RWA Continues Push for Access to Verizon-Mediacom MVNO

WASHINGTON, July 7, 2025 – A trade group for rural wireless operators continues to seek access to contracts that Verizon wants to keep private.

At issue is whether lawyers for the Rural Wireless Association should be able to review a Mobile Virtual Network Operator Agreement between Verizon and Mediacom Communications. On Wednesday, the RWA sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission reiterating its request for access to the highly confidential arrangement.

The letter is the latest in a feud between Verizon and RWA over access to the former’s MVNO agreement with Mediacom, a regional ISP. The FCC was given a copy of the agreement in May to aid in its review of the merger between T-Mobile and UScellular. In that same month, RWA requested a copy of the agreement, a request that Verizon urged the FCC to deny.

The trade association, which represents rural wireless internet service providers with each having fewer than 2 million subscribers, disputed Verizon’s argument that its outside counsel may be involved in future negotiations with the telecommunications giant.

“Verizon’s argument that disclosure of its Wholesale Agreements would lead to competitive harm because Outside Counsel may be involved in future negotiations with Verizon is both speculative and unsupported,” RWA said in its letter to the FCC signed by outside counsel Carri Bennet and Stephen Shaebaugh. “Verizon provides no evidence to substantiate this claim.”

RWA also claimed that, even if members of its outside counsel were involved in future negotiations with Verizon and were unable to effectively wall off confidential information from the MVNO, it would have no material impact on Verizon’s bargaining position.

“Verizon can reasonably be expected to offer the same terms to similarly situated entities,” RWA asserted. “Disclosure of these Wholesale Agreements would only materially impact future negotiations if Verizon were offering different terms to similarly situated entities - a discriminatory practice that the FCC should investigate if that is in fact the case.”

RWA concluded its letter by arguing that the FCC’s explicit request for the MVNO demonstrated its relevance to the proceedings, and that access to the MVNO would not be shared with members of RWA.

The trade association’s letter came in response to a filing Verizon sent to the commission on June 10. That filing argued that Verizon did not believe that RWA’s outside counsel would intentionally misuse information from the MVNO, but rather that the information obtained would subconsciously influence the negotiation tactics of members of the counsel when representing future parties. 

“The very reason that the Protective Order separates Highly Confidential Information from Confidential Information … is because the FCC has recognized that it is impossible to expect the actions of even the most diligent individual not to be influenced by learning certain information,” Verizon said.

Verizon further argued that releasing the information contained in its MVNOs to RWA’s outside counsel will contribute little of relevance to the record, but will allow RWA members to strengthen their bargaining position in future negotiations with Verizon.

“The [RWA] goes on to suggest that the real reason RWA members (or their outside counsel) may be interested in seeing these agreements is to determine whether the members are themselves receiving the best price from Verizon,” Verizon asserted. “RWA members’ commercial interest in learning the terms of competitors’ contracts is well outside the scope of any legitimate internet in the data produced in this proceeding.”