Petition at 2-3, 11; WealthTV Reply at 1. 47 C.F.R. �� 76.1003(g), 76.1302. Provided that an MVPD or programming vendor submits a complaint within the period specified by the Commission's program access or program carriage complaint provisions, the MVPD or programmer can obtain remedies for violations of the program access and program carriage rules even after this transaction closes (including, for example, violations relating to the HBO/Turner Programming Agreements and the modifications
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1099A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1099A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1099A1.txt
  • Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit June 21, 2010 NOTICE OF EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROGRAM ACCESS COMPLAINT RULES: 47 C.F.R. �� 76.1001(b)(2), 76.1003(c)(3), AND 76.1003(l) MB Docket No. 07-198 On January 20, 2010, the Commission adopted the First Report and Order in MB Docket No. 07-198, which promulgated rules addressing unfair acts involving terrestrially delivered, cable-affiliated programming, and rules establishing procedures for the Commission's consideration of requests for a temporary standstill in program access cases. Those rules, except for new Sections 76.1001(b)(2) and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2092A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2092A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2092A1.txt
  • - FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION'', and the cover letter should also state that the Submitting Party is filing an unredacted version of the same documents. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 4(j) of the Communications Act as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i) and (j), Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Nancy Murphy APPENDIX A In the Matter of DISH Network
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-381A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-381A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-381A1.txt
  • to file their Reply within fifteen (15) days from the date on which the highly confidential materials are delivered to Complainants' counsel. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 628 of the Communications Act as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), (j) and 548, Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption; and We GRANT Complainants an extension until fifteen (15) days from the date on which the highly confidential materials are delivered to Complainants' counsel to file their Reply
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-679A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-679A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-679A1.txt
  • Ass'n v. FPC, 259 F.2d 921, 925 (D.C. Cir. 1958); see also Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Comm'n v. Holiday Tours, 559 F.2d 841 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (clarifying the standard set forth in Virginia Petroleum Jobbers Ass'n v. FPC); Hispanic Information and Telecomm. Network, Inc., 20 FCC Rcd 5471, 5480, � 26 (2005). Sky Angel filed its petition pursuant to Section 76.1003(1) of the Commission's Rules and based on the Commission's general statutory authority to act on standstill petitions. See Sky Angel Petition at 1, 3-4, 7. Section 76.1003(l) has not yet taken effect and, in any event, pertains to renewals of existing contracts. See Review of the Commission's Program Access Rules and Examination of Programming Tying Arrangements, MB Docket No. 07-198,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-682A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-682A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-682A1.txt
  • - FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION'', and the cover letter should also state that the Submitting Party is filing an unredacted version of the same documents. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 4(j) of the Communications Act as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i) and (j), Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau APPENDIX A Before the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-818A1.pdf
  • � 76.1001(b)(2)(iii). 4 oA defendant has 45 days �rather than the usual 20 days �from the date of service ofthe complaint to file an answer. See47 C.F.R. � 76.1001(b)(2)(i). oWith the exceptions noted above, a program access complaint proceeding regarding an unfair act involving terrestriallydelivered, cable-affiliated programming will be subject to the same procedures set forth in Sections 76.7 and 76.1003 of the Commission's rules that applyto program access complaints involving satellite-delivered, cable-affiliated programming. See47 C.F.R. �� 76.7, 76.1003. Application of the Rules oThe rules adopted in the First Report and Orderapplyto common carriers and open video system operators, and their affiliated programmers, to the extent that these entities provide video programming to subscribers or consumers, because the Act so requires.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1212A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1212A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1212A1.txt
  • PUBLIC INSPECTION,'' and the cover letter should also state that the Submitting Party is filing an unredacted version of the same documents. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 4(j) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i) and (j), Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau APPENDIX A Before the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1594A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1594A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1594A1.txt
