Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (23274)	6/22/2000 1:48:00 PM
From: Jack Hartmann	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

Grace, Thanks for the link. I'm in for some ATHM to see how far it can run. Jack

To: GraceZ who wrote (23274)	6/22/2000 1:59:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

An item from your link. This is quite an important point: Because Portland premised its open access condition on its position that @Home is a "cable service" governed by the franchise, we begin with the question of whether the @Home service truly is a "cable service" as Congress defined it in the Communications Act. We conclude that it is not. [1] Subject to limited exceptions, the Communications Act provides that "a cable operator may not provide cable service without a franchise." 47 U.S.C. S 541(b)(1). The Act defines "cable service" as "(A) the one-way transmission to subscrib- ers of (i) video programming, or (ii) other programming ser- vice, and (B) subscriber interaction, if any, which is required for the selection or use of such video programming or other programming service." 47 U.S.C. S 522(6). For the purposes of this definition, "video programming" means "programming provided by, or generally considered comparable to program- ming provided by, a television broadcast station, " 47 U.S.C. S 522(20), and "other programming service " means "informa- tion that a cable operator makes available to all subscribers generally." 47 U.S.C. S 522(14). The essence of cable service, 6759 therefore, is one-way transmission of programming to sub- scribers generally. [2] This definition does not fit @Home. Internet access is not one-way and general, but interactive and individual beyond the "subscriber interaction" contemplated by the stat- ute. Accessing Web pages, navigating the Web's hypertext links, corresponding via e-mail, and participating in live chat groups involve two-way communication and information exchange unmatched by the act of electing to receive a one- way transmission of cable or pay-per-view television pro- gramming. And unlike transmission of a cable television sig- nal, communication with a Web site involves a series of connections involving two-way information exchange and storage, even when a user views seemingly static content. Thus, the communication concepts are distinct in both a prac- tical and a technical sense. Surfing cable channels is one thing; surfing the Internet over a cable broadband connection is quite another.

To: GraceZ who wrote (23274)	6/22/2000 2:23:00 PM
From: Educator	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

"Portland reversal" Hi Grace- I have not carefully read the opinion. Does this change anything? Will T continue as planned and allow other ISPs to come aboard? I believe they will if technically feasible. It's kind of funny. We are up now just under $3. The pop is fading. How much of that drop from $98 to $15 was due to this open access obstacle? I would say a most of it! And all we pop back is a couple of lousy bucks? This open access took quite a toll on this stock. We shareholders have paid the toll. I'm not so sure the road was worth it. Seems kind of bumpy. BTW...the pop is now just over $2. Maybe we will get some good press on this reversal. I hope we can then head upward. Ed

To: GraceZ who wrote (23274)	6/22/2000 3:10:00 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

Here are the pertinent sections of the ruling. [6] Like other ISPs, @Home consists of two elements: a "pipeline" (cable broadband instead of telephone lines), and the Internet service transmitted through that pipeline. However, unlike other ISPs, @Home controls all of the transmission facilities between its subscribers and the Internet. To the extent @Home is a conventional ISP, its activities are one of an information service.However, to the extent that @Home provides its subscribers Internet transmission over its cable broadband facility, it is providing a telecommunications service as defined in the Communications Act. ... [9] Thus far, the FCC has not subjected cable broadband to any regulation, including common carrier telecommunications regulation. We note that the FCC has broad authority to forbear from enforcing the telecommunications provisions if it determines that such action is unnecessary to prevent discrimination and protect consumers, and is consistent with the public interest. See 47 U.S.C. S 160(a). Congress has reposed the details of telecommunications policy in the FCC, and we will not impinge on its authority over these matters. III We hold that subsection 541(b)(3) prohibits a franchising authority from regulating cable broadband Internet access, because the transmission of Internet service to subscribers over cable broadband facilities is a telecommunications service under the Communications Act. Therefore, Portland may not condition the transfer of the cable franchise on nondiscriminatory access to AT&T's cable broadband network. We need not reach AT&T's other statutory and constitutional arguments. REVERSED