FCC broadband reclassification "will likely have significant adverse effects" on Internet investment, according to a study by Kevin Hassett, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and Robert Shapiro, a senior policy fellow at the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy, which circulated the paper Tuesday. The authors acknowledged research support from Washington think tank NDN but said the views were their own. The data show broadband service spread more rapidly than computers or dial-up service "and with virtually no regulatory intervention," the study said, but applying Title II of the Communications Act to broadband Internet access service will "likely increase costs and regulatory hurdles for providers" and could lead to "substantial price increases and consumer costs," with a negative impact on investment. The authors cited a 2015 Progressive Policy Institute policy memo by Hal Singer that suggested Title II regulation reduced telecom company investment by 5.5 percent per year in past years compared with what it otherwise would have been. Hassett and Shapiro also cited their own 2014 AT&T-backed study that suggested Title II regulation could reduce future telecom investment by 12.8 to 20.8 percent. The authors noted the FCC net neutrality order questioned the assumptions of that study, but they rejected commission criticisms and called some of them irrelevant. The authors also cited a University of Pennsylvania paper by Christopher Yoo that compared certain broadband metrics of the U.S., when broadband was more lightly regulated, with those of Europe, which was more heavily regulated, and found that America had higher access and investment levels, and lower consumer costs at speed tiers below 12 Mbps (with higher U.S. costs for higher speed levels justified by higher bandwidth use). "This suggests that it is reasonable to expect large negative effects on investment from Title II regulation," Hassett and Shapiro said. "Substantial" uncertainties arising from Title II litigation and FCC forbearance decisions would likely further depress investment, the authors said. "We should expect that ISPs will reduce some of their planned capital investments, at least until the FCC establishes how, to what extent and toward whom the new regulations will be applied, and the legal challenges to those decisions have been resolved." FCC enforcement of specific complaints -- including over IP interconnection, a vast new area of jurisdiction -- and the 2016 election and likely FCC leadership changes will prolong the uncertainties, they added. "Sorting this out could take years or even decades, not unlike the more than 70 years it has taken to give effect to Title II," they said. "These multiple sources of uncertainty extend beyond the enduring and compounding negative effects of the regulation, such as the increased costs, prohibited practices, and delayed innovation." FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has disputed that the net neutrality and the Title II broadband order is discouraging investment (see 1506260024 and 1505200033).

Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Mobile Future and the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) plan to file amicus briefs in support of petitioners challenging the FCC net neutrality order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063). Furchtgott-Roth, a former FCC commissioner, and WLF intend to file a brief Aug. 6 in support of petitioners Alamo Broadband, the American Cable Association, AT&T, CenturyLink, Daniel Berninger, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless Internet Service Provider Association, their notice filed Monday said. It said all the parties, including the FCC and Justice Department, consented to the filing of the brief. Mobile Future intends to file an amicus brief in support of CTIA and AT&T, its motion filed Monday said. Mobile Future said it plans to address points "unique to mobile broadband providers" that may not be fully discussed by the main group of petitioners, which includes both mobile and fixed providers, some of which oppose mobile broadband arguments to be made by CTIA. Mobile Future said it was "impractical" for it to join with other parties in an amicus brief.

The Telecommunications Industry Association plans to support challenges to the FCC net neutrality order, the group said in an emailed news release Monday. TIA filed a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to file an amicus brief on Aug. 6 in support of various petitioners in the case, including USTelecom (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063). TIA said it would argue that the FCC decisions to reclassify broadband Internet access service under Title II of the Communications Act and craft an Internet conduct rule were "arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with the law."

The May FCC order requiring pay-TV carriers to pass through emergency alerts on a secondary audio stream to mobile devices streaming their content (see 1505210056) takes effect Aug. 10, the Media Bureau said in a public notice posted Friday in docket 12-107. Aug. 10 is also the deadline for comments on some other proposed aspects of the rule, such as whether school closing information should be included on the secondary audio stream; and whether the FCC should require multichannel video programming distributors to provide “a simple and easy to use activation mechanism” for accessing the emergency information on the secondary stream. Reply comments on those matters are due Sept. 8, the PN said.

The FCC Friday posted the dates for its 2016 meetings. The commission meets for the first time Jan. 28 and holds its last meeting Dec. 15. In between it meets Feb. 25, March 31, April 28, May 26, June 16, July 14, Aug. 4, Sept. 29, Oct. 27 and Nov. 17.

