COMPTEL, which represents competitive communications network providers, has asked the FCC to deny the Charter/Time Warner Cable merger.

In a petition filed Oct. 13, the deadline for such filings, COMPTEL focused on what it said would be the combined company's market power over video programming and its impact on broadband deployment.

The group argues that combining Charter and Time Warner Cable would mean the company would be negotiating content purchases for 17.3 million video customers, making it the second largest MVPD after Comcast.

That, says COMPTEL, would give it "more bargaining power to elicit favorable terms from programmers and create a substantial barrier to future broadband investment and competition."

They say Charter's claim that the combined company would face competition from competitive broadband providers does not hold up, and they should know.

"The crucial issue for determining whether the Transaction would be in the public interest is whether New Charter would face substantial competition in the future," COMPTEL told the commission. "If New Charter were to face 'dynamic' broadband competition, it would come from the competitive community that COMPTEL represents. The feedback from COMPTEL's membership, however, is that New Charter's cost advantage for video programming would make irrational any thought of investing in broadband to compete against the new firm."

While COMPTEL initially gave Charter props for committing to settlement-free peering, and still calls it a "step in the right direction," COMPTEL said the commitment of the duration too short, and changes are needed if the FCC did decide to approve the merger.

For one, the three-year commitment to settlement-free should be seven years, it said. Plus, it argues that Charter's point that it has never asked for interconnection payments was mostly because it had not had the scale to demand payments. so that rather than being a sign of "benign intent" it was a "reality of its pre-merger market power."

“Charter’s proposed transactions with Time Warner Cable (TWC) and Bright House Networks (BHN) is receiving broad support, " Charter said in response to various petitions to deny the deal. "To date, there are hundreds of  positive comments positive comments filed with the FCC from a broad and diverse array of voices, including Netflix; civil rights groups like the Hispanic Leadership Alliance; independent programmers TV One, Bounce TV Fuse (formerly Nuvo) and One World Sports, as well as from dozens of local businesses and community organizations."

We recognize that there are also parties who challenge the benefits of  the proposed transactions. We are listening to them and have addressed many of the issues they have raised with commitments such as those about expanding access to fast broadband, preserving an Open Internet and investing in interconnection, enhancing customer service by adding more highly trained employees for our call centers and field technician operations. We look forward to continued engagement with regulators, interested parties and members of the communities we serve about the significant public interest benefits of the transactions.”

Charter was not commenting on the specific COMPTEL petition, but it has pointed out that it will be a smaller provider than either Comcast and AT&T, and that rather than subsume the number-two provider as Comcast/TWC would have, the deal would arguably create a stronger compwetitor to AT&T and Comcast.

As to the programming leverage, it has pointed out that TWC already negoaties programing for Bright House, so that adding Charter's 4.5 million subs will hardly create a dramatic shift. Charter is also on the record criticizing volume discounts and supporting wholesale unbundling.

New America's Open Technology Institute (OTI) has reiterated to the FCC its request for interconnection conditions on the AT&T-DirecTV merger, arguing that M-Lab's recently released Internet Health Test network diagnostic data show AT&T as the worst performer in terms of "patterns of degradation" at interconnection points.

"AT&T has already demonstrated its ability to degrade broadband access during negotiations with transit providers and edge services; the acquisition of a major video distribution business would substantially increase AT&T’s incentive to engage in such conduct," OTI told FCC staffers earlier this week.

OTI wants the Federal Communications Commission to require AT&T to interconnect on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms and wants AT&T to voluntarily forego any interconnection fees. It also wants the FCC to require periodic disclosure of interconnection practices.

An OTI spokesperson said that it was not opposed to all interconnection fees, but did oppose those "that are used to pay for upgrades to AT&T's last mile, or fees that are pure 'access fees.'"

The FCC has yet to restart the informal shot clock on the AT&T-DirecTV merger. It is widely believed to be focused on possible interconnection conditions, among others, and may want to get those ducks in a row before restarting the clock, which is on day 170 of a 180-day target.

AT&T was filing a response to the OTI pitch Thursday (June 25), saying the issue was unrelated to the transaction, and that OTI was flat-out wrong.

"In its latest filing, OTI falsely claims that Internet speed data from Measurement Lab (“M-Lab”) show that AT&T has caused congestion at its interconnections with other ISPs and transit providers that can only be remedied by regulating interconnection rates," AT&T said.

AT&T said the interconnection marketplace is working, citing its recent deals with Level 3 and Cogent, as well as a third that was redacted, so is not yet public knowledge.

"AT&T remains open to negotiating with any similarly situated provider and reaching similar commercial agreements that properly align the incentives of all parties for the benefit of end users," the company said.

The telco also pointed out that the FCC had shown a preference for marketplace solutions in its new Open Internet order, saying, "It would be premature to adopt prescriptive rules to address any problems that have arisen or may arise.” Instead, the FCC said it would use a case-by-case complaint process, which AT&T said should be sufficient, with no deal conditions needed or "appropriate."