AT&T told the FCC that the Rural Cellular Association's arguments comparing the appeals court decision in NCTA v. FCC to the carrier's against exclusive handset agreements between carriers and handset makers doesn't hold up. "RCA apparently believes that the mere fact that the word 'exclusive' occurs in both contexts means the same result must apply," AT&T said. But, the carrier continued, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit "emphasized in the very decision RCA cites: 'context matters.'" AT&T called the contexts very different. "In the cable/[multiple dwelling unit] context, dominant cable incumbents were entering into arrangements to be the exclusive provider of cable service in multi-tenant buildings, thereby acquiring a retail monopoly on cable service for a substantial segment of the market," the carrier said. "Exclusive wireless handset agreements do not pose any of these harms. All wireless consumers can choose between numerous wireless carriers and numerous wireless handsets. Given that the wireless and handset marketplaces are both vigorously competitive with no provider even approaching dominance, this is thus a classic case in which exclusive offers have only pro-competitive effects."
展开▼
