Net Neutrality fell

Bambooza

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 25, 2017
5,775
18,285
2,875
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
ISP’s are in an interesting position. As some have touched on there is a cost to compete element to the game but even here it’s not the full picture. As google fiber found out the hard way when they attempted to start rolling out their service to cities across the United States, utilities and the conduits they run through be it on a pole or underground are heavily regulated and the easements on who owns rights a legal quagmire. The second part is that most jurisdictions award a single company full access to these easements as a common carrier and in doing so grant them a natural monopoly. This is due to the reality that there is only so much room available within the infrastructure and having many companies attempting to run their own services would quickly use up all available space. It’s the same issue with in the wireless broadband market with contracts and bids for parts of the designated spectrum as well as contracts for places to place ones antenna. So the first part of the issue is not just the startup capital required but the natural limitation either with in the physical space or with in the electromagnetic spectrum so the best solution is still to allow a few companies to operate as a service provider as a common carrier and provide the service for the community.

Given the natural limitations on who can provide internet content it becomes problematic when the common carrier is also capable of filtering what content is available to the end user. Netflix is a great example as they are in direct competition with most cable broadband provider’s corporate holdings. So while they might not be able to completely deny you access to Netflix they can easily slow down traffic coming from Netflix’s servers to the point where it’s impossible to stream any movie without massive amounts of buffering. At the same time they can promote their own content solution at a price slightly more than Netflix or a lot more and what choice do you have? We have seen a similar trend with cell phone providers were they will offer perks with Pandora in that Pandora streaming does not count against your monthly data cap. But if you want to listen to Spotify instead you reasonably can’t.

So while healthy competition is great as it spurs on development and increases options to the consumers due to the very nature of the physical connection and its limited space there is not a lot of options or competition. The end result should be that service providers should not also be allowed to be content providers. While the FCC cannot prevent these companies from being both it attempted to prevent them from favoring their own content over their competitors.


Maybe the solution is not to attempt to force them to treat all data equal but to break up these companies and put into place the ruling that service and content cannot exist within the same umbrella.
 

NaffNaffBobFace

Space Marshal
Donor
Jan 5, 2016
12,222
44,933
3,150
RSI Handle
NaffNaffBobFace
ISP’s are in an interesting position. As some have touched on there is a cost to compete element to the game but even here it’s not the full picture. As google fiber found out the hard way when they attempted to start rolling out their service to cities across the United States, utilities and the conduits they run through be it on a pole or underground are heavily regulated and the easements on who owns rights a legal quagmire. The second part is that most jurisdictions award a single company full access to these easements as a common carrier and in doing so grant them a natural monopoly. This is due to the reality that there is only so much room available within the infrastructure and having many companies attempting to run their own services would quickly use up all available space. It’s the same issue with in the wireless broadband market with contracts and bids for parts of the designated spectrum as well as contracts for places to place ones antenna. So the first part of the issue is not just the startup capital required but the natural limitation either with in the physical space or with in the electromagnetic spectrum so the best solution is still to allow a few companies to operate as a service provider as a common carrier and provide the service for the community.

Given the natural limitations on who can provide internet content it becomes problematic when the common carrier is also capable of filtering what content is available to the end user. Netflix is a great example as they are in direct competition with most cable broadband provider’s corporate holdings. So while they might not be able to completely deny you access to Netflix they can easily slow down traffic coming from Netflix’s servers to the point where it’s impossible to stream any movie without massive amounts of buffering. At the same time they can promote their own content solution at a price slightly more than Netflix or a lot more and what choice do you have? We have seen a similar trend with cell phone providers were they will offer perks with Pandora in that Pandora streaming does not count against your monthly data cap. But if you want to listen to Spotify instead you reasonably can’t.

So while healthy competition is great as it spurs on development and increases options to the consumers due to the very nature of the physical connection and its limited space there is not a lot of options or competition. The end result should be that service providers should not also be allowed to be content providers. While the FCC cannot prevent these companies from being both it attempted to prevent them from favoring their own content over their competitors.


Maybe the solution is not to attempt to force them to treat all data equal but to break up these companies and put into place the ruling that service and content cannot exist within the same umbrella.
Or perhaps vital public service infrastructure should be taken into public ownership? the ISP's compete on price but the gov keeps the wires running.
 

Ripcord33

Grand Admiral
May 2, 2016
217
668
1,210
RSI Handle
Ripcord03
Nope.

You dont pay extra..yet. Netflix has to pay your ISP extra so that they don't get throttled.

Then Netflix has to charge you more for the monthly fee to make up for the costs.

So goodbye $12/month, hello $15/month.
Well, netflix already sent me an email saying my prices were going up in January, im sure they will go up again after that too
 
  • Like
Reactions: StdDev and Bambooza

NaffNaffBobFace

Space Marshal
Donor
Jan 5, 2016
12,222
44,933
3,150
RSI Handle
NaffNaffBobFace
Well, netflix already sent me an email saying my prices were going up in January, im sure they will go up again after that too
Didn't Netflix start out posting rental DVD's to your door? I can see a return to that business model if things don't turn out too well ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bambooza

Bambooza

Space Marshal
Donor
Sep 25, 2017
5,775
18,285
2,875
RSI Handle
MrBambooza
The FCC thing might be a good thing. In their relinquishing control of something they really didn't have much power to enforce it gives local governing bodies, states and congress the ability to enact laws that are far more easily regulated.
 

Sirus7264

Space Marshal
Donor
Apr 5, 2017
3,364
11,195
2,800
RSI Handle
Sirus7264
Only fools believe there is any real competition in the ISP business.

More than 80% of US consumers have ONLY ONE CHOICE for which ISP to use.

Your entire argument is based on a fictitious situation whereby consumers have choice. That is absolutely NOT the state of the US ISP business.
I can agree with this my mother's house in florida has one company she can pick for cable/fiber. She has to pay rediculas ammounts for internet as it is since they have control of her area. they say the reason why they have to pay so much is because how far away she lives from normal society the upkeep costs of the wiring underground. So so glad im not in america right now and hope they fix this before i go back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StdDev

Toihva

Captain
Aug 13, 2017
106
384
200
RSI Handle
Dagnimaer
Only fools believe there is any real competition in the ISP business.

More than 80% of US consumers have ONLY ONE CHOICE for which ISP to use.

Your entire argument is based on a fictitious situation whereby consumers have choice. That is absolutely NOT the state of the US ISP business.
And you do know who is to blame for this aspect of US internet, right?

I lived in such an area and it sucked.

And as far as the rules, who do you think is gonna start writing those rules and regulations. Give you a hint, not gonna be the EFF.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bambooza

HeadClot

Grand Admiral
May 29, 2014
197
671
1,210
RSI Handle
HeadClot88
And you do know who is to blame for this aspect of US internet, right?

I lived in such an area and it sucked.

And as far as the rules, who do you think is gonna start writing those rules and regulations. Give you a hint, not gonna be the EFF.
I really think that Municipal Internet should become more common. Allot of states should invest in this as it brings high tech jobs to the city and it forces ISPs to compete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bambooza

Sirus7264

Space Marshal
Donor
Apr 5, 2017
3,364
11,195
2,800
RSI Handle
Sirus7264
Well, netflix already sent me an email saying my prices were going up in January, im sure they will go up again after that too
My prices are still down low here in japan
I'm curious (selfishly) how this will affect people outside of the US.
Netflix could raise prices in all countries by a little to make up for the big increase they will get from the american side. I'm sure its the same across the board as a business tactic i could see this happening. The less money people need to pay the less people will ask questions or stop paying for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadClot
Forgot your password?