Cable Easement Agreement

The second point concerns the characteristics of the MDU in one of the 17 states that have passed mandatory access laws. Although mandatory public access statutes vary in their coverage, they generally prevent MDU owners from impairing a cable operator`s ability to supply MDU residents and give franchise operators, either explicitly or implicitly, the right to install and maintain wiring in MDU buildings, including on owners` objections. However, a mandatory access law should not be expected to automatically facilitate the entry of the property or the use of existing infrastructure, such as indoor wiring, for a cable company. Even in a mandatory state of access, an owner can negotiate the terms of a cable operator`s access to the property, including the use of common areas for marketing purposes, and the existing wiring infrastructure for the provision of services. You will definitely want to be in the know if you plan to put extra to your home or bridge building. If you build a terrace over a part of the country that a neighbor is allowed to pass legally to access the road, you could not only be forced to take it, but you could also end up in court. That`s why it`s important to know if there are facilities on a property before you decide to buy it. An owner may sign a document stating that the supplier is “authorized here” to enter the owner`s apartment complex, but ultimately provides the supplier with rights that are normally related to relief. Yes, for example.

B, an owner of the MDU issues a licence that the parties describe as “irrevocable”; “is coupled with an interest”; or “runs with the country” and is “obligatory for [the heirs] of the owner, successor and beneficiary of the transfer”; and if the issuance of the licence is duly registered in local registers, the licence cannot be revoked without reason and will not be removed if the property is passed on to a new owner. In such a case, the license has the most practical consequences as relief, and termination as a license does not deny these consequences. First, the FCC`s 2007 Regulation on Exclusive Video Access Agreements means that video providers (with the exception of direct satellite providers who are excluded from the ban at least for the time being) are not authorized to adopt or enforce contractual provisions that designate a single video service provider on an MDU property. The order does not mean that an MDU owner must allow a particular supplier to access the property. A supplier must continue to negotiate access terms with a building owner, as is currently the case, and there is nothing in the FCC rule requiring an owner to grant access to a supplier. In other words, by prohibiting exclusive access and service agreements, the FCC has not created a mandatory federal access right. For this reason, relief is more valuable to a supplier than a simple license.