The Letter: From Bad to Worse
Posted: 07/2002
From Bad to Worse
AS COMPETITIVE PROVIDERS APPLAUDED the U.S. Supreme Court’s order upholding
TELRIC pricing and claimed a small victory in the policy war being waged over
control of the competitive telecommunications market, another ruling has quieted
their celebration (see our cover
story).
On May 24, a Washington Appeals
Court decision overturned and remanded for reconsideration the FCC’s rules for
determining what ILEC network elements must be offered on an unbundled basis.
This by itself is not a huge deal since the FCC already is reviewing these in
its high-profile Triennial Review of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
What is troublesome, however, is the
court also vacated the commission’s rules requiring ILECs to share voice lines
for CLEC delivery of DSL services.
Verizon Communications Inc. and SBC
Communications Inc. already have jumped on this ruling, citing it in efforts to
preclude line sharing, according to competitive telecom associations, CompTel
and ALTS. The two groups have asked the FCC to preserve the status quo until it
completes its review.
At stake is the disconnection of
tens of thousands of customers that receive broadband service over line-sharing
UNEs, the groups report.
It is no surprise the Bells would
glom on to such an interpretation of the ruling. It essentially gets them
exactly what they have been lobbying for via legislative channels — freedom
from sharing their network assets with broadband competitors.
What’s worse, if there can be such,
is analysts’ predictions that the ultimate outcome of the FCC’s review will
follow similar lines.
Reading the writing on the wall,
ASCENT has proposed an interesting strategy for competitive players, which it
outlines on page 10. "Perhaps now is the time for the industry to pay more
attention to learning how to compete effectively in the rapidly evolving
post-271 landscape and forge partnerships with the RBOCs," writes Walter
Blackwell, ASCENT’s new president.
"Perhaps now is the time that
we consider alternatives to regulatory debates and proceedings in order to chart
our competitive destiny. Even the fiercest competitors can find common ground
when they believe their own individual interests can be served. Is there common
ground, tilled and harvested between the behemoth monopolists and the agile new
entrant?"
ASCENT’s answer is yes. I hope it is
right.
Khali Henderson
khenderson@vpico.com.
Editor in Chief
