U.S. Dist. Court, Roanoke (Va.), denied Cox Cable’s motion to dis...
U.S. Dist. Court, Roanoke (Va.), denied Cox Cable’s motion to dismiss class action suit brought by subscribers challenging MSO’s passthrough of franchise fees on cable modem service. Plaintiff Kimberly Bova argued that passthrough of franchise fees violated Communications Act…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
because cable modem service was “telecommunications” service and under Act Cox couldn’t charge franchise fees for telecom services. Bova said Cox continued to collect franchise fees on Internet service even after 9th U.S. Appeals Court, San Francisco, ruling that it was telecom service. Cox said its high-speed Internet service was either cable service or information service, so its franchise fees were legal. MSO also said FCC had exclusive jurisdiction to determine propriety of passthrough of cable franchise fees and Act didn’t provide private right of action for subscriber challenge. Chief Judge Samuel Wilson said court denied Cox’s motion to dismiss on substantive grounds because it found that plaintiff “has stated a claim upon relief can be granted.” He said ruling didn’t cover jurisdictional issues raised by Cox.