The American Red Cross

 

Cybertelecom
Cybertelecom
Federal Internet Law & Policy
An Educational Project

Internet over Cable

Navigation Links:
- Broadband
- Sec. 706
- Dial Up
- DSL
- - Naked DSL
- - Net over Wireline (Info Service)
- - UNE
- Cable
- - Open Access
- Fiber
- Wireless
- - 3G
- - Wifi
- - WiMax
- - 700 Mhz
- Powerline
- Satellite
- Municipal Broadband
- Telecom Services
- Computer Inquiries
- Network Neutrality
- Consumer Protection
- Forbearance
- Backbones
- - ICAIS
- Layers
- Interconnection
- - Negotiation
- Reciprocal Comp
- Mergers
- Federal Advisory Committees
- FCC
- Universal Service
- Statistics: Broadband
:: Home ::
:: Feedback ::
:: Disclaimer ::
:: Sitemap ::

The same cable network that currently provides television service to consumers is being modified to provide broadband access. Because cable networks are shared by users, access speeds can decrease during peak usage hours, when bandwidth is being shared by many customers at the same time. Network sharing has also led to security concerns and fears that hackers might be able to eavesdrop on a neighbor’s Internet connection. The cable industry is developing “next generation” technology which will significantly extend downloading and uploading speeds. - Broadband Internet Regulation and Access: Background and Issues, CRS p. 5 Jan. 26, 2006 OpenCRS

The FCC has concluded that Internet over cable broadband is an unregulated "Information service."

Regulatory Proceedings

Closed

Internet Ventures Petition for access to leased access channels in order to "broadcast" Internet content

 
. . ..

Gulf Power v. FCC

 Gulf Power S.Ct. Decision, Findlaw 1/17/02
In construing the pole attachment provision of the Communications Act, 47 USC § 224, the 11th Circuit concluded that Internet access provided through a cable system contains neither a cable service nor a telecom service.

In April 2000 the 11th Cir. Court of Appeals  vacated the FCC's Pole Attachment Order.  The item at issue in this order is whether the FCC has jurisdiction over facilities (wires) attached to telephone poles.  The Court recognized that the FCC had jurisdiction over telecommunications and cable facilities, but that the Communications Act gave the FCC no clear authority attached to poles which is used for Internet access.  This again raises the issue of whether cable that is used for Internet access is considered cable, telecom, or something other (this is at issue in the open access controversy).  It also raises the question of what about the facility defines its regulatory status - is it the transport layer, the TCP/IP layer, or the communications as a whole.  Is cable considered cable regardless of use, or does the fact that TCP/IP is transmitted on top transform cable into something other - and how can that be rationally explained?  Previously different facilities fit neatly within different boxes - cable, telecom, wireless, satellite, broadcast.  But as these facilities become fungible - as different facilities supply similar or the same services - the old boxes and the different regulations that applied become more difficult to work with.  This proceeding, therefore, questions the continued viability of the enhanced versus basis service provider distinction and where Internet communications fits within communications regulatory schemes.
 

  • Supreme Court Rules FCC Can Set Pole Rates, Newsbytes 1/17/02
  • High court settles Internet dispute, MSNBC 1/17/02
  • Supreme Court Ruling May Speed Broadband Rollout, Newsfactor 1/17/02
  • Supreme Court Ruling a Boon for Cable Firms, Wash Tech 1/17/02
  • Cable industry wins Supreme Court victory over price of high-speed Internet lines, Nando 1/17/02
  • Supreme Court Slams Door on Excessive Utility Fees, Internet News 1/17/02
  • Court rules in favor of Web providers, CNET 1/17/02
    		•  .Gulf Power Co. v. FCC, 208 F.3d 1263 (11th Cir. 2000), Motion to Stay Granted (Oct 12, 2000), reh'g and suggestion for reh'g en banc denied, 226 F.3d 1220 (11th Cir. 2000), cert. granted sub nom., National Cable Television Ass'n v. Gulf Power Co., 121 S.Ct. 879 (2001) (vacating FCC's Pole Attachment Rules) 

    Oct 2, 2001 Oral Argument S.Ct.

    Petition for Cert has been granted by the Supreme Court.  See Court Order List Page 4 

    Other Pole Attachment Case Law

    Southern Co. v. FCC, 293 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2002)

    Alabama Power Co. v. FCC, 311 F.3d 1357 (11th Cir. 2002)

    Southern Co. Services, Inc. v. FCC, 313 F.3d 574 (D.C. Cir. 2002)

     

     

    Law

    • 1968: Southwestern Cable - Supreme Court upholds FCC rules that prevent unfair competition by cable with broadcast TV
    • 1972 FCC Cable Television Report and Order
    • 1976 Copyright Act
    • Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 (adding Title VI to Communications Act of 1934)
      • Rate deregulation, guidance for local franchise regulation, leased access provisions
    • Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992
      • Regulation of rates and services. Must carry, retransmission regulations
      • Public Educational Government (PEG) channels may be required by franchise authorities
    • Telecommunications Act of 1996
      • Relaxed 1992 Act rate regulation
      • Cablecos can enter telecom
      • Closed captioning

    DOCSIS

    "Cable Labs DOCSIS (Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification) provides the basis for the development of standardized equipment that enables the offering of new or improved services over the cable network. DOCSIS 1.0 defined standardized ways of communicating high-speed Internet traffic over the channels of the cable network. DOCSIS 1.1 offered the ability to define various tiers of service or levels of quality that could be offered to different kinds of customers. DOCSIS 2.0 specification should enable increased “upstream” throughput, making possible symmetric data services." - Vermont Telecommunications Plan, Sept 2004 P. 1-19
    Cable Standard Upstream Capacity Equipment Status
    DOCSIS 1.0 5MBits/sec per 6MHz channel Currently Available
    DOCSIS 1.1 10Mbits/sec per 6 MHz channel Expected by December 2001
    DOCSIS 2.0 30 MBits / sec per 6MHz channel Expected by 2003

    Source:  Network Magazine, p. 16 November 2001; various

    Timeline

    • 1996 January Multimedia Cable Network System (MCNS) Partners Ltd formed to set cable modem system specifications
    • 1997 March MCNS released draft DOCSIS 1.0
    • 1998 Cablelabs begins certification program for DOCSIS equipment
    • 1998 March ITU accepts DOCSIS statandard as ITU J.112
    • 1999 April DOCSIS 1.1 issued by Cablelabs
    • 2001 Dec DOCSIS 2.0 issued by Cablelabs

    Press Releases and Statements

    Open Access Trials

    Links

    State & Foreign Activities

    California :: Colorado :: Florida :: Maryland :: Massachusetts :: Oregon (with the early AT&T v Portland):: Pennsylvania :: Texas :: Virginia :: Washington :: Canada

    Papers

    Books

    News & Blogs

    see also Broadband News | Industry News
    Web services provided by Wyoming.com
    : Home : About Us : Contact Us : Sitemap : Discussion : Search : Newsletter : RSS :
    : ADA : Broadband : Crime : Copyright : DNS : ECommerce : EGovt : First Amendment :
    : Intl : Privacy : Security : SPAM : Statistics : VoIP : Vote :
    :: Feedback : Disclaimer ::
    © Cybertelecom ::