Mayors, the National Association of Counties and the National League of Cities, asserts that these groups also have a vested interest in the outcome because they act as local cable-television franchising authorities.
The OpenNet Coalition, which represents 800 ISPs and supporters, states that the Portland rules "represent reasonable measures to ensure that openness and competition, which have fueled the astounding development of the Internet in the narrowband era, continue to exist in the market for broadband Internet access."
The OpenNet brief argues that "AT&T wants to force consumers seeking such access to purchase the services of the ISP controlled by AT&T, whether or not they would prefer another ISP. AT&T has fashioned a 'take-it-or-leave-it' proposition for consumers desiring high-speed, cable-modem access to the Internet, intended to foreclose competition and eliminate consumer choice. Under AT&T's monopoly model, every consumer who would prefer another ISP would have to pay for two ISP services in order to get the one that the consumer desired."
The Possible Outcomes
A ruling in favor of AT&T likely will scare off other municipalities trying to determine whether to follow Portland's lead. A ruling against AT&T may have the opposite effect, increasing the number of municipalities willing to take up the issue and impose conditions on the transfer of their cable franchises to AT&T. Either way, the decision is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Pull up a chair: It should be a more entertaining show than anything on cable.
