It is a ten year old issue. The situation you are referring to was not the first time your perspective has been raised. It was raised as far back as 1997, and perhaps even further back than that, but I don't recall. Every few years we can expect people who believe as you to do try to make a play for imposing their own brand of what has been repeatedly deemed as "NOT fairness" by the entities designated by our society to make those decisions.
I am sorry but that is not the case. This is not a 10 year old issue, the FCC recently looked at Time Warner and Comcast's practice of witholding regional sports nets from other providers through the "terrestrial loophole" in 2006 when the two companies bought/merged with Adelphia cable who had fallen into bankrupcy.
And we can expect similar conditions applied to the establishment of this JV, because of the JV. There is nothing surprising about that. It doesn't mean anyone has been doing anything wrong up until now. When such conditions are applied they are simply a matter of the application of balance. Just because you didn't like the balanced reached in 1998 or 2006 or any of the other times this issue has been addressed doesn't mean that someone did something wrong. That was the point.
As a condition of the merger, the FCC ruled that ...
Ridiculous. Their allowing a service provider to do something means that they determined that specific thing to be fair, or part of a fair overall system. You choose to call it "unfair", even though the FCC's actions, by your own assertion, belie your labeling.
While I am not certain what the government will do in this case, the have recently shown they will allow Comcast to continue a practice that has been determined "unfair" if the right people are lobbying for it.