Comcast & AT&T issue statements opposing reclassification

by: William Neilson JrMay 13, 2014

netneutrality-contentblocked VentureBreak

The FCC has been under an extreme amount of pressure in the last few days due to their net neutrality proposal, which would result in the opposite of net neutrality. The FCC plans to vote on May 15 on a new draft of open Internet rules that would use existing Sec. 706 authority to justify the rules rather than go the Title II route, though input will be given on whether the FCC should impose Title II regs.

Now, Comcast and AT&T are telling the FCC that attempting to reclassify their companies as common carrier services would deter billions in investment needed for broadband deployment and would subject the industry and the FCC alike to years of litigation.

Translation: Give us what we want or else we will intentionally scale back our services so that our investors can continue raking in billions while we win more “Worst Company Of The Year” awards.

2014wciabracketqfinal Consumerist

AT&T and Comcast are reacting to the growing pressure from tech companies and the general public to reclassify broadband services under Title II of the Telecommunications Act. Of course, almost nothing that Comcast and AT&T describe is actually true.

For example, AT&T states several times that if the FCC reclassifies broadband providers, it will have to reclassify all sorts of available services by AT&T, including various internet companies such as search and email providers….except as TechDirt & Ars Technica point out, this is not even remotely close to the truth.

Over the past decade, the FCC has issued a number of decisions that define broadband as information services. Therefore, the FCC was able to specifically identify broadband without impacting other services. So, why can’t we do it here?

As Free Press’s Matt Wood told Brodkin: “Nothing in Title II says that every last provision has to apply to any Title II service.” – TechDirt

AT&T and Comcast both completely mischaracterize what the federal appeals court said when they struck down the FCC’s net neutrality rules. The court did not dispute the FCC’s authority to impose common carrier obligations if it were to reclassify broadband, and the court said that anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules are common carrier obligations.

Oh, and apparently AT&T wants us to care that Wall Street may not like this deal from an investor standpoint. With revenues of around $130 billion in 2013, it is understandable that they would want to make sure that every last dime was kept in their investor’s pockets rather than spent on consumer services.

In fact, most of what is found in AT&T’s statement was already dealt with by the FCC back in 2010. Mike Masnick also makes a great point about the dates of the quotes found in AT&T’s statement:

“Even more hilarious is that nearly all of the Wall Street analyst quotes that AT&T tosses out are from five years ago, and many are insisting that there’s no need for reclassification because of all that “competition” in the broadband space. But now we know that was bunk then, and it’s even more bunk today.”


  • Nathan Borup

    These companies really just need to be kicked in the balls…

  • shlk7

    How do these people live with themselves day to day?

  • Bradley Uffner

    If the ISPs hate it, it must be good.

    • kieraeastedi321

      my co-worker’s sister makes $76 hourly on the internet
      . She has been without a job for 6 months but last month her payment was $20399
      just working on the internet for a few hours. original site

  • I am still a bit floored at the number of statements issued by AT&T from shareholders/investors. I understand that they need a bottom-line and therefore Wall Street funds them in a way…..but to use them as some sort of reason to do the deal….is so absurd.

  • Andrew

    “that they would want to make sure that every last dime was kept in their investor’s pockets rather than spent on consumer services.”

    That pretty much sums it up. If they were truly competitive, they would be investing to keep pace in quality of service, versus trying to make everyone else pay for it.
    And by everyone else, I mean the American people who we seem to be footing the bill for too much of their crap lately.