The FCC is lifting the sunshine period on the upcoming Incentive Auction Procedures Public Notice, according to a public notice released late Friday. Parties will be able to make presentations to FCC officials about the Procedures PN until 7 p.m. Wednesday, the PN said. The lifting of the sunshine period is related to the FCC's expected release of additional information about the Incentive Auction interference simulations that the commission released data from in May, an FCC official told us. The Procedures PN is on the agenda for Thursday's open meeting.

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn dismissed the notion Internet access is not a necessity when she addressed the National Action Network Wednesday in a speech that appeared to answer comments made recently by Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, who disputed that Internet access is a necessity (see 1506250035). Clyburn said the FCC is looking to update its voice-oriented Lifeline USF support program for the digital age. "But let me warn you, any proposed transition will not come easy, for there are those who publicly proclaim that Internet access is 'not a necessity'!" she said, according to her remarks as prepared for delivery. "Not a necessity … during a time when the majority of Fortune 500 companies post new job listings strictly on websites? And where if you are fortunate enough to secure a position, your new boss expects you to have an e-mail address? Not a necessity … where, in a growing number of states, those who are income-eligible can only apply for benefits or aid online? Not a necessity … when most colleges and universities post and accept student admissions electronically? Not a necessity … as the evidence grows daily, on how technology is bridging long-standing gaps when it comes to the delivery, quality of service, and cost efficiencies for access to health care and wellness? And when you make that face-to-face appointment or conduct business in person, when was the last time you bought or referred to a folded map when you traveled to that destination?"

The FCC assembled a steering committee and working team to oversee review of Charter Communications' buy of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable. Heading the interbureau steering committee in docket 15-149 will be General Counsel Jonathan Sallet, with the committee including International Bureau Chief Mindel De La Torre, Media Bureau Chief Bill Lake, Wireless Bureau Chief Roger Sherman and Wireline Bureau Chief Matthew DelNero. Heading the working team will be Owen Kendler, on detail with the FCC Office of General Counsel from the Department of Justice, where he most recently was assistant chief of its Antitrust Division's Telecommunications and Media Enforcement Section. The senior economist on the working team will be William Rogerson, former FCC chief economist. The working team will report to the steering committee.

Comment deadlines are set on a small-provider exemption to new net neutrality transparency rules, the FCC's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau said in a public notice in docket 14-28. Initial comments are due Aug. 5 and replies are due Sept. 4, the bureau said after the Federal Register published a previous bureau public notice inviting comments and replies 30 days and 60 days after such publication, respectively (see 1506220037). The FCC is seeking comment on its decision to temporarily exempt small ISPs (with 100,000 or fewer broadband connections) from enhancements to its net neutrality transparency rules, which require local broadband providers to disclose to consumers, edge providers and others information about the "commercial terms, performance characteristics and network practices" of their services.

The FCC apparently won't require AT&T/DirecTV to make regional sports networks available to competitors on reasonable terms, the American Cable Association said in a news release Tuesday. ACA is "deeply disappointed" the FCC appears headed toward approving AT&T's takeover of DirecTV "without shielding consumers from being overcharged for three Root Sports regional sports networks (RSNs) owned by DirecTV and a fourth Roots [sic] Sports RSN currently co-owned by AT&T and DirecTV," ACA CEO Mathew Polka said in a statement issued in the release. "The FCC's action would fly in the face of overwhelming evidence that AT&T and DirecTV have overcharged for their RSNs and have every intention of continuing to do so and to an even greater extent. Consumers, particularly those who are customers of smaller rivals to DirecTV and AT&T U-verse, will be forced to pay these costs" in the greater Denver, Houston, Pittsburgh and Seattle markets. "While the FCC Chairman espouses ‘competition, competition, competition,'" if the FCC approves the transaction without protections for smaller video providers and their customers, consumers will see only "higher prices, higher prices, higher prices," Polka said. ACA Senior Vice President Ross Lieberman told us the group's sense of the commission's direction was "based on feedback we've received from the FCC in our discussions." ACA and member enTouch have lobbied FCC officials recently in support of attaching a program-access condition to approval of AT&T/DirecTV (see 1507020047). AT&T and FCC spokesmen had no comment.