2018-22356: Implementation of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 as Amended by the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992

Comment Period Closed

Public comment closed .

Get alerted when the next rule lands

New rules open for comment on their own schedule. Pick how you want to hear about them — we email you when one appears.

Publishing to members? Embed a live rule tracker on your own site — the proposed rules in your area and the comment deadlines closing on them, updating themselves. Free, one line of HTML.

Create a free account & build one →

Summary

In this document, the Commission seeks comment on two cable franchising issues raised by the remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Montgomery County, Md. et al. v. FCC. The Commission tentatively concludes that, with limited exceptions, "cable-related, in-kind contributions" required by a franchising agreement should be treated as "franchise fees" subject to the statutory five percent cap on franchise fees set forth in Communications Act. It also tentatively concludes that the mixed-use network ruling should be applied to incumbent cable operators to prohibit LFAs from using their video franchising authority to regulate the provision of most non-cable services, including telecommunications services and information services such as broadband internet access service, offered over a cable system by an incumbent cable operator. These tentative conclusions are intended to promote competition by fostering parity between incumbents and new entrants and helping to ensure that local franchising requirements do not discourage cable operators from investing in new facilities and services.

The agency’s own summary, as published.

What this changes

Amends 1 part of the Code of Federal Regulations — the standing rules this notice rewrites.

Don't miss the comment window

One Click Politics alerts you on every deadline, hearing, and rule change.

See all rules with comments due soon →