  • into the license agreement with Verizon as required by this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counts II, III, IV, and V of the above-captioned complaint filed by Verizon Telephone Companies and Verizon Services Corporation against Madison Square Garden, L.P. and Cablevision Systems Corporation ARE HEREBY DENIED for the reasons discussed herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 76.1003(h)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(h)(1), this Order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau Throughout this Order, we use the term ``unfair act'' as shorthand for the phrase ``unfair methods of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1595A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1595A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1595A1.txt
  • AT&T as required by this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Counts II, III, IV, and V of the above-captioned complaint filed by AT&T Services, Inc. and Southern New England Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Connecticut against Madison Square Garden, L.P. and Cablevision Systems Corporation ARE HEREBY DENIED for the reasons discussed herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 76.1003(h)(1) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(h)(1), this Order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau Throughout this Order, we use the term ``unfair act'' as shorthand for the phrase ``unfair methods of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1694A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1694A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1694A1.txt
  • on or before November 14, 2011. We take this action on our own motion to provide the Commission an opportunity to consider the Defendants' Petition and Application for Review. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 628 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 154(j), and 548, and Sections 76.1001 and 76.1003 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 76.1001, 76.1003, the Order IS STAYED to the extent indicated above. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau See 47 U.S.C. � 548(b). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1001(a). See AT&T Servs. Inc.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1695A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1695A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1695A1.txt
  • on or before November 14, 2011. We take this action on our own motion to provide the Commission an opportunity to consider the Defendants' Petition and Application for Review. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 628 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 154(j), and 548, and Sections 76.1001 and 76.1003 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 76.1001, 76.1003, the Order IS STAYED to the extent indicated above. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. � 0.283. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau See 47 U.S.C. � 548(b). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1001(a). See Verizon Tel. Cos.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-847A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-847A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-847A1.txt
  • 3359, 3425, � 148 (1993) (``1993 Program Access Order''). See supra � 3. See Review of the Commission's Program Access Rules and Examination of Programming Tying Arrangements, First Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 746, 785-86, � 56 (2010) , appeal pending sub nom. Cablevision Sys. Corp. et al. v. FCC, Nos. 10-1062, 10-1088 (D.C. Cir.). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(c)(4); 1993 Program Access Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 3416, � 125. See 1993 Program Access Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 3416, � 125; see also 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(c)(4). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(c)(4); 1993 Program Access Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 3417, � 126. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(c)(4); 1993 Program Access Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 3417, �
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-953A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-953A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-953A1.txt
  • . . . can appropriately be held responsible for the discriminatory acts of its program supplier affiliate because it controls the supplier and the supplier's unfair actions are designed to benefit these entities.''). See Defendants' April 25 Letter at 2. See 47 U.S.C. � 548(b). 2010 Program Access Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 786, � 57. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(j). See Defendants' April 25 Letter at 3. See, e.g., 2010 Program Access Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 785, � 56 (``The evidence required to satisfy this burden will vary based on the facts and circumstances of each case . . . .''). We further note that the 2010 Program Access Order left open the issue of whether a ``purpose'' without
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-18A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-18A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-18A1.txt
