Home » Comcast/Xfinity »Competition »Consumer News »Public Policy & Gov't »Rural Broadband » Currently Reading:

Time Warner Cable Wants to Keep Its Taxpayer Subsidized Rural Broadband Expansion a Secret

Phillip Dampier December 17, 2014 Comcast/Xfinity, Competition, Consumer News, Public Policy & Gov't, Rural Broadband 4 Comments

rural cableTime Warner Cable has appealed to the Secretary of the New York Department of Public Service to keep information about taxpayer-subsidized broadband expansion projects in New York a secret.

The case is part of a series of ongoing requests for disclosure of information about the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable under New York’s Freedom of Information Law.

Several public interest groups are requesting copies of documents submitted to the state Public Service Commission that the two cable operators have repeatedly asserted should remain confidential. Gerald Norlander from the Public Utility Law Project has been seeking details about how the two companies plan to address New York’s rural broadband dilemma before any decision about the merger is made by state regulators. Norlander requested copies of documents that include details about Time Warner’s taxpayer-subsidized rural broadband expansion under the auspices of Gov. Cuomo’s Connect NY program. Time Warner wants to keep the information confidential, citing competitive concerns.

New York Administrative Law Judge David L. Prestemon ruled earlier this month that while Time Warner could maintain secrecy in the early stages of its proposed expansion efforts, once the company disclosed details about a project in a public filing with state or local officials, confidentiality should be lifted.

shhPrestemon rejected efforts by Time Warner Cable to maintain confidentiality even after news of one broadband expansion project was reported by Albany-area media outlets. Prestemon added that public regulatory filings submitted by the company as a project commences effectively places information about it in the public domain.

Counsel for Time Warner Cable rejected that assertion, claiming information found in certain regulatory filings or in a newspaper article lacks the granularity sought by Time Warner’s competitors.

“Simply because physical construction begins on a project does not mean that the public or competitors would be aware of who is completing the project, the geographic extent of the project, the number of passings, or the estimated completion date,” argued Maureen O. Helmer and Laura L. Mona in an appeal filed by Time Warner’s legal team at Hiscock & Barclay, LLP. “This information would be difficult and costly for a competitor to compile, such that disclosure would significantly harm Time Warner Cable’s competitive advantage.”

The attorneys revealed Time Warner Cable’s use of subcontractors is already helping shield the company from having expansion projects become public knowledge:

Time Warner Cable typically uses subcontractors to complete the physical construction. Therefore, the vehicles used to construct the build-out are often not Time Warner Cable owned vehicles. While Time Warner Cable generally requires contractors to display signs stating “Contractor for Time Warner Cable,” the existence of construction vehicles on the side of a road would not convey to an average member of the public or a competitor that Time Warner Cable was engaged in construction of new facilities, as opposed to repair, maintenance, or some other activity. In similar fashion, if a Time Warner Cable vehicle was present on the side of a road, it would not mean that a new build-out was being constructed as the vehicle could be performing any number of tasks that would not be known to the public.

Norlander’s group is concerned Comcast intends to combine Time Warner Cable’s systems in New York and could focus entirely on large urban markets while potentially abandoning rural customers to maximize revenue.

This is the third time Time Warner Cable has appealed one of Judge Prestemon’s rulings on this subject.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
4 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jim Livermore
Jim Livermore
9 years ago

OMG, what bullsh*t. “This information would be difficult and costly for a competitor to compile, such that disclosure would significantly harm Time Warner Cable’s competitive advantage.” In the areas that they may or not be expanding into, maybe the imagined competition might find the information useful. As a competitor, why would I push into a TWC focus area? Is that what they are worried about, someone leaping past them in an under-served area that they have plans for? Cable will never push out into the rural areas. What is the threat to their “competitive advantage” – Wireless? Vote NO on… Read more »

fjfdybvfgj
fjfdybvfgj
9 years ago
Reply to  Jim Livermore

I know right. Some non existent competition is there excuse. Wireless isn’t competition as its too caped. Voting NO on Merger

Howie
Howie
9 years ago

I feel that the taxpayers of New York State have the right to know how their tax money is being spent.
If T-W wants to keep how it spends money on it’s rural expansion a secret, then let them use their own money, not being subsidized by the taxpayer.

fjfdybvfgj
fjfdybvfgj
9 years ago

What TW wants to do is keep it a secret so that they can pocket 90% of the money and say it wasn’t enough to connect the rural areas. We shouldn’t spend a single dime on subsidies for these ISPs since we’ve already payed for every house in America to be lined with fiber (To the home). They havnt kept that promise and instead just pocketed the money. We’ve payed for schools to be lined with fiber more than 9 times. Still don’t have that yet. REMEMBER THE $400 BILLION BROKEN PROMISE. IT EXPLAINS WHY WE NEED TITLE II AND… Read more »

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!