Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
11 <br />searches to find similar content and e-commerce retail outlets offered by <br />independent providers, <br />The Internet, a two way communication pathway, came of age over the common <br />carrier telephone system. Recently, it has made the transition to the cable <br />television broadband platform. To grow it must retained its common carrier <br />heritage, hence Open Access is a necessary component and this aspect of the <br />medium should be safeguazded by local government. <br />2. Should Open Access be extended to the cable program environment? If not, then <br />cable television subscribers may never see programs provided by unaffiliated <br />companies, such as Fox News Network, a cable television program service that <br />competes against Company owned Cable News Network or Disney on the Basic <br />Service Tier which competes with Company owned Cartoon Network. In the <br />past, the US Supreme Court has ruled that the cable company is a First <br />Amendment speaker and as such it can make content related decisions. Whether <br />cable systems have matured to achieved common carrier status can only be <br />addressed by the US Congress. Transforming cable companies to common <br />carriers is complicated by the fact that the US Supreme Court ruled in FCC v. <br />Midwest Communications, 1979 that cable operators are not subject to common <br />carrier rules. <br />Expansion of the Open Access argument to include unafbliated program <br />providers, independent content producers, becomes moot in communities served <br />by multiple cable television franchisees who compete head-to-head for customers <br />by offering content and program services at prices people are willing to pay. One <br />or the other company~will be motivated to offer vast arrays afprogram services to <br />retain customers. <br />3. Whether local government should take up the gauntlet and become involved in <br />over azching anti-competitive monopolistic concerns, such as the City of <br />Portland's stance on Open Access, currently before the 9~' Circuit Court of <br />Appeals, is a legitirrtate public policy question. As Portland learned, doing sa <br />may result in prolonged and substantial legal defense expenditures. <br />The U.S. Constitution's First and Fifth Amendments may become the focal point <br />ofa Constitutional argument regarding Open Access as applied to cable <br />pro~~g• <br />Although Disney/ABC is not demanding free access to the cable platform, Disney <br />seeks nondiscriminatory access, a position on the cable system platform and <br />receiving the same program fees as Time Warner pays its affiliated program <br />providers. On the other hand, Time Warner is a First Amendment speaker; as such <br />-ry_ <br />