SCN: Fw: Urban Politics #132 - CABLE LEGISLATION

[emailer1]

Useful reading.

----- Original Message -----
From: <NickELT at aol.com>
To: <urbanpolitics at lists.speakeasy.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 4:34 PM
Subject: Urban Politics #132 - CABLE LEGISLATION
> CABLE LEGISLATION
>
> Urban Politics #132 with Nick Licata, 5/5/02
> With assistance from my Legislative Assistant Newell Aldrich
>
> Urban Politics (UP) blends my insights and information on current public
> policy developments and personal experiences with the intent of helping
> citizens shape Seattle's future.
>
> Instructions on subscribing or unsubscribing to the Urban Politics mailing
> list are at the bottom of the UP.
>
> SEATTLE CABLE CUSTOMER BILL OF RIGHTS
> FEDERAL RULING ON CABLE MODEMS
> ***
> COUNCILMEMBER  & MAYOR E MAILS
> SUBSCRIPTION INSTRUCTIONS
>
>
> SEATTLE CABLE CUSTOMER BILL OF RIGHTS
>
> Last month at the Full Council's Monday, April 22, 2002 meeting I voted to
> approve Ordinance 114137 (sponsored by Councilmember Jim Compton),
> legislation that strengthens our city's Cable Customer Bill of Rights by
> revising sections of Seattle Municipal Code 21.60.  The ordinance passed
8-0,
> with Councilmember Pageler excused.  This legislation is significant
because
> it specifically defines, for the first time anywhere in the nation, how a
> municipality can implement existing Federal laws regulating cable
services.
> I see four important aspects to this legislation.
>
> First, it requires that cable companies notify cable customers at least 30
> days before each separate instance the companies intend to share personal
> customer information with third parties.  Federal Law simply states that
> cable providers must "give notice" to customers when sharing their
> information with third parties.
>
> Second, this ordinance requires that a specific form, a post card, include
> specific and plain language that discloses how cable companies share
personal
> information and to inform cable customers that they may "opt out" of such
> sharing.  Federal Law simply states that cable providers must allow
> subscribers to "opt out" to prevent providers from sharing their personal
> information with third parties.  Often, I have heard complaints that cable
> company notices lack clarity, are confusing, and do not provide clear
> direction on how to remove oneself from personal information sharing.
>
> Third, if a cable company shares a customer's personal information after
the
> customer failed to opt out of such information sharing, the cable company
> must notify the customer within 45 days of having shared their personal
> information that the customer has another opportunity to opt out of future
> information sharing.  When a customer opts out, it is permanent.  No
further
> opt out notices need to be sent by the cable company or acknowledged by
the
> customer.  The cable company may, however, ask the customer to consider
> opting back in at a latter date.
>
> And last, this legislation looks to the future by defining interactive
> television as one of the "other services" covered within the ordinance.
The
> City anticipates that cable set-top box software and other interactive
> technology will one day be able to collect personal information on
customers.
>  So, the City extended to that technology consumer safeguards on personal
> information sharing, as well.
>
> As a result of the Council having successfully passed this legislation,
> several cities are now looking to Seattle as a model they can use when
> shaping their own legislation on cable customer rights.  I commend
> Councilmember Jim Compton and his staff for their leadership on this
> groundbreaking legislation.
>
>
> FEDERAL RULING ON CABLE MODEMS
>
> In a Declaratory Ruling announced on March 14, 2002, the FCC concluded
that
> cable modem service is properly classified as an "interstate information
> service" rather than a "cable service" as defined by the Communications
Act
> and is therefore not subject to local regulation.  The FCC also said that
> cable modem service does not contain a separate "telecommunications
service"
> offering and therefore is not subject to common carrier regulation. In
other
> words, cable companies cannot be forced by local government to share their
> lines with other internet access providers.
>
> If you are a cable modem subscriber, you might have already felt the
impact
> of this ruling:  your monthly bill has shrunk by a couple bucks.  That's
> because, as of April 1st, cable providers have removed municipal franchise
> fee taxes from their customers' cable modem bills.  Presently, the city
> levies a 10% utility tax on cable services.  Cable companies have not yet
> asked the City to remove cable modem revenue from that tax base.  The city
> puts into reserve 4% of that tax in anticipation of cable companies
> eventually requesting to be taxed at the lower telecommunications services
> rate of 6%.  But, although cable modems are considered a utility, there is
> not yet a taxing category for "interstate information services," which the
> FCC has declared cable modems to be.
>
> While taxpayers obviously benefit from these lower cable bills, the City
is
> losing revenue.  Although specific figures are not yet available, the
budget
> office anticipates that the hit on Seattle's coffers could amount to about
> three hundred thousand dollars for the rest of this year.
>
> In response to the FCC's March 14th cable modem ruling, two interest
groups
> have acted.  The Washington State Association of Telecommunications
Officers
> is in the process of submitting comments to the FCC challenging their
> determination that cable modem service is not a cable service.  And the
> National League of Cities, U. S. Conference of Mayors, National
Association
> of Counties, and National Association of Telecommunications Officers
> announced jointly on April 24th that they have formed the Alliance of
Local
> Organizations Against Preemption.  ALOAP was formed in direct response to
the
> FCC ruling and has appealed it to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
> That's the same court that unanimously decided in 2000 that the regulation
of
> cable modems is properly the jurisdiction of federal, not local
government.
>
> Look for updates on this fast-changing issue in future Urban Politics.
>
>
>     COUNCIL MEMBER & MAYOR E-MAILS
>
> Heidi.Wills at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Richard.McIver at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Jan.Drago at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Judy.Nicastro at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Margaret.Pageler at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Jim.Compton at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Peter.Steinbrueck at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Richard.Conlin at ci.seattle.wa.us
> Nick.Licata at ci.seattle.wa.us
>
> Mayors.office at ci.seattle.wa.us
>
> SUBSCRIPTION INSTRUCTIONS ----
>
> --Send all messages to Majordomo at lists.speakeasy.org
> --Type these requests in the body of the message.
> --To Unsubscribe: type unsubscribe urbanpolitics
> --To Subscribe: type subscribe urbanpolitics
> --To Change email addresses use the two lines above in the same
> message but on separate lines.
>
>
>
>

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *