dslreports logo
 story category
LUS Files Complaint With FCC Over Cox Blackballing
Insists they're being kept out of National Cable Television Cooperative

As we've long covered, locals in Lafayette have a long history of fighting both Cox and BellSouth (now AT&T) in order to build a voter-approved local fiber network. After a long series of often sleazy PR and legal attacks on the project by area incumbents, LUS service went live last year, offering symmetrical service up to 50 Mbps, VoIP and TV at some unheard of prices (at least in the U.S.). The result? Local incumbents have sped up service and lowered prices due to a strange phenomenon known as "competition."

However, LUS says they're still running into obstacles erected by local cable operator Cox Communications. In a complaint this week (pdf), LUS officials say they've been blocked from joining the National Cable Television Cooperative. The cooperative, open to all TV operators (including municipal) was created to give smaller cable providers a combined voice and greater negotiation power when buying national programming. But according to LUS, they've been banned from joining the group. What's more -- they blame Cox for doing it and have filed a complaint with the FCC:

quote:
The filing is a result of several refusals by NCTC to grant a membership to LUS Fiber, including NCTC’s recent refusal to admit LUS Fiber on the same terms and conditions that it offered to two other municipally-owned providers. It is notable that a significant difference between LUS Fiber and these other municipally-owned providers is that LUS Fiber’s major competitor, Cox Communications, is NCTC’s largest member as well as a member of the NCTC board of directors. Beyond this difference, LUS Fiber contends, its application for membership was no different from that of the other municipal providers.
We've dropped a line with Cox to see if they have a comment on LUS's allegations of skulduggery.

Update: Cox offered this response to LUS's allegations:
quote:
Cox has nothing to do with NCTC's membership decisions, which are entirely in the control of NCTC management. Cox has always embraced competition in Lafayette, and we will be vigorously defending ourselves against this meritless lawsuit.
view:
topics flat nest 

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Pointless

The NCTC is a private organization. It has every right to restrict or admit membership as it chooses.

Kinda funny I think... the same governments that can and do force taxpayers to subsidize cable TV or Internet service get pissy when a private organization chooses to push back.
Stumbles
join:2002-12-17
Port Saint Lucie, FL

Stumbles

Member

Re: Pointless

Well if the article is correct in stating; The cooperative, open to all TV operators (including municipal)...". Then it would be interesting to know why a municipal cannot join. Of course I would never suggest the incumbents within that organization would deny membership simply because a municipality had the gall to force other local ISPs into that unspeakable position of actually competing. The hubris of it all.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Re: Pointless

said by Stumbles:

Then it would be interesting to know why a municipal cannot join.
We already know why they can't join.

Because the NCTC says so.

It is not a government agency, it owes no one no explanation for its decisions.
Stumbles
join:2002-12-17
Port Saint Lucie, FL

1 edit

Stumbles

Member

Re: Pointless

They may not owe an explanation but their decision speaks very clearly.
JohnSJ
join:2004-08-14
Lafayette, LA

JohnSJ to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
The hell we can't ask for an explanation from a "private" chartered cooperative that exists in its current powerful form only because of federal law and arm twisting.

I can also ask the same from a "private" oil company that has been accepting subsidies from my governments.

I can and I do.

This kind of "I don't know-nothing and don't think I even ought to know anything" comment is a blatant attempt to defend these jerks from real consequences. There is no such thing as principled ignorance.

Louisiana has lots of reasons to ask questions of major corporations and their handmaidens.

And we are asking them.
phiber_fed
join:2010-06-10
Lafayette, LA

phiber_fed to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
said by pnh102:

Kinda funny I think... the same governments that can and do force taxpayers to subsidize cable TV or Internet service get pissy when a private organization chooses to push back.
Force taxpayers? The taxpayers are the ones that forced our publically owned utility to deploy fiber! Just like they did when LUS deployed electricity to our community in the late 1800s.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: Pointless

i'm sure that everyone did NOT want the Fiber. And forced? HA! You can't force them to do anything just because of a vote. Someone had to come up with the idea to start off with.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to pnh102

MVM

to pnh102
said by pnh102:

The NCTC is a private organization. It has every right to restrict or admit membership as it chooses.
If the organization is truly "open to all, including muni", then they really can't choose to block an applicant. If they can choose who will belong, they should not claim to be "open to all". False/misleading claim.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: Pointless

it is open to ALL to apply. doesn't say anything about all being accepted.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS

MVM

Re: Pointless

said by hottboiinnc4:

it is open to ALL to apply. doesn't say anything about all being accepted.
What is the point? If you can turn down an applicant, it isn't "open to all".
Dampier
Phillip M Dampier
join:2003-03-23
Rochester, NY

Dampier to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
It is a violation of federal law for the NCTC to deny access to LUS Fiber. Since it's a cable industry collective, with some of its board members cable executives who have part ownership interests in some cable programming networks, the 1992 Cable Act specifically forbids discriminatory pricing and access to cable programming, which is exactly what NCTC is doing --

Section 628(b)

It shall be unlawful for a cable operator, a satellite cable programming vendor in which a cable operator has an attributable interest, or a satellite broadcast programming vendor to engage in unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts or practices, the purpose or effect of which is to hinder significantly or to prevent any multichannel video programming distributor from providing satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming to subscribers or consumers.

I know this very well since I was integrally involved in the battle to pass the 1992 Cable Act, the only bill to survive a veto by George H.W. Bush.

We actually negotiated FOR the NCTC in Section 628(c)(2)(B) of the bill. Of course, back then the NCTC wasn't dominated by big corporate cable like Cox and Charter. It was a co-op for wireless cable operators, community-owned co-ops, utility cable co-ops and independent cable systems.

That section was also designed to protect home satellite dish viewing rights.

These days, Cox and Charter dominate the membership of the NCTC and the group has gotten increasingly cagey about admitting cable industry competitors. That's why there is a justified FCC complaint. Expect the NCTC to eventually cave, because their admissions process is not defensible under federal law.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

holly SH**!

$45/month for symmetrical 30 mbps!

even better.. $58/month for symmetrical 50 mbps.

video is related...

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· fHLUlZf4

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536

Premium Member

Re: holly SH**!

said by ArrayList:

$45/month for symmetrical 30 mbps!

even better.. $58/month for symmetrical 50 mbps.

video is related.
Shows you just how bad the phone and cable companies are RIPPING US OFF.

kpfx
join:2005-10-28
San Antonio, TX

kpfx

Member

True

Why exactly does Lafayette need to join the NCTC? Its basically a private organization supporting cable operators. There aren't any telco's banging on the door to get in.....

I'm just curious as to what they think they'll gain by joining an organization designed to assist traditional cable operators. And as far as the "municipality owned" clause in there.... that was targeted for small city-owned operations that existed to serve communities that had no other operations in their franchise areas... not the cable equivalent of a CLEC.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: True

said by kpfx:

Why exactly does Lafayette need to join the NCTC? Its basically a private organization supporting cable operators. There aren't any telco's banging on the door to get in.....

I'm just curious as to what they think they'll gain by joining an organization designed to assist traditional cable operators. And as far as the "municipality owned" clause in there.... that was targeted for small city-owned operations that existed to serve communities that had no other operations in their franchise areas... not the cable equivalent of a CLEC.
They qualify for reduced rates on buying content. That was in the story.
The cooperative, open to all TV operators (including municipal) was created to give smaller cable providers a combined voice and greater negotiation power when buying national programming.
»www.baller.com/pdfs/Lafa ··· -10).pdf

N10Cities
Premium Member
join:2002-05-07
0000000
Asus RT-AC87

N10Cities to kpfx

Premium Member

to kpfx
said by kpfx:

Why exactly does Lafayette need to join the NCTC? Its basically a private organization supporting cable operators. There aren't any telco's banging on the door to get in.....

I'm just curious as to what they think they'll gain by joining an organization designed to assist traditional cable operators. And as far as the "municipality owned" clause in there.... that was targeted for small city-owned operations that existed to serve communities that had no other operations in their franchise areas... not the cable equivalent of a CLEC.
Uhhh..." The cooperative, open to all TV operators (including municipal) was created to give smaller cable providers a combined voice and greater negotiation power when buying national programming".

....it gives them better bargaining power when purchasing programming.... strength in numbers, that sort of thing...instead of going it alone and trying to negotiate your own price....

icantdecide
@speakeasy.net

icantdecide

Anon

It could be cheaper still...

