Ninth Circuit Decision is Big Victory for FTC and FCC
Posted by Andrew Regitsky
Mar 2, 2018 10:09:02 AM
In a February 26, 2018 Opinion, the full Ninth Circuit Court in San Francisco gave the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) a huge victory when it found that a company is regulated as if it were a common carrier based on a specific "activity" rather than by "status." In other words, a non-common carrier cannot become a common carrier and escape FTC regulation for its non-common carrier services simply by providing a single common carrier service. Instead, as per usual, its common carrier services would be regulated by the FCC, but its non-common carrier services would fall under FTC authority.
The significance of this is clear. The non-common carrier services such as broadband Internet access service provided by ISPs like AT&T and Verizon will be regulated under section 5 of the FTC rules, as the FCC envisioned in its recently released Restoring Internet Freedom Order.
Here is the background for this important Opinion.
Topics: CLECs, FCC, ILECs, switched access, service providers, bill-and-keep, wireless, inter-carrier compensation, terminating traffic, direct connections, wireless carriers, small providers, Inteliquent, wholesale traffic, AT&T, clec, terminating access charges, IXC
Industry comments are due on March 14, 2018, involving one of the weirdest filings to come before the FCC in a long time. In a Petition for Expedited Declaratory Ruling (Petition) filed by South Dakota Networks (SDN) on February 7, 2018 in Docket 18-41, SDN requests the Commission to issue a declaratory ruling asserting that in a dispute between it and Northern Valley Communications, Inc. (NVC) involving interstate switched access traffic:
A contract between SDN and AT&T, negotiated to terminate large volumes of traffic originally bound to a CLEC (NVC) engaged in access stimulation is lawful; and,CLECs, such as NVC, enjoy no exclusive right to transport terminating traffic to their end offices (or elsewhere). Moreover, the filing of a federal tariff by a CLEC, does not confer a right to compel other carriers to use the tariffed services.
Topics: CLECs, FCC, ILECs, switched access, service providers, bill-and-keep, wireless, inter-carrier compensation, terminating switched access, terminating traffic, direct connections, wireless carriers, small providers, Inteliquent, wholesale traffic, AT&T, clec, terminating access charges, IXC, federal tariff
Even with inter-carrier compensation reform, some bad actors continue to abuse the remaining price differences in switched access charges to enrich themselves. These arbitrage opportunities exist because rural ILECs were not required to reduce terminating tandem-switched transport to bill-and-keep maintaining their access revenues and originating switched access charges were never reformed at all by the FCC.
On the terminating side, some LECs continue to contract out with enterprises that generate large numbers of terminating calls and split the excess access revenues. Next week, we will discuss this issue of access stimulation (or traffic pumping) and review a current case where the FCC will determine whether IXCs must utilize the tariffs of LECs engaged in such a practice.
Topics: CLECs, FCC, ILECs, service providers, bill-and-keep, wireless, inter-carrier compensation, terminating traffic, direct connections, wireless carriers, small providers, Inteliquent, wholesale traffic, AT&T, 8yy, clec, terminating access charges, 8yy query charges
O1 Communications Takes Aim at T-Mobile Over Direct Connections Refusal
Posted by Andrew Regitsky
Jan 26, 2018 10:00:00 AM
A couple of weeks ago, we became aware of a brewing industry dispute between a diverse group of small service providers and the major national wireless carriers. The small carriers claim that wireless companies are refusing to directly connect with them to terminate traffic or at least certain types of terminating traffic such as wholesale. Instead, wireless carriers are forcing this traffic to be routed through an intermediate carrier partner or affiliate, and as a result, the originating providers can no longer can terminate traffic to these wireless carriers on a bill-and-keep basis.
The small carriers believe that by forcing carriers to send terminating traffic through the wireless company’s intermediate carrier partner they are engaging in an arbitrage scheme. These intermediate carriers assess terminating minute of use access charges and share these revenues, either directly or indirectly, with their wireless partner.
Topics: service providers, bill-and-keep, wireless, terminating traffic, T-mobile, direct connections, wireless carriers, small providers, Inteliquent, wholesale traffic, O1 Communications
Subscribe to our Blog
Recent Posts
Posts by Topic
- FCC (257)
- regulatory updates (248)
- CLECs (99)
- carrier access rates (87)
- LECs (72)
- Net Neutrality (62)
- intercarrier compensation (62)
- Telco Access Alert (61)
- ILECs (59)
- TelView (50)
- rate and tariff data (49)
- special access (43)
- IP Network (31)
- Open Internet (29)
- Tariff Transmittal Alert (27)
- Broadband (26)
- Business Data Services (16)
- ISPs (16)
- switched access (12)
- TDM (10)
- Universal Service Fund (10)
- CCMI (9)
- Intrastate Access Filing 2013 (9)
- Intrastate Access Filings 2014 (8)
- internet freedom (8)
- Ethernet (7)
- internet regulation (7)
- IP Transformation (6)
- Interconnection Agreements (6)
- bill-and-keep (6)
- federal trade commission (6)
- webinar (6)
- VoIP (5)
- clec (5)
- privacy (5)
- terminating traffic (5)
- wireless (5)
- BYOD (4)
- CABSdb Pro (4)
- Inteliquent (4)
- Intrastate Access Filings 2015 (4)
- ajit pai (4)
- commissions order (4)
- congress (4)
- direct connections (4)
- inter-carrier compensation (4)
- internet freedom order (4)
- open internet order (4)
- service providers (4)
- small providers (4)
- telecom rate research tools (4)
- trump (4)
- wholesale traffic (4)
- wireless carriers (4)
- AT&T (3)
- CRA (3)
- Enterprise Market (3)
- Enterprise Users (3)
- Mobility (3)
- Technology Transition (3)
- Telecom Expense Management (3)
- USOCs (3)
- access charges (3)
- ftc (3)
- net neutrality order (3)
- terminating access charges (3)
- terminating switched access (3)
- CPM (2)
- ICAs (2)
- IXC (2)
- LATA (2)
- Negotiate Enterprise Communications Deals (2)
- Network Services Procurement (2)
- Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2)
- T-mobile (2)
- VoIP tariffs (2)
- congressional review (2)
- internet traffic (2)
- open internet preservation act (2)
- supreme court (2)
- telecom (2)
- 8yy (1)
- 8yy query charges (1)
- Ben Fox (1)
- Cloud (1)
- Connect American Fund (1)
- Intrastate Access Filings 2016 (1)
- MOU charges (1)
- NNP (1)
- Net Express (1)
- NetExpress (1)
- NetPricer (1)
- O1 Communications (1)
- Press & News (1)
- RFP (1)
- RFP documents (1)
- RFPs (1)
- SB-460 (1)
- SEA-US (1)
- TC2 (1)
- Telecom Summit (1)
- Title II (1)
- USF (1)
- United States (1)
- arbitrage schemes (1)
- broadband deployment (1)
- broadband deployment advisory committee (1)
- broadband report (1)
- california (1)
- california senate (1)
- call completion (1)
- call termination (1)
- call terminations (1)
- competitive sourcing (1)
- federal tariff (1)
- hawaii (1)
- hawaii telcom (1)
- hawaiian telcom (1)
- independent carriers (1)
- infrastructure deals (1)
- international roaming (1)
- litigation (1)
- nationwide number portability (1)
- network services (1)
- networking deals (1)
- rate of return (1)
- stakeholder management (1)
- telecom mergers (1)
- telecommunications act (1)
- toll free numbers (1)
- vendor proposals (1)
- wireless broadband (1)
Comment