The FCC is voting on their plan to kill Net Neutrality this week. Without Net Neutrality, your ISP can decide Channels is a competitive threat and block access to our website and products. The industry has lobbied hard to make this happen ($500mm+ in spending) and has a long history of anti-competitive policies:
Please take a moment to call your representatives in Congress and tell them to Support Net Neutrality: https://www.battleforthenet.com
From this side of the pond trump and his cronies have really reached new levels. We watch with concern from the UK.
Don’t forget this one:
AT&T is giving cellular customers unlimited data (no caps) if using DirectTV Now. But, if you use any other streaming video service, your data usage will be charged and you will be billed if going over the subscribed amount.
EDIT: Personally, I am against most government regulation, even if it is net neutrality. I think that a service providers should be able to bill what they want, offer services they want, and the consumer can choose not to use that service provider if they don’t like it. In the end, free market will win and the majority of the population will choose the services that have the best prices and the best speeds for all internet content.
The capital required to compete is why most US homes only have one broadband provider to choose from, so there isn’t any competition. I am lucky that I have 4 to choose. It’s going to take a while to get competitive internet country-wide.
With people dropping cable in favor of streaming, that is a huge hit on cable company pocketbooks. I don’t know how much most people pay for content, but I pay 35/mo spread over 3 providers, cutting my cable bill from $130 to $70. I saved $30, the cable co lost $60. I’m sure the loss is higher when they lose premium and Sports customers.
Although we as consumers don’t care about individual companies (as we shouldn’t) These cable companies personally can’t take this creative destruction death gracefully. That’s why everyone will see consolidation and ISP charges go up to compensate for those losses.
It will reach an equilibrium, but only when it’s cost effective for competition to move into an area. It’s going to take time and technology updates for that to happen. This is just molasses in the step of progress.
People using only streaming often subscribe to faster internet plans. I use gigabit internet in my home. I don’t think the cable companies are losing money.
In your case, if your internet provider started charging more money to steam Netflix (or insert any internet streaming here), you would probably choose to use one of the 3 other internet providers servicing your area. Because of this, no reasonable provider is going to be increasing prices. I suppose it could be a problem in remote areas of the country where there is no competition… maybe the federal regulations should instead be a state or town regulation only applying to remote areas where there are few people/services.
Well here in the UK there is even less choice.
Living in Baltimore. I can choose Xfinity, FIOS, HughesNet, Verizon DSL, Windstream, Exede, or among 25 other small-business providers. Both Comcast Xfinity and Verizon FIOS offer speeds over 1gbps in most areas of the city. These and a few others have packages that include Internet, TV, and Phone. Personally, I use an antenna to get all of my TV. I receive OTA broadcasts from both Baltimore and DC… It is a lot of HD channels. I used to use FIOS for my Internet, but recently decided to switch to Xfinity. And I don’t have a landline phone, but have two AT&T cellular plans, both of which also receive high-speed internet via LTE.
I am an American consumer and have the freedom to choose to use any provider that I want.
Yeah, and some of us are concerned about the part of the 350million that don’t have it, or how the other side of your Connection have to raise their rates because of their ISP.
Living right outside Baltimore county I get one option; Comcast.
The medium is irrelevant. If the company offers Internet, they are an ISP. If they offer telephone service, they are a phone company. It doesn’t matter if they use fiber, coax, copper, satellite, or even teleporting space rays… as long as the end result is Internet/TV/Phone in your home.
EDIT: All I am getting to is that there are some choices. Consumers will find a way to get the service that they want without the government stepping in and regulating things.
Seriously, folks here need to look past the “neutrality” euphemism and see the deeper pluses and minuses for so-called “net neutrality.”
There is still such a thing as the FTC. Your concern about anti-competitive practices are over-blown. And your lack of concern about the impact of the gov regulating the Internet using the Comm Act of 1934 are mystifying.
Oh well. Whats done is done. Once this plays out in court, we’ll see.
Very proud that all 4 of Hawaii’s representatives support Net Neutrality.
Thank the matrix, however time will tell if it’ll be enough.
Consumer choice is best but there is nothing like having the internet to voice your opinion and get the word of injustice out onto the web even if you only have one choice! It worked for me. I have one choice in my neighborhood which is a local telco. They were offering Gig in the neighborhood literally on the other side of the ditch from me at just $40US over what I paid for 50x5 ($90/mo). The reason? I am not 100% sure but there was competition in that neighborhood. I made a huge stink about it calling them out on FaceBook and sure enough, a couple months later, I had much faster internet at a better rate. Was this planned by them and it took them time to roll it out? I am not sure, but I like to think I had a hand in it.
Those specific mentions by the creator were all before NN and I do not think a single one of them panned out for the company. Companies have a right to do what they want. It is also the right of the individual to do what they want as well. Just because they are a big company and we pay them to give us a service does not give the government the right to making sweeping changes to their rules of governing their company and how they serve us for just a service. It is a SERVICE! We do NOT have a RIGHT to that service. Especially if we are complaining about ‘cutting the cord’. If the internet was ABSOLUTELY life saving in tens of thousands of cases a year then that could be argued. But it isn’t. There are alternatives to services. Just because we don’t have alternatives to that service with another service does not mean we do not have alternatives. The alternative is to not pay them. Do we miss out on stuff? SURE, but they have the right to do business the way they want and we have a right to make a complaint and/or not pay them.
I lived in Singapore for about 7 years. During the latter half of my time there, they started rolling out fiber on this island (easy for them to do in such a small country). The fibre line itself was owned by one company that was under the very watchful eye of the Information Ministry to ensure they provided the best infrastructure. Then, the 3 telcos leased that line and provided the service. I was zipping along with high speeds at a very reasonable price.