In Seoul, South Korea, we have 100mb/30mb service with HDTV, VOD, etc. and WiFi IP phone, for about $30/month.

It was fun to fire up BitTorrent and download at Ethernet speeds, or experiment with Speedtest and discover that results depended greatly upon workstation performance because wire speed was just that high, with actual numbers coming in close to 90 down.

This is a step in the right direction here in the 'States but more work is needed.
BlueC
join:2009-11-26
Minneapolis, MN

BlueC

Member

Re: It could be cheaper still...

said by icantdecide :

In Seoul, South Korea, we have 100mb/30mb service with HDTV, VOD, etc. and WiFi IP phone, for about $30/month.

It was fun to fire up BitTorrent and download at Ethernet speeds, or experiment with Speedtest and discover that results depended greatly upon workstation performance because wire speed was just that high, with actual numbers coming in close to 90 down.

This is a step in the right direction here in the 'States but more work is needed.
In less than a week my building will have symmetrical 100mbps service @ $40/mo per user. Right now we have 60mbps. Yes, it is funny once you get into the higher speeds that you discover user hardware limitations.

It can be done in the US. Just takes some motivation of property owners. Of course this is only easy to do with hi-rise buildings, that's still a big market in urban areas.

Camaro
Question everything
Premium Member
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA

Camaro

Premium Member

Like watching

A big child not getting there way,good for these residents i am very jealous of service like that,to bad these story's never make it outside of our tech world, i would guess if this story hit the 6:30 national news there would be a lot more people calling up there town and wondering why can't we do this in our town.
phiber_fed
join:2010-06-10
Lafayette, LA

1 edit

phiber_fed

Member

minor nitpick

LUS actually offers 100 Mbps over the FTTH network but only to their commercial customers (for now). It is $199 / month.

Daarken
Rara Avises
Premium Member
join:2005-01-12
Southwest LA

Daarken

Premium Member

Re: minor nitpick

Some other tidbits..
Cox advertises their high speed FIBER network locally in the Lafayette area, and how great the prices/service are.

Here are the current rates from Cox's business site.
Business Internet. Maximum down/up stream speeds: Monthly Pricing
2.0 Mbps down x 384 Kbps up $124.00
5.0 Mbps down x 1.0 Mbps up $194.00
10.0 Mbps down x 2.0 Mbps up $254.00
20.0 Mbps down x 3.0 Mbps up $374.00
50.0Mbps down x 5.0 Mbps up (Available only within the Parish of Lafayette, LA) $389.00
nongobi
join:2008-12-03
Lafayette, LA

nongobi

Member

Re: minor nitpick

FYI residential 50mbps down x 5mbps through Cox is $89.99/month. That's what I am using here currently only because I'm too far out for LUS.

Daarken
Rara Avises
Premium Member
join:2005-01-12
Southwest LA

Daarken

Premium Member

Re: minor nitpick

I know you have that Gobi!!!
I have cox in Crowley, and the speeds are in constant flux.
I be sad.
nongobi
join:2008-12-03
Lafayette, LA

nongobi

Member

Re: minor nitpick

Time to move buddy.

Daarken
Rara Avises
Premium Member
join:2005-01-12
Southwest LA

Daarken

Premium Member

Re: minor nitpick

I work in Lake Charles, and with the job market for my line of work is kinda bleak ATM, and with the potential effects of the spill, I would be very concerned about any new job there.

ProFiber
@cox.net

ProFiber

Anon

Cox has done nothing but try to CRUSH competition

Living in Lafayette, I am enjoying 30mbps symmetrical for $45 a month. Not only that, on speedtest, I can usually download around 50. Plus, everyone on LUS fiber has a 100mbps peer-to-peer connection, and I've tested it with my friend who has LUS fiber and we're getting 90mbps real-world transfer speeds between each other. Anybody anti-fiber want to tell me I'm getting a bad deal?
Cox has done nothing but be deceptive through the whole fiber initiative in our community. They have lied, and ironically, filed "meritless lawsuits" to try to prevent it from happening, when all they want to do is keep their monopoly because they don't want to upgrade their network. They even started deceptive advertising by putting up ads on billboards saying that they had a fiber network. It was so deceptive that the BBB got involved and issued a press release saying that they should be taken down.
"Cox has always embraced competition in Lafayette"...what a joke.