roundtable: Common Carriage on Video Dialtone

roundtable: Common Carriage on Video Dialtone

Common Carriage on Video Dialtone

James Love (love@essential.org)
Mon, 21 Feb 1994 22:27:55 -0500 (EST) 

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 1994 22:27:55 -0500 (EST)
From: James Love <love@essential.org>
Subject: Common Carriage on Video Dialtone
To: roundtable@cni.org
Message-Id: <Pine.3.85.9402212255.A4561-0100000@essential>


re:       Telephone Industry Preferred langague on common
          carriage in video dialtone (HR 3636 - aka the
          Markey Fields bill).

from:     jamie love,TAP  <love@essential.org>

The telephone companies (USTA) have asked the republican members
of the Markey subcommittee to adopt the following language on the
issue of access to the so called "Video Platform," of HR 3636. 
The amendment would eliminate the so called 75/25 provision of HR
3636, which requires the telephone companies to provide non-
affiliated companies with access to 75 percent of the capacity of
Video Platform (video dialtone) services, on non-discriminatory
terms.  The USTA/republican proposal seems to 

We are interested in any comments people have in this language. 
If the USTA and the republicans previal in mark-up, any access to
the video networks will controlled under these provisions. 
Pointers to alternative language or literature on this topic
would also be greately appreciated.

    jamie

               ---------------------------------------------
                              USTA Amendment


             AMENDMENTS TO CABLE SERVICE PROVISIONS OF HR 3636


                       Amendment 1 - Video Platform
                         (dated January 31, 1994)

Page 32 Line 25 strike all after the work "establish" through
Page 33 Line 8 and insert the following:

     (1) be required to give notice to the Commission that it
     intends to establish channel capacity for the provision of
     video programming if there is adequate customer demand for
     such capacity;

     (2) specify in the notice to the Commission that entities
     including its video programming affiliate seeking such
     channel capacity should submit to such carrier their channel
     capacity requirements along with contractual commitments
     relating to such capacity.

     (3) if there is sufficient customer demand as evidenced by
     contractual commitments, establish channel capacity meeting
     the initial requirements identified in paragraph (2) if such
     identified requirements are sufficient to provide such
     capacity on an economically reasonable basis;

     (4)  provide channel capacity to meet subsequent
     requirements of customers, including its video programming
     affiliate, upon reasonable request and pursuant to contract.

(b)  COMMISSION REGULATIONS - The Commission shall establish
within one year of the date of the enactment of this section
regulations that --

     (1) prohibit a carrier from discriminating in favor of its
     video programming affiliates with regard to access to video
     channel capacity, and the rates, terms and conditions for
     such capacity;

     (2) define what will constitute a reasonable request as
     described in Subsection (a);

     (3) establish what will constitute sufficient demand as
     described in Subsection (a).

(c) EXISTING REGULATION - the provision of this section shall
supercede anyregulations in effective on date of enactment.
     
page 33 Line 9 delete (b) and insert (d).

Page 28 Line 23 through Page 29 Line 3 delete in their entirety.

Page 39 Line 4 delete (4) and insert (3)

Page 33 Line 16 through Page 34 Line 15 delete in their entirety.

..... renumber several sections......


----------------------------------------------------------------------
James Love, Taxpayer Assets Project; internet:  love@essential.org
P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036; v. 202/387-8030; f. 202/234-5176
12 Church Road, Ardmore, PA 19003; v. 215/658-0880; f. 215/649-4066
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[CNI Home Page]