t's local interconnection sites. Comcast attempted to collect monthly fees for this connectivity. After a series of discussions, Level 3 paid these fees but protested in letters to the FCC and the Justice Department. Level 3 stated that the Netflix service competed with Comcast's services, and Comcast's actions were anticompetitive. In response, Comcast has stated that there is a great deal of competition with its services from providers such as Boxee, Amazon, and Apple, as well as satel- lite TV operators. Comcast further maintained that it provides interconnections for entertainment and media companies that stream services over its broadband network. In addition, Comcast stated that Level 3's requests were for peering connections. Peering sites are locations in backbone networks, where carriers exchange traffic addressed to locations on others' networks. In these instances, carriers that transmit many more IP packets over greater distances have tradi- tionally paid to transmit IP traffic to carriers to which they connect. Level 3 contends that the billing dispute with Comcast is not about peering traf- fic in the backbone portion of networks. Rather, this traffic is essentially local- ized traffic for connection to Comcast's customers. Level 3 further contends that the FCC's 2010 Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) explicitly forbade broadband carriers from charging competitors for access to their last-mile cus- tomers. This is because access is required to reach these customers, and it is not economically feasible for competitors to build their own broadband connections within cities. Continued Competition, Industry Structures, and Regulations Netflix and Comcast are holding continuing discussions over these payments. Level 3 plans to continue publicizing this issue. Disputes of this type raise antitrust concerns because providers are able to place a lock on access to their residential subscribers. Moreover, content from provid- ers such as Netflix competes with the services offered by cable TV providers. Se