Regulations preventing SpaceX from saying "no" if OneWeb asked them to launch their satellites?

Question

The Forbes article With A Successful Launch, OneWeb Just Joined SpaceX And Others In The Satellite Internet Race says:

This marks a turning point in a new generation of communications satellites, which backers say will provide high-speed internet connectivity to the billions of people who still lack access to it. OneWeb joins SpaceX as the second company in this new generation of internet satellite to actually put spacecraft into orbit.

If OneWeb asked SpaceX to launch their internet satellites which compete with SpaceX's planned internet satellites, it might be in SpaceX's interest to say "no" and force them to go with a more expensive carrier, and to avoid the optics.

Question: But since SpaceX operates in a highly regulated niche within the already highly regulated transportation industry, would they be able to simply say "no, your money's no good here" or are there regulations that would requite them to treat all potential customers in a similar way?

I'm not asking if they could find a way to torpedo the deal or shuffle the schedule to OneWeb's disadvantage, I'm asking if they can just say no.

I'm looking for fact based answers, and those can include facts of laws and factual anecdotes where this issue may have already come up.

---

ex post factoid: SpaceX launches 40 OneWeb satellites into orbit, aces rocket landing

Answer 1

There are no such regulations, so I can't think of any reason why SpaceX couldn't refuse to launch a competitor's satellites.

The relevant regulator here is the FAA, and specifically AST. AST regulates the launch and reentry of space objects from the United States. AST's authority to regulate these activities is set out in U.S. law. That authority is focused almost entirely on the safety of operations (as well as some related topics like liability). So the short answer to the question is that no U.S. regulator has the ability to impose rules that would prevent SpaceX from discriminating against competitors.

There are two possible arguments that could be used to force SpaceX to accept competitor launches, but neither is currently available. First, if SpaceX and other launch providers were to be considered "common carriers", then they would not be allowed to discriminate against customers. I'm not an expert in common carrier law, but my understanding is that generally in the United States, industries are specifically designated as common carriers by legislation, either explicitly or by implication. There have been various laws in the past century or two that did that for rail operators, airlines, and see of course most recently the battle about net neutrality as this concept applies to telecoms. There has been no such legislation with regard to space launch providers.

Second, if SpaceX had a monopoly on space launches, the Department of Justice and other federal agencies could take enforcement action against them to require certain steps to protect the public. That would require actual monopoly power (which SpaceX does not have - in fact there are lots of new launchers coming online) - as well as extensive litigation, which has not occurred.