  • Docket No. 07-198, Report and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 17791, 17847-59, �� 83-113 (2007) (``2007 Program Access Order''), aff'd sub nom. Cablevision Sys. Corp. v. FCC, 597 F.3d 1306 (D.C. Cir. 2010). In contrast to the program access rules, which allow the complainant and the respondent to enter into arbitration voluntarily (see 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(i)), the Adelphia Order provides for mandatory arbitration if an MVPD invokes its right to arbitration. See Adelphia Order, 21 FCC Rcd at 8337, App. B, � B.2.f. Once an MVPD invokes its right to arbitration under the Adelphia Order, the terms and conditions of its existing contract (assuming its action concerns a contract renewal) automatically remain in place pending the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-644A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-644A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-644A1.txt
  • FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION,'' and the cover letter should also state that the Submitting Party is filing an unredacted version of such documents. IV. ORDERING CLAUSES Accordingly, we ADOPT AND ISSUE the Protective Order attached at Appendix A pursuant to Sections 4(i), 4(j), and 628 of the Communications Act as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), (j) and 548, Sections 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. �� 0.457(d) and 76.1003(k), and Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b)(4), and such Protective Order is effective upon its adoption. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by Section 0.283 of the Commission's rules. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION William T. Lake Chief, Media Bureau APPENDIX A In the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268844A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268844A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-268844A1.txt
  • Communications Canaan, Norfolk, CT et al No Code CSR-7067-E Comcast Cable Communications Howard County, MD No Code CSR-7070-P Echostar Satellite LLC Home Box Office (HBO) No Code NOTE: CSR-7070-P is placed on Public Notice solely for the purpose of assigning it a CSR tracking number. This Public Notice has no impact on the pleading cycle already underway pursuant to Sections 76.1003(a) and 76.7, 47 C.F.R. �� 76.1003(a) & 76.7. -FCC- N N N N N $ �N e f h h g h gd �����PNG > �!�R>^��S�S߿�"K�k������er4 �J�dM�O�O � �,I TV��5 0�z̪�� ��� %�o� �� � �a�% Tf(c) U~��Uy�Ӛ�o=�c� {�YAD ���Zv�}�YAD e/�,�-�%E9 ^1�J 2�� bʆPh=f 8H�]}��`��2@ ���'����X�t�p�O � ��$��>��� -�m�``�Q(q P� ���e D �_�� p�/]b|?�O� V��Jõ tXT���e� 2)�V``� (c)}�l�tmE...bϡ gs�>o���(R)"q�Q ܆���D
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-202A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-202A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-202A1.txt
  • if, as a trend, vertically integrated programmers began to switch from satellite delivery to terrestrial delivery for the purpose of evading the Commission's rules, we would "consider an appropriate response to ensure continued access to programming." Id. Program Access Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22861-62 �� 50-51; AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3180 � 37. 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. See AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3180 � 38. See id., 14 FCC Rcd at 3180 � 39. See also AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3179 � 35 n.117 (``AT&T-TCI acknowledge that the merged firm will be subject to the Commission's program access rules.''). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.504. This restriction applies only to the first
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-404A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-404A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-404A1.txt
  • at 21836. Comcast presented evidence indicating that cost savings of up to $1,680,000 per year could be achieved using existing terrestrial infrastructure in the Philadelphia market to deliver SportsNet. DIRECTV Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 21836; EchoStar Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 2101. The facts relied upon by the Bureau were supported by affidavits as required by 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(b)(3). DIRECTV Application for Review at 16; EchoStar Application for Review at 8. Despite its purported willingness to bear part of the yearly multi-million dollar cost to uplink SportsNet, DIRECTV argues that its current expenditure of uplinking some Philadelphia sporting events at $5,000 - $8,000 per game is not cost effective. DIRECTV Application for review at 7 n.21. DIRECTV Order, 13
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-127A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-127A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-127A1.txt
  • Delivery of Video Programming, Fourth Annual Report, 13 FCC Rcd. 1034 (1998). In the Matter of: DirecTV, Inc., v. Comcast Corp; Echostar Communications Corp. v. Comcast Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 2000 WL 1720534, (2000)(``Order''). Order at �13. RCN Application for Review at 7. Majority Opinion and Order at �19. See Majority Opinion and Order at �20. See 47 C.F.R. 76.1003(g) See e.g. Title Guarantee Co. v. NLRB, 534 F.2d 484, 487 (2d Cir. 1976)(``Neither the liberal provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure pertaining to pretrial discovery nor the liberalized rules of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure have any bearing on (National Labor Relations) Board discovery procedures.''). See, e.g., Dixon v. Love, 431 U.S. 105, 115 (1977); but
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-50A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-50A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-50A1.txt
