[NewsPoster]

Comcast believes that a number of companies are trying to bully the cable and Internet provider in order to get favorable terms -- in exchange for their non-opposition of the merger with Time Warner Cable. In a response to the comments filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over the proposed merger, Comcast claims that companies are engaging in a sort of blackmail to further their own business interests at the cost of the deal.

After spending time talking about the benefits of the merger and thanking various people for support, including non-profits and politicians that Comcast has donated money to, Comcast took to the offensive in its written response. The provider believes that many of the complaints levied about the potential merger are only happening because it refused to grant any special compensation or requests that were directed its way after the merger announcement.

The long list of demands, which includes free backbone interconnections, sharing of advertising technology, and requests to carry networks that don't exist, would be traded for either support or silence in the transaction. Comcast estimates that if it caved to demands for the programming portion alone, only considering the networks that were "concrete enough to estimate," it would cost the company more than $5 billion. This cost would be handed off to customers, adding an additional $4 per month or more by 2019.

"The significance of this extortion lies in not just the sheer audacity of some of the demands, but also the fact that each of the entities making the 'ask' have all but conceded that if its individual business interests are met, then it has no concern whatsoever about the state of the industry, supposed market power going forward, or harm to consumers, competitors or new entrants," said Comcast.

Discovery Communications, Cogent, Dish Media and Viamedia were called out directly, with Comcast also focusing heavily on the comments made by Netflix. With Cogent, Comcast believes that it is trying to stop the provider from competing further in the edge provider market in its own "self-interested agenda." While Dish's claims are perhaps the least demanding of the companies, as Dish simply points to the potential for Internet "choke points" that would be anticompetitive in the hands of a bigger Comcase. The company, which seeks to acquire Time Warner, believes that the remaining companies are looking for something to gain.

Viamedia is said to be seeking "mandatory access to Comcast's advertising interconnects," as well as placing constraints on Comcast's ability to compete with Viamedia in advertising. Discovery Communications is accused for demanding "unwarranted business concessions" for its own financial interests.

As for Netflix, Comcast thinks that it is requesting something that has nothing to do with the transaction, and is economically unsound in reasoning. In the filing, it said that Netflix is mirroring what it's advocating in the Open Internet issue, and coincides with complaints the video streaming company makes about other providers. Using "trumped-up economic theories," Netflix is attempting to push the cost of "carrying its content onto the backs of others." Comcast brings up the deal it made with Netflix earlier in the year, adding that CEO Reed Hastings said it would work "well for both of us for the long term."

Both Netflix and Discovery have denied the extortion charges in statements to Recode. Discovery spokesman David Leavy told the publication that the company stands by their concerns that the resulting company could leverage "onerous terms that jeopardize the ability of independent programmers" from investing into different content.

"Comcast's silence on the details of key issues like program discounts, and instead, its continued strategy of intimidating voices that are not fully supportive of its position, is troubling," said Leavy.

Netflix stated that it wasn't extorting Comcast, but it believes that the provider is the one forcing businesses to bend to its whims. Netflix adds that it's something that customers are ultimately suffering for, as well as setting a bad precedent for future businesses.

"It is not extortion to demand that Comcast provide its own customers the broadband speeds they've paid for, so they can enjoy Netflix. It is extortion when Comcast fails to provide its own customers the broadband speed they've paid for, unless Netflix also pays a ransom," said the company. "Netflix grudgingly paid to improve performance for our mutual customers, a precedent that remains damaging for consumers (who ultimately pay higher costs) and for other innovative businesses (that can be held over the barrel by Comcast to do the same)."

2014 09 23 REDACTED Comcast TWC Opposition and Response

[Makosuke]

"Using 'trumped-up economic theories' Netflix is attempting to push the cost of 'carrying its content onto the backs of others.'"

I'm sorry, I thought that's exactly what *I* was doing every time I paid a bill to my ISP for service. For, you know, them to carry the content from somewhere else on the internet into my house. But hey, what do I know, I'm just their customer.

And for what it's worth, Comcast probably is being extorted, but given their market position and previous actions, I'm not exactly feeling any sympathy for them. When someone tries to shake down the neighborhood mobster, people don't generally go running to his defense.

[Flying Meat]

eh, netflix, et al, are for profit companies. As such, should be paying a "reasonable" fee to network service providers for measurable load in excess of an average load calculated against people that do not use their products.

It seems fair to the network service providers. On the other hand, the fees paid should only be usable by the network service providers in the specific act of upgrading the their infrastructure.

Yeah. I got it all figured out.

[azrich]

Geez this internet stuff is getting weird.

I wish I had an idea of a solution for all this, or at least who the 'bad guys' are but I think it is just business being business.

[elroth]

There's no way Comcast is right in this. They have a monopoly on cable service already in many parts of the country, and that will only increase if the merger is approved. What it would do is give them special power over content - they can freeze other companies out, for example, either by making special deals with the content creators, or slowing down the internet streaming of competing companies (Netflix, Apple, etc). unless they get paid a big fee. We've already seen this. Comcast wants very much to be the bottleneck that all other companies have to go through to deliver content to customers.

Also, don't forget that Apple was apparently negotiating with Time Warner Cable on new initiatives for the AppleTV. It was so far the only chance for Apple to reallymake the AppleTV special, but all that went in the tank with the proposed merger. After the merger, Comcast could deal on its own terms with everybody - fees, fees, fees. If you have Comcast and find it impossible to deal with them about bogus charges, broken promises and bad service (as I have), think how much worse it could get now.

Deals like this are always subject to FCC restrictions if approved - either divesting some assets, or promises to behave in a way to not hurt consumers or competitors. What these other companies are asking for is just a few things to slightly level the playing field.

[unicast reversepath]

How hilarious - Dishonest Scumbags complaining that competitors are acting like dishonest scumbags! Even an empty suit like obama has more credibility than Comcast at this point in time - lmao...

[Inkling]

Bullying what polls say is the most hated corporation in America? Somehow I can't feel sympathetic, particularly since I used to be a Comcast customer. If anything, I'd fault these other companies for offering a deal under which they'd not opposed the spread of Comcast.