FCC Chairman Says His Agency Won't Review AT&T's Time Warner Purchase (engadget.com)

Today, FCC commissioner Ajit Pai confirmed that his agency would not review AT&T's Time Warner purchase, clearing the way for the Justice Department to likely approve the deal. Engadget reports: Last month, AT&T revealed how it might structure its deal to acquire Time Warner without having to go through FCC review. The communications giant noted that it "anticipated that Time Warner will not need to transfer any of its FCC licenses ... after the closing of the transaction." That means that the FCC wouldn't need to review the transaction. "That is the regulatory hook for FCC review," Pai said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. "My understanding is that the deal won't be presented to the commission." The WSJ notes that this would leave the Justice Department as the only governmental agency reviewing the potential deal. Time Warner has said that it has "dozens" of FCC licenses, but the company believes those won't need to be transferred to AT&T as part of the merger, thus keeping the FCC out of the deal. The report notes that the deal still might not go through even if the FCC won't review the transaction. There's a lot of opposition to it from consumer advocacy groups, and President Donald Trump has said he opposes the deal.

Comments

Really

[Anonymous Coward]

Back to the days of monopolies and kings queens and peasants. ISPs are utilities and should be regulated as such

Re:Really

[AK Marc]

ISPs are generally monopolies. Everywhere I've lived in the US, there has been only one company owning copper to an address, and only one company who could legally provide coax to an address. Yes, 10 miles apart, it may be a different company, but at a single address, there was never competition for the copper line, and never competition for the coax line.

Where do you live where you can get cable Internet at a single address from multiple companies? Where do you live where you can get a copper line owned by two different companies (and no, I'm not talking CLECs where 10,000 companies can buy the copper line, or DSL service from AT&T, but where you can get two copper lines owned by two separate companies)?

Nowhere in the US I've ever seen. Zero competition (often enforced by law) is a monopoly. Even if it's a micro monopoly by zip code, or a duopoly if you consider copper and coax to be the same thing. Though, there is a spread of fiber, and the last address I looked at in rural NYS had the option of fiber from 3 companies (some at $1000+ a month, but available at the address none the less). But most of the US doesn't have those options.

There, fixed it for you

[Anonymous Coward]

FCC Chairman Says His Agency Won't Review Anything That Might Benefit Consumers (or inconvenience the wealthy).

Re:...what

[ATMAvatar]

Approving mergers generally falls under the purview of the FTC (see merger review).

The only reason the FCC came up is due to the fact that the two companies may have had to transfer FCC licenses as part of the deal. Since it appears no transferal is taking place, the FCC is not involved.

Re:Surprise! Not.

[Megane]

This isn't a "cable/telco" merger because TWC hasn't been part of TW since 2009 and is not involved.

Take a look at a cable franchise map

[raymorris]

Have a look at a franchise map and get back to us on that. The New York map is entertaining because there are so many places where one company is permitted to operate on one side of the street, amd another company on the other side of the street. Yes there are several companies in New York, each granted legally enforced monopolies in specific neighborhoods.

This is about the time someone pipes up and says "cities aren't allowed to grant monopolies anymore." Read that law and see what it actually says, or if you're in hurry just go to the New York City web site and look at the map of monopolies enforced by the city. To summarize the law in one sentence:
Cities may not grant brand new legally enforced monopolies - unless they hold a hearing first.