  • other MVPDs in every cable franchise area, as well as against other DBS providers. 47 C.F.R. � 1.115. EchoStar v. Speedvision Network, L.L.C. et al., 14 FCC Rcd 9327 (1999) (``Order''). See OutdoorLife Network, L.L.C. and Speedvision Network, L.L.C. v. EchoStar Satellite Corporation and EchoStar Communications Corporation, No. 3:98CV2378(AHN) (D. Conn. filed Dec. 7, 1998). Pursuant to 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(h), which provides for the confidentiality of proprietary information falling within an exemption to disclosure contained in the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. � 552(b) (``FOIA''), the Networks requested that portions of their opposition be treated as confidential because they contain proprietary information and, accordingly, submitted a redacted copy of their opposition for inclusion in the Commission's public file. This
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-328A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-328A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-328A1.txt
  • to the DirecTV platform, and therefore conditions grant of the Application on compliance with this access commitment. The Applicants' proposed commitment is not unlike the nondiscrimination requirement in the Communications Act and the Commissions program carriage rules. Aggrieved programmers and MVPDs may seek relief for any alleged violations of this condition by using the existing enforcement mechanisms found at Section 76.1003 of the Commission's rules. ACCESS TO NATIONAL AND NON-SPORTS REGIONAL NETWORKS News Corp. has interests in several satellite cable programming networks, including national programming networks offering sports, news, or general entertainment, and regional programming networks that do not offer sports. News Corp's satellite cable programming networks are currently covered by the non-discrimination and unfair practices prohibitions in the program access
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-330A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-330A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-330A1.txt
  • Applicants' proposed commitment is not unlike the nondiscrimination requirement in the Act and our program carriage rules. Similar to our treatment of the remainder of Applicants' proposed program access commitments in the following section, we clarify that aggrieved programmers and MVPDs may seek relief for any alleged violations of this condition by using the existing enforcement mechanisms found at Section 76.1003 of the Commission's rules. As to broadcast programming, we find it unlikely that, after the transaction, DirecTV would discriminate against competing television broadcast stations. The applicable statutory and regulatory provisions thoroughly address satellite carriage of broadcast television programming. In any market in which DirecTV offers local-into-local service pursuant to the statutory copyright license, it is required to carry all television
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-105A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-105A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-105A1.txt
  • Commission shall issue a report on regional sports network access and carriage issues both on an industry-wide basis and specifically with respect to the Applicants. After issuing the report, the Commission, in its discretion, may determine if further action is warranted. Moreover, the Commission intends to review, evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the complaint resolution procedures prescribed in Sections 76.1003 and 76.1302 of our rules. National and Non-Sports Regional Programming Positions of the Parties. EchoStar and RCN assert that the proposed transactions would give Time Warner and Comcast an enhanced incentive and ability to withhold national and non-sports regional programming. According to EchoStar, Comcast's expanded share of the national MVPD market would result in an increased incentive and ability to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-169A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-169A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-169A1.txt
  • authority found in Sections 4(i), 303(r), and 628 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. �� 154(i), 303(r), and 548, the Commission's rules ARE HEREBY AMENDED as set forth in Appendix D. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that (i) pursuant to 5 U.S.C. � 553(d)(3) and 47 C.F.R. � 1.427(b), the amendment to Section 76.1002(c)(6) and new Sections 76.1003(i) and 76.1003(k) WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE upon publication in the Federal Register; and (ii) the amendment to Section 76.1003(e)(1) and new Section 76.1003(j) contain information collection requirements subject to the PRA and WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE upon approval by the Office of Management and Budget. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-7A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-7A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-7A1.txt
  • Notice also seeks comment on whether and how our procedures for resolving program access disputes under Section 628 should be modified. Our rules provide that any MVPD aggrieved by conduct that it believes constitutes a violation of Section 628 and the Commission's program access rules may file a complaint at the Commission in accordance with 47 C.F.R. �� 76.7 and 76.1003. The Commission's rules provide that before an MVPD may file such a complaint, it must first notify the cable operator or satellite programming vendor that it intends to file the complaint. The complaining MVPD must allow the cable operator or vendor 10 days to respond to the prefiling notice prior to filing its complaint with the Commission. The necessary contents
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-66A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-66A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-66A1.txt
