1. WHAT THE IP TRANSITION MEANS FOR CONSUMERS AND A UBIQUITOUS, AFFORDABLE, RELIABLE NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM David C. Bergmann Telecom Policy Consulting for Consumers Moderator

2.  Partial (recent) legal context  Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014)  In re FCC No. 11-161 (1oth Cir. May 23, 2014)  FCC  IP Transition Trials (GN 13-5)  AT&T Trans Trials (GN 13-5) (AL & FL)  Verizon short-term change notifications (VA & NY) WHAT THE IP TRANSITION MEANS FOR CONSUMERS

3.  My views, consistent with NASUCA views  “Black letter law” unlikely  As Justice Jackson said, "We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.” Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 540 (1953) CAVEATS

4.  Verizon’s appeal from FCC rules requiring disclosure and forbidding discrimination in Internet access service  Court upheld the disclosure rules but vacated the anti- discrimination rules and anti-blocking rules  FCC had failed to establish that these rules do not impose per se common carrier obligations  Because FCC had previously classified broadband providers as exempt from treatment as common carriers VERIZON v FCC

5.  NASUCA perspective  BB should be reclassified; it’s not just information.  Scalia and pizza in Brand X  Is BIAS telecom, info, or both? Yes!  VoIP, for sure, is telecommunications.  Easier, and more lawful, to reclassify, but probably won’t happen  So how do we ensure enduring public values if not? VERIZON v FCC

6.  Reminder: 30 appeals from FCC “Global USF/ICC Transformation Order”; oral argument held 11/19/13  Decision upheld Order in all respects  NASUCA issue (ARC charge): failure to file Pet for Recon meant waiver  Big picture issues  B&K for all ICC is OK  CAF for small rural carriers is OK, too NASUCA, et al., v FCC (Re: FCC 11-161, 10 th Cir.)

7.  AT&T Trans Trials experiments: FCC decision w/i 60 days of reply comments = 6/9/14  Verizon network changes: Auto approved w/i 90 days of PN = 8/18/14  Open Internet Rules comments 7/15/14, replies 9/10/14 TIMELINES

8.  IP Transition Trials (GN 13-5)  INS withdrew, so numbering & rural EoIs about it  AT&T Trans Trials (GN 13-5) (AL & FL)  Note the schedule!  Verizon short-term change notifications (VA & NY)  Note the schedule!  Open Internet rules  Comments due 7/15/14, replies 9/10/14 AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF TO TALK ABOUT ON THIS ROUNDTABLE

9.  Depends on whose customer you are  AT&T/Verizon  Wireless the only alternative  No broadband except cable, Trans Trials EoIs  “Mid-size”  Seem to be doing OK  Small  Ditto HOW WILL THE INTERNET TRANSITION IMPACT RURAL CUSTOMERS

10.  Impacts already: price increases, bundling, wireless  Choice of over-priced services; cord-cutting (or never getting one)  Depends on who your carrier is (see previous slide)  The poor are just like us; they just have less money  Fewer and more difficult choices in the Internet world  But the issues that plague all consumers plague low- income consumers HOW WILL THE INTERNET TRANSITION IMPACT LOW-INCOME CUSTOMERS

11.  What is the IP Transition?  How does the rise of the Internet and alternative forms of communication affect the transition from traditional telephone service to VoIP?  What is the difference between fixed or interconnected VoIP and “over-the- top” or independent VoIP service and why should we care?  How do traditional telephone service and VoIP service compare in terms of availability, functionality, quality, and price?  What consumer protection issues arise with respect to the IP Transition?  How are issues such as service quality and customer migration related to the IP Transition?  How will the IP Transition affect rural customers?  What are the implications of the IP Transition for low income customers?  Do net neutrality rules affect telephone service?  How have the technology changes of the last 25 years affected consumers’ expectations and use of the telephone network?  Competition after the IP Transition: should we still be concerned about monopoly ? QUESTIONS