Back in December of 2007, the FCC passed a rule saying that if you're a cable operator, you can't own more than 30% of the pay TV market. According to the FCC, the rule was "designed to ensure that no single cable operator or group of operators, because of its size, can unfairly impede the flow of programming to consumers." Given Comcast sits somewhere around 27%, the operator quickly sued the FCC, noting some degree of FCC hypocrisy in capping Comcast growth, but signing off on every baby bell merger that comes their way.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit apparently agrees with Comcast, today ruling (pdf) that the FCC decision was "arbitrary and capricious," before throwing out the restriction. At the time it was made, the very AT&T-friendly FCC was doing everything in its power to make things easier for AT&T and Verizon to get into the TV business, under the premise that doing so would result in lower TV prices for consumers (the fact that this didn't actually happen and precisely why is part of another discussion).

"We are pleased the DC Circuit has vindicated our position," Comcast announced in a prepared statement e-mailed to Broadband Reports. "This important decision affirms that rules must reflect the changing realities of the dynamic video marketplace where today consumers have more choice in video providers and channels than ever before."

"We applaud the court's decision to reject an unnecessary rule that can no longer be justified in a market where consumers are enjoying robust competition that is producing a wide variety of world class services at affordable prices.," similarly crows NCTA President Kyle McSlarrow. "Today's decision is further affirmation that consumers are benefiting from a vibrant and competitive video marketplace that has undergone dramatic change and is providing more choice and better value than ever before." Consumers weren't aware they had it so good.

As you might expect, consumer advocates weren't quite so enthused. Calling the 30% cap an "important public interest protection against excessive media consolidation," Ben Scott of consumer advocacy firm Free Press dubbed the move "regrettable." "Congressional intent in the Cable Act of 1992 is very clear - the goals of federal policy in the cable industry are to promote competition, consumer choice, and a diversity of programming," says Scott, who says consumers get "perpetual price hikes" due to cable carrier and broadcast consolidation and power.

The idea of capping the amount of TV customers a cable carrier could serve first popped up in 1992, when Congress directed the FCC to impose limits. The FCC has tried to impose limits twice before on cable growth, but the efforts were always overturned in the courts. The third time, apparently, was not the charm -- and Comcast can get back to work growing even larger. Rumors have the cable giant saving pennies for another huge content acquisition like Time Warner, but they could also find smaller cable operators like Charter or Cox tasty targets.