The Federal Communications Commission's decision to let a handful of megacorporations control U.S. media sparked a maelstrom of protest--enough to inspire Congress to reverse the move, at least temporarily.

But another FCC decision that has gone largely unnoticed by consumers may have a huge impact on where you get Internet access and how much you pay for it. It's part of the FCC's Triennial Review, and it changes how big regional phone companies grant competing DSL providers access to their equipment.

If the ruling remains in force, many ISPs claim it will put them out of business--and hand a huge chunk of the broadband market to the telco giants.

DSL 101
To understand what the rule change means, you have to understand how DSL works. Here's a quick sketch.

DSL signals travel over the same copper wire that delivers voice service to your home or office. When you order a DSL line from an ISP such as EarthLink or Covad, the provider goes into your nearest central office (a warehouselike space filled with cables and switches), installs DSL equipment, and connects it to your voice line. This process is known as line sharing, because the same line is shared by both your phone company (usually a Baby Bell) and your DSL provider. According to Covad, the largest independent DSL provider, about 40 percent of its revenue comes from customers using shared lines.

Baby Bells own the central offices. But according to the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the Bells must share their networks with other carriers at a reasonable cost. The Act was designed to open phone markets to competition so that consumers would benefit from lower costs and better service, and for the most part, it has worked as planned.

The new FCC ruling says that within three years, the Bells no longer have to share their lines with other DSL providers. If they do choose to share, they can charge up the wazoo for them. And that, says Bway.net's Joe Plotkin, will kill small broadband ISPs.

"Basically, the FCC has decided that ISPs don't deserve to be in business," says Plotkin, director of marketing for the New York-based DSL provider, which is rallying other service providers to join a class-action suit challenging the rule change. "Who's going to sign up with an ISP when they know their circuit will be gone in a year or two?"

Does competition ring a bell?
"Small ISPs can survive by partnering with competitive phone carriers," counters Dana Frix, cochair of the telecom practice at Chadbourne & Parke, which represents several competitive phone companies. In other words, a competitive carrier such as Choice One or Z-Tel could lease a copper line from Verizon or SBC, then sell part of it to a DSL provider. But with more than 90 percent of all residential service controlled by the Bells, such lines will be in short supply.

Meanwhile, telecom lawyers and consumer advocates are revving their engines, gearing up for what promises to be a bitter fight. In a letter to President Bush, longtime telecom critic Bruce Kushnick asks, "Is it better to have four large monopolies controlling America's Digital Future or thousands of smaller companies, each dreaming up a new vision for America's Broadband service?"

The good news is that FCC rules are not written in stone. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently overturned an FCC ruling that allowed cable broadband companies to avoid regulation under the 1996 Telecom Act. But whether cable companies will be forced to share their lines with other ISPs is still an open question.

Think about it this way. Your DSL line goes dark during a hectic deadline day. Whom would you rather call, a local ISP that knows your name or tech-support flunky No. 3752 at Big Bell Inc.? Unless we can overturn yet another misguided FCC rule, you may not have a choice.