  • attributable interest in DIRECTV or the Commission's program access rules no longer remain in effect (provided that if the program access rules are modified these commitments shall be modified, as the Commission deems appropriate, to conform to any revised rules adopted by the Commission). Aggrieved MVPDs may bring program access complaints against the Applicants using the procedures found at Section 76.1003 of the Commission's rules. We find that the additional conditions advocated by commenters with respect to national and non-sports regional programming are unnecessary. ACA has asked the Commission to prohibit Liberty Media and Discovery from engaging in any noncost-based price discrimination when dealing with small and medium-sized cable operators or their buying group, contending that ``volume discounts'' are a means
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.txt
  • (2008). -2. 47 U.S.C. � 503(b). Id. at � 403. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. � 1.41 (authorizing the filing of informal complaints). Adelphia/Time Warner/Comcast Order, 21 FCC Rcd 8203, 8298, para. 220 (2006). Comcast Network Management Practices Order, 23 FCC Rcd at 13032-33, paras. 10-11. 47 C.F.R. � 1.711 et seq. 47 C.F.R. � 76.7; see also 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003 (program access complaints). 47 C.F.R. �� 1.200 et seq. See 47 C.F.R. � 1.1206(b)(2). 47 C.F.R. � 1.1206(b). 47 C.F.R. �� 1.415, 1.419. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24121 (1998). See 5 U.S.C. � 603. Pub. L. No. 104-13. Pub. L. No. 107-198. See 44 U.S.C. � 3506(c)(4). See 5 U.S.C. � 603. The
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-17A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-17A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-17A1.txt
  • programming, unlike complaints involving satellite-delivered programming, entail an additional factual inquiry regarding whether the unfair act has the purpose or effect set forth in Section 628(b). With the exception of the additional burdens described below and the additional time for defendants to file an Answer, these proceedings will be subject to the same procedures set forth in Sections 76.7 and 76.1003 of the Commission's rules that apply to program access complaints involving satellite-delivered, cable-affiliated programming. Among other things, these rules provide for pre-filing notices, discovery, remedies, potential defenses, and the required contents of and deadlines for filing the complaint, answer, and reply. Additional Burdens in Program Access Complaint Proceedings Alleging Unfair Acts Involving Terrestrially Delivered, Cable-Affiliated Programming We are adopting rules
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-30A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-30A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-30A1.txt
  • proceeding in which we established rules for (i) complaints alleging unfair acts involving terrestrially delivered, cable-affiliated programming; and (ii) requests for a temporary standstill of the price, terms, and other conditions of an existing programming contract by a program access complainant seeking renewal of such a contract. In this Erratum, we make three corrections. First, we amend Sections 76.1000(j) and 76.1003(c)(3) to reflect that a defendant to a program access complaint involving terrestrial cable programming will be one of the entities listed in Section 628(b) and not a terrestrial cable programming vendor. Second, we amend Section 76.1003(g)(3) of the rules, which pertains to the time limits for filing program access complaints, to reflect that complaints may be filed alleging unfair acts
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-84A1.txt
  • Comments at 20 (suggesting that the Commission modify the pole attachment rule governing Petitions for Temporary Stay so that they may be used in make-ready situations); T-Mobile Comments at 8-9 (proposing accelerated treatment of pole attachment disputes). National Broadband Plan at 112. See 47 C.F.R. �� 1.1401-1.418. 47 C.F.R. �� 1.720-1.736. 47 C.F.R. � 76.7; see also 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003 (program access complaints). Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket No. 02-55, Report and Order, Fifth Report and Order, Fourth Memorandum Opinion and Order, and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 14969, 14986, para. 27 (2004) (800 MHz Report and Order) (creating an independent third party responsible for mediating certain spectrum reconfiguration disputes and, in the event mediation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A1.txt
  • We note that the Commission has also adopted specific procedures for requesting and awarding damages in program access cases. We propose to apply these same procedures to the award of damages in the program carriage context. While we briefly summarize some of these procedures here, we encourage commenters to review these procedures in their entirety as set forth in Sections 76.1003(d) and 76.1003(h)(3) of the Commission's rules and the 1998 Program Access Order to determine whether they are appropriate for program carriage cases. Under the program access rules, a complainant seeking damages must provide in its complaint either (i) a detailed computation of damages (the ``damages calculation''); or (ii) an explanation of the information that is not in its possession and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-119A3.txt
  • program access context but not in the program carriage context (emphasis added)). Compare 47 U.S.C. � 548(e)(1) (``Upon completion of [a program access] adjudicatory proceeding, the Commission shall have the power to order appropriate remedies, including, if necessary, the power to establish prices, terms, and conditions of sale of programming to the aggrieved multichannel video programming distributor''), and 47 C.F.R. 76.1003(h)(1) (``Upon completion of [a program access] adjudicatory proceeding, the Commission shall order appropriate remedies, including, if necessary, the imposition of damages, and/or the establishment of prices, terms, and conditions for the sale of programming to the aggrieved multichannel video programming distributor.''), with 47 U.S.C. � 536(a)(5) (stating explicitly that remedies, including carriage, can be ordered upon the finding of a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-4A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-4A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-4A1.txt
  • in the Adelphia Order, but our modeling has evolved since those transactions. See ACA Comments - Rogerson Report at 22. See 31-COM-00000298, [REDACTED] at 35. See id. at 25, 30, 37. See News Corp.-Hughes Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 513-14, �� 84-87. In addition, our program access rules do not apply to broadcast programming. See generally 47 C.F.R. �� 76.1001, 76.1003(d). See News Corp.-Hughes Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 552-53, 572-73, �� 175-76, 220-21. . Recently we have recognized the need to extend this remedy to other types of programming on a case by case basis. See Terrestrial Loophole Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 778, � 48. See supra � 36. See Application at 117. See 47 U.S.C. � 522(20) (defining
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-30A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-30A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-30A1.txt
  • APPENDIX D Potential Rule Amendments In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on alternative approaches to the exclusive contract prohibition -- retaining, sunsetting, or relaxing (either through market-based petitions or retaining a prohibition for RSNs). This Appendix lists potential rule amendments based on each of these alternatives. I. Retaining the Exclusive Contract Prohibition For ease of review, Sections 76.1002 and 76.1003 are restated below showing potential amendments in bold/underline (for additions) or strikethrough (for deletions). PART 76 - MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE 1. The authority citation for Part 76 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 325, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 522,
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.wp
  • 5) franchising authority certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b)); 6) petition for reconsideration of certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.911); 7) petition for recertification (47 C.F.R. � 76.916); 8) petition for review of rates (47 C.F.R. � 76.933); 9) rate complaint (47 C.F.R. � 76.950); 10) commercial leased access dispute (47 C.F.R. � 76.975); 11) program access adjudicatory proceedings (47 C.F.R. � 76.1003); 12) petition for exclusivity (47 C.F.R. � 76.1002); 13) carriage agreement adjudicatory proceeding (47 C.F.R. � 76.1302). Each type of petition or complaint has particular requirements regarding the conditions that must be satisfied before a filing can be made, who must be served with the filing, and the deadline time for a response. One reason for this variation is that
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.wp
  • the meaning of the term "multiple dwelling units."257 94. We proposed that allegations of predatory pricing be made and reviewed under principles of federal antitrust law as interpreted and applied by the federal courts.258 We requested commenters to address Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-57 259Id. at 5971-72, citing Communications Act � 632(d), 47 U.S.C. � 543(d). 260See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. 261Notice, 11 FCC Rcd at 5972. 262S. Rep. No. 92, 102d Cong., 1st Sess. 76 (1991). 263Rate Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5898. 264Id. 265Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, Buy-Through Prohibition, Third Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4326 (1994) ("Third Order on Reconsideration"). 2661996 Act � 301(b)(2),
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.txt
  • challenge only those to which they are a party. ACA Comments at 21-22. See Appendix B, � 76.65(c). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.7(a)(4) (Complaint shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested.). 47 C.F.R. � 76.7(b)(2). DIRECTV Comments at 16; EchoStar Comments at 21. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(g) (program access); 47 C.F.R. � 76.1302(f) (program carriage); 47 C.F.R. � 76.1513(t) (open video systems). See Appendix B, � 76.65(e). DIRECTV Comments at 17-18; EchoStar Comments at 23; RCN Reply at 6. WCA supports limited mandatory discovery. WCA Comments at 16. Disney Reply at 13. Network Affiliates Reply at 35-36. Network Affiliate Reply at 36-38. 47 C.F.R. � 76.9. 47
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00202.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00202.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00202.txt
  • if, as a trend, vertically integrated programmers began to switch from satellite delivery to terrestrial delivery for the purpose of evading the Commission's rules, we would "consider an appropriate response to ensure continued access to programming." Id. Program Access Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22861-62 �� 50-51; AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3180 � 37. 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. See AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3180 � 38. See id., 14 FCC Rcd at 3180 � 39. See also AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3179 � 35 n.117 (``AT&T-TCI acknowledge that the merged firm will be subject to the Commission's program access rules.''). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.504. This restriction applies only to the first
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Reports/fcc98335.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Reports/fcc98335.txt
  • Sports Net LLC and Fox Sports Direct (collectively "Fox"). EchoStar alleges that Fox had engaged in unlawful discrimination against EchoStar in the prices, terms and conditions that Fox imposed upon EchoStar for making available the regional sports programming that it controls. Fox filed an answer denying discrimination and requesting that the Commission dismiss the Complaint with prejudice. Pursuant to Section 76.1003(r)(1) of the Commission's rules, Echostar had one year from the date of entering into the contract with Liberty Satellite Sports, Inc./Fox Sports Direct to file a program access complaint with the Commission. The Bureau dismissed Echostar's complaint with prejudice, finding that it was barred by the one year limitations period. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-335 1Annual Assessment of the Status
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.txt http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.wp
  • 382Id. at 5. 383Id. 384Id. at 5-6. 385Id. at 6; NCTA Opposition at 17-18. 386NCTA Opposition at 17-18. See also GSN Opposition at 12. 387NCTA Opposition at 17-18. For instance, NCTA notes that disputes regarding program access require an aggrieved competitor to notify the potential defendant prior to filing with the Commission. NCTA Opposition at 17 citing 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(a). See also 47 C.F.R. � 76.1302(a) (notice required prior to filing a complaint alleging violation of carriage agreement rules). NCTA also cites the must-carry complaint resolution process noting that such complaints must be sent by a broadcaster to a cable operator prior to filing with the Commission. NCTA Opposition at 17 citing 47 C.F.R. �� 76.7(4)(i) and 76.61(a). 388NAD/CAN Reply
• http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/08/releases/r&odbs.pdf http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/08/releases/r&odbs.txt http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/08/releases/r&odbs.wp
  • ample opportunity to sell its offerings to these competing providers. 121.The Commission has chosen to adopt a single structural rule that temporarily limits full-CONUS spectrum aggregation, and to rely upon this limitation and our continuing authority to review transactions under Title III rather than upon conduct rules to safeguard competition by See 47 U.S.C. � 548(g). 236/ 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. 237/ See NPRM at � 65. 238/ Continental, 4 FCC Rcd at 6293 and 6302 n.6. 239/ Id. at 6302 n.10. 240/ See DIRECTV Comments at 25; EchoStar/Directsat Comments at 57; MCI Comments at 22-23; USSB 241/ Comments at 10. 48 ensuring the conditions necessary for development of three separate full-CONUS DBS services. The Commission also has the authority under
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Notices/1998/fcc98068.wp
  • 5) franchising authority certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.910(b)); 6) petition for reconsideration of certification (47 C.F.R. � 76.911); 7) petition for recertification (47 C.F.R. � 76.916); 8) petition for review of rates (47 C.F.R. � 76.933); 9) rate complaint (47 C.F.R. � 76.950); 10) commercial leased access dispute (47 C.F.R. � 76.975); 11) program access adjudicatory proceedings (47 C.F.R. � 76.1003); 12) petition for exclusivity (47 C.F.R. � 76.1002); 13) carriage agreement adjudicatory proceeding (47 C.F.R. � 76.1302). Each type of petition or complaint has particular requirements regarding the conditions that must be satisfied before a filing can be made, who must be served with the filing, and the deadline time for a response. One reason for this variation is that
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/1999/fcc99057.wp
  • the meaning of the term "multiple dwelling units."257 94. We proposed that allegations of predatory pricing be made and reviewed under principles of federal antitrust law as interpreted and applied by the federal courts.258 We requested commenters to address Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-57 259Id. at 5971-72, citing Communications Act � 632(d), 47 U.S.C. � 543(d). 260See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. 261Notice, 11 FCC Rcd at 5972. 262S. Rep. No. 92, 102d Cong., 1st Sess. 76 (1991). 263Rate Order, 8 FCC Rcd at 5898. 264Id. 265Implementation of Sections of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Rate Regulation, Buy-Through Prohibition, Third Order on Reconsideration, 9 FCC Rcd 4316, 4326 (1994) ("Third Order on Reconsideration"). 2661996 Act � 301(b)(2),
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00099.txt
  • challenge only those to which they are a party. ACA Comments at 21-22. See Appendix B, � 76.65(c). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.7(a)(4) (Complaint shall state fully and precisely all pertinent facts and considerations relied on to demonstrate the need for the relief requested.). 47 C.F.R. � 76.7(b)(2). DIRECTV Comments at 16; EchoStar Comments at 21. See 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(g) (program access); 47 C.F.R. � 76.1302(f) (program carriage); 47 C.F.R. � 76.1513(t) (open video systems). See Appendix B, � 76.65(e). DIRECTV Comments at 17-18; EchoStar Comments at 23; RCN Reply at 6. WCA supports limited mandatory discovery. WCA Comments at 16. Disney Reply at 13. Network Affiliates Reply at 35-36. Network Affiliate Reply at 36-38. 47 C.F.R. � 76.9. 47
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00202.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00202.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2000/fcc00202.txt
