AT&T is trying to ease its way out of scrutiny by the Federal Communications Commission over the wireless and TV giant’s $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.
Telecom regulators shouldn’t need to analyze the deal because it will be beyond their jurisdiction, AT&T signaled in a filing Thursday to the Securities and Exchange Commission. By potentially eliminating a layer of oversight, the claim could accelerate the merger’s approval in Washington, where federal antitrust officials are also expected to review the proposed purchase.
AT&T, which became the nation’s largest pay-TV provider when it acquired DirecTV last year, is gunning for Time Warner’s massive library of content and intellectual property, which it hopes to distribute and sell advertising against. Time Warner owns CNN, HBO and Warner Bros., along with rights to lucrative media franchises such as “Harry Potter” and “Batman.”
To aid in getting shows and movies from their origins to TV screens, Time Warner uses satellite transmissions. The FCC typically has a role in overseeing any merger or acquisition that would transfer control of those airwaves from one company to another. For months, AT&T said it had been looking to see which, if any, of Time Warner’s satellite licenses it would acquire as part of the deal. In its SEC filing Thursday, AT&T said it has concluded that no licenses will be transferred.
“While subject to change, it is currently anticipated that Time Warner will not need to transfer any of its FCC licenses to AT&T in order to continue to conduct its business operations after the closing of the transaction,” the filing said.
If no licenses are changing hands, that could make it unnecessary for the FCC to become involved. That could be bad news for opponents of the deal, because the FCC grants its blessing to deals such as AT&T’s on the finding that it will benefit the public. That’s considered a higher bar to clear compared to what AT&T faces in persuading antitrust regulators, who simply need to be convinced that the acquisition will not harm competition among other businesses.
Full Content: Washington Post
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
US Consumer Watchdog Eyes Expansion of ‘Junk Fee’ Crackdown Ahead of 2024 Election
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Brazil Proposes Reform to Competition Law Targeting Big Tech
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Meta Enhances User Data Control, Resolving German Antitrust Dispute
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
X May Be Excluded from EU’s Strict Tech Rules, Sources Suggest
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
G7 Targets Competitive Imbalances in Semiconductor Industry
Oct 10, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh