Who Controls the ISP in a Multi-Unit Building?
- Anna Baryudin
- Jun 20
- 2 min read
Though landlords are not generally required to provide internet, some choose to do so. Commonly, those landlords will enter into bulk service agreement with internet service providers (ISPs), and the lease will reflect the tenants’ obligation to pay their share of the internet. But what if a tenant asks for an alternative ISP? Or another ISP demands access to the building under threat of lawsuit?
In some jurisdictions, the landlord cannot impose a specific ISP on a tenant. In Oakland, for example, a “property owner interferes with the occupant’s choice of communication services provider by [...] refusing to allow a communication services provider to install the facilities and equipment necessary to provide communication services [...].” O.M.C. 8.66.030. But Oakland property owners are still allowed to refuse access to a new ISP under certain circumstances (no tenant in the building has requested the ISP; the ISP and landlord can’t agree on compensation, etc.; O.M.C. 8.66.080).
Absent a local ordinance, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) restricts ISPs, not landlords. Back in 2022, the FCC passed regulations prevented ISPs from blocking competitive access to alternative providers by entering sale-and-leaseback arrangements with landlords but did not require landlords to allow new ISPs into the building, and did not allow tenants to opt out. In 2024, the FCC proposed to expand regulations to apply to landlords. The proposal would have banned landlords from entering into arrangements that required tenants to pay for broadband, cable, and satellite service provided by a specific provider, and would have allowed tenants to opt out of such arrangements if they were in the lease.
The 2024 proposal never went into effect, and in 2025, the new FCC commissioner called the 2024 proposal a “regulatory overreach.”