  • if, as a trend, vertically integrated programmers began to switch from satellite delivery to terrestrial delivery for the purpose of evading the Commission's rules, we would "consider an appropriate response to ensure continued access to programming." Id. Program Access Order, 12 FCC Rcd at 22861-62 �� 50-51; AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3180 � 37. 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003. See AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3180 � 38. See id., 14 FCC Rcd at 3180 � 39. See also AT&T-TCI Order, 14 FCC Rcd at 3160, 3179 � 35 n.117 (``AT&T-TCI acknowledge that the merged firm will be subject to the Commission's program access rules.''). See 47 C.F.R. � 76.504. This restriction applies only to the first
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Reports/fcc98335.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Reports/fcc98335.txt
  • Sports Net LLC and Fox Sports Direct (collectively "Fox"). EchoStar alleges that Fox had engaged in unlawful discrimination against EchoStar in the prices, terms and conditions that Fox imposed upon EchoStar for making available the regional sports programming that it controls. Fox filed an answer denying discrimination and requesting that the Commission dismiss the Complaint with prejudice. Pursuant to Section 76.1003(r)(1) of the Commission's rules, Echostar had one year from the date of entering into the contract with Liberty Satellite Sports, Inc./Fox Sports Direct to file a program access complaint with the Commission. The Bureau dismissed Echostar's complaint with prejudice, finding that it was barred by the one year limitations period. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-335 1Annual Assessment of the Status
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.txt http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Orders/1998/fcc98236.wp
  • 382Id. at 5. 383Id. 384Id. at 5-6. 385Id. at 6; NCTA Opposition at 17-18. 386NCTA Opposition at 17-18. See also GSN Opposition at 12. 387NCTA Opposition at 17-18. For instance, NCTA notes that disputes regarding program access require an aggrieved competitor to notify the potential defendant prior to filing with the Commission. NCTA Opposition at 17 citing 47 C.F.R. � 76.1003(a). See also 47 C.F.R. � 76.1302(a) (notice required prior to filing a complaint alleging violation of carriage agreement rules). NCTA also cites the must-carry complaint resolution process noting that such complaints must be sent by a broadcaster to a cable operator prior to filing with the Commission. NCTA Opposition at 17 citing 47 C.F.R. �� 76.7(4)(i) and 76.61(a). 388NAD/CAN Reply
• http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2010/dd100621.html
  • 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 202/418-2555 June 21, 2010 __________________________________________________________________ THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- PUBLIC NOTICES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- Report No: 47261 Released: 06/21/2010. BROADCAST ACTIONS. MB [1]DOC-298868A1.pdf [2]DOC-298868A2.txt Report No: 27261 Released: 06/21/2010. BROADCAST APPLICATIONS. MB [3]DOC-298867A1.pdf [4]DOC-298867A2.txt Released: 06/21/2010. NOTICE OF EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROGRAM ACCESS COMPLAINT RULES: 47 C.F.R. SECTIONS 76.1001(B)(2), 76.1003(C)(3), AND 76.1003(L). (DA No. 10-1099). (Dkt No 07-198 ). MB . Contact: David Konczal at (202) 418-2228, email: David.Konczal@fcc.gov or Diana Sokolow at (202) 418-0588, email: Diana.Sokolow@fcc.gov. News Media Contact: Janice Wise at (202) 418-8165, email: Janice.Wise@fcc.gov [5]DA-10-1099A1.doc [6]DA-10-1099A1.pdf [7]DA-10-1099A1.txt Released: 06/21/2010. FEE DECISIONS OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. (DA No. 10-1098). (Dkt No 86-285 ). OMD
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/76print.html
  • leased access capacity. [135]76.980 Charges for customer changes. [136]76.981 Negative option billing. [137]76.982 Continuation of rate agreements. [138]76.983 Discrimination. [139]76.984 Geographically uniform rate structure. [140]76.985 Subscriber bill itemization. [141]76.986 "A la carte" offerings. [142]76.987 New product tiers. [143]76.990 Small cable operators. Subpart O -- Competitive Access to Cable Programming [144]76.1000 Definitions. [145]76.1001 Unfair practices generally. [146]76.1002 Specific unfair practices prohibited. [147]76.1003 Program access proceedings. [148]76.1004 Applicability of program access rules to common carriers and affiliates. [149]76.100576.1010 [Reserved] Subpart P -- Competitive Availability of Navigation Devices [150]76.1200 Definitions. [151]76.1201 Rights of subscribers to use or attach navigation devices. [152]76.1202 Availability of navigation devices. [153]76.1203 Incidence of harm. [154]76.1204 Availability of equipment performing conditional access or security functions. [155]76.1205 Availability of interface information.
• http://www.fcc.gov/mb/engineering/part76.pdf
  • Negative option billing. � 76.982 Continuation of rate agreements. � 76.983 Discrimination. � 76.984 Geographically uniform rate structure. � 76.985 Subscriber bill itemization. � 76.986 "A la carte" offerings. � 76.987 New product tiers. � 76.990 Small cable operators. Subpart O-Competitive Access to Cable Programming � 76.1000 Definitions. � 76.1001 Unfair practices generally. � 76.1002 Specific unfair practices prohibited. � 76.1003 Program access proceedings. � 76.1004 Applicability of program access rules to common carriers and affiliates. �� 76.1005-76.1010 [Reserved] Subpart P-Competitive Availability of Navigation Devices � 76.1200 Definitions. � 76.1201 Rights of subscribers to use or attach navigation devices. � 76.1202 Availability of navigation devices. � 76.1203 Incidence of harm. � 76.1204 Availability of equipment performing conditional access or security functions.