Home
Legislative Briefing Book
Background Documents
The Need For Reform
NOTE: Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet Files
International (MS Excel Spreadsheet 47k File)
Satellite and telecommunications companies succinctly state the need for satellite reform (MS Excel PowerPoint 45k File).
One question that has come up during the course of drafting legislation is whether using the U.S. market as leverage is in accord with U.S. commitments under the Agreement on Basic Telecommunication Services of World Trade Organization (WTO).
The FCC's DISCO II order makes clear, in a post-WTO decision, that it can and will restrict U.S. market entry if necessary to IGOs and their affiliates if to allow them in would hurt competition.
In a letter from Charlene Barshefsky, U.S. Trade Representative, to Fred Landman, President & Chief Executive Officer, PanAmSat Corporation, Ms. Barshefsky makes clear that the United States will not grant market access to an IGO or future privatized affiliate, or other IGO spin-off entity that would likely lead to anti-competitive results.
User Coalition Report on the Benefits of Direct Access
Click here for FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on Direct Access Direct Access. (Note: File is in Word Perfect format)
Click here for Direct Access Pleadings before the FCC.
These agreements are the sources of Intelsat's and Comsat's privileges and immunities.
The 1962 Act created Comsat and charged it with creating the international organization that became Intelsat. The Act was amended in 1978 to provide for U.S. participation, through Comsat, in Inmarsat.
When the GAO staff looked at the issue of the international satellite market, they documented the comparative advantages that the two intergovernmental organizations ("IGOs") had at that point and how those advantages harm competition.
The coverage of international satellites is different from the coverage of U.S. domestic satellites. The two cannot be lumped together for purposes of comparison. Intelsat does not cover the U.S. domestic market, but, by its sheer number of international satellites, dominates the international satellite market.
Windows Users: Right Click desired link and save file as source to disk before opening.
MacOS Users: Option-Click desired link and save file as source to disk before opening.
Domestic (MS Excel Spreadsheet 33k File)
Intelsat v. PAS Capacity (MS Excel Spreadsheet 50k File)
In the fall of 1998, Lockheed Martin applied to the FCC to become a telecommunications common carrier and, as a carrier, applied for authority to acquire 49% of Comsat, which is the first step in its proposed acquisition. A number of companies filed oppositions and there was a round of replies from each side.
AT&T Pleading (Document)
MCI Pleadings (MCI Reply); (MCI Petition)
PanAmSat Pleadings (Additional Information); (Reply)
Teledesic Pleadings
Last year, the FCC examined closely Comsat (and Intelsat's) market position in countries around the world. Although the Commission treated Comsat as non-dominant in certain markets, it found that the markets for "thin-route" telephony and occasional video were not competitive and continued to regulate Comsat as dominant in those markets. These markets are comprised primarily of developing countries that contain almost half of the world's population and cover half the world's land mass and are ideal markets for satellite services. More Information
NOTE: Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation File
Windows Users: Right Click desired link and save file as source to disk before opening.
MacOS Users: Option-Click desired link and save file as source to disk before opening.
Betty C. Alewine, President and CEO of Comsat Corporation (0325ale.pdf)
James W. Cuminale, Senior Vice-President and General Counsel of PanAmSat Corporation (0325cum.pdf Adobe Acrobat 12k File)
Senator John McCain, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation (0325jsm.pdf Adobe Acrobat 4k File)
Conny Kullman, Director General and CEO of Intelsat (0325kul.pdf Adobe Acrobat 28k File)
Roderick K Porter, Acting Chief, International Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission (0325por.pdf Adobe Acrobat 38k File)
John Sponyoe, CEO of Lockheed Martin Global Telecommunications (0325spo.pdf Adobe Acrobat 26k File)
Privileges and Immunities
Section 5 of Pub. L. No. 105-366 addresses the privileges and immunities that the intergovernmental entities enjoy. This section clarifies that Intelsat and Inmarsat, and the U.S. signatory, Comsat, have no immunity for acts they take in connection with their commercial telecommunications activities. The House Commerce Committee Report on the bill addressed this in detail.
As specified in Pub. L. No. 105-366, NTIA is conducting a inquiry into the specific kinds of harm caused by privileges and immunities of the IGOs. A number of companies filed comments, which are accessible here in "PDF" format.
In 1998, the 3 major carriers studied the benefits of direct access. The carriers' analysis still pertains.
(User must enter Docket #98-192 at search request.)
Comsat claims that permitting direct access would constitute an unconstitutional "taking" of Comsat's property.
When the House debated takings on the floor, privileges and immunities was one of the issues thoroughly considered. The following documents are in Acrobat format: pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
Intelsat has long claimed that it is needed to provide "universal service" to the developing countries. A study by Prof. Waverman, London Business School, sponsored by PanAmSat shows that, contrary to Intelsat's claim, Intelsat is actually an obstacle to universal service.
Home | Rules | Issue | News | Developments | Technology | Legislative | Resources