Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Judges Question FCC’s Need for Contracts in Comcast-Time Warner Cable Deal

Has the FCC made the “necessary link” in justify its needs?

Oliver Hoffmann/Shutterstock

Appeals court judges questioned government lawyers Friday about why media companies’ confidential programming contracts and related documents should be made available to some parties in the government’s ongoing review of Comcast’s acquisition of Time Warner Cable and AT&T’s deal to acquire DirecTV.

A three-judge panel heard arguments in the case Friday morning and questioned a Federal Communications Commission lawyer about why the agency needs to share thousands of confidential media company documents — including contracts, emails and other documents describing contract negotiations — with outside parties, including lawyers for other media companies and public interest groups.

CBS, Disney and 21st Century Fox are among the media companies that asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to overturn a Federal Communications Commission decision to allow outside parties involved in the government’s review of the Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal to see programming contracts. Although those parties would be required to sign confidentiality agreements, the media companies are worried that details of their contracts could leak out to competitors anyway.

Two judges — David Tatel and Sri Srinivasan — peppered the FCC’s attorney with questions about whether the agency had made the technical case for why it needed the documents released. They focused on technical language that the agency has used to argue for disclosure and focused on whether the FCC had made the “necessary link” to justify its needs.

The FCC has argued that it needs to make the documents available to outside parties so they can help agency lawyers complete their review of the deal. FCC attorneys have argued that since they require what are essentially non-disclosure agreements to be signed by outside parties, there should be no problem in allowing them to see the documents.

The other judge on the panel, Robert Wilkins, noted that the FCC’s protective order, which prevents parties who see the documents from sharing their contents, “doesn’t prevent them from using it.”

The programming contracts have been in the hands of Justice Department and FCC officials for months. The FCC wants to share the media companies’ programming contracts with outside parties in order to get extra input about whether it should allow Comcast* to acquire Time Warner Cable or how to craft conditions for the deal.

The media companies are worried competitors would use the data during future contract negotiations, even though the information is only supposed to be used in relation to the FCC’s reviews of the Comcast-Time Warner Cable and AT&T-DirecTV deals.

A lawyer for CBS said the FCC wants “hundreds of thousands of pages” to be released to third parties — including groups hoping to block the deal — because of a desire to do some “crowdsourcing,” he said.

After the hearing had concluded, hallway chatter among some media lawyers who had attended suggested that they thought the judges weren’t very sympathetic to the FCC’s argument. However, it’s often hard to tell how a case will go based on questions asked during oral arguments.

A spokeswoman for Comcast, which had several lawyers at the hearing, said the company had no comment.

A federal appeals court barred the FCC from sharing the programing contracts while the appeal was pending. The case has slowed, somewhat, the FCC’s review of the Comcast-Time Warner cable deal, which the cable giant had hoped would be approved by now. Last month, the two companies extended an agreement until August when it became clear the FCC wasn’t going to finish its review until later this spring.

* Comcast owns NBCUniversal, which is a minority investor in Revere Digital, Re/code’s parent company.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh