US Internet Service In 2014: Net Neutrality Challenges and High-Speed Build-Outs

Ars Technica takes a look at two sides of the world of internet service, as it's available to customers in the U.S., and especially at changes that are in the works for the next year. Thanks to Google, AT&T and other providers (including municipal networks), the number of Americans with access to very high speed household connections is rising dramatically — good news, for those in range of fiber-to-the-home rollouts, and this means at least some pressure on competitors. But as Ars writer Jon Brodkin points out, there are also developments that may dismay many customers, specifically the possibility that the Federal Communication Commission's 2010 Open Internet Order ("a network neutrality law that forbids ISPs from blocking services or charging content providers for access to their networks") may be overturned or weakened. That could come about either through lawsuit (Verizon's suit is mentioned), or through a more market-oriented approach from the FCC. Writes Brodkin: "If the law were overturned, ISPs could more easily steer customers to their own services and away from those of their rivals. They could charge companies like Netflix for the right to have their videos prioritized over other types of Internet traffic, perhaps indirectly raising the price consumers pay for streaming video and making it more difficult for startups to compete against established players who can afford the 'Internet fast lane' fees."

Comments

Pass the cost to the end user

[MacDork]

If the FCC decides Net Neutrality is no good, I would suggest sites pass the new costs to end users.

We've detected your ISP is Comcast. Due to fees Comcast charges YouTube to deliver content to you, YouTube is no longer free on Comcast. If you would like to continue using YouTube, you must change your ISP or pay YouTube $X/mo to offset this cost. We are sorry Comcast has decided to double charge you. Thank you for using YouTube

Re:Pass the cost to the end user

[MacDork]

Funny you should mention credit card surcharges. Those are on the way after a long court battle, and a federal judge has already declared it unconstitutional for states to block it.

Re:Pass the cost to the end user

[Shadow of Eternity]

You think people don't already complain about an ISP whose nickname is "Comcrap"?

Re:Pass the cost to the end user

[Megane]

In other words, it's like when a cable company's contract with a local TV station is up. For three months you get end-of-the-world warnings about LOSING YOUR KZZZ TV CHANNEL!!!1!!11ONE~!!1 (as though it were not possible to watch it any other way but through the officially blessed One True Cable Box*), but at the last minute, a new contract is signed, just in time. (Or after maybe one token day of black-out just to remind the plebes that their fate is entirely at the mercy of CocksWeener CableCo.)

*not that most people would even know how to change channels without the box knowing what channels were available -- between the few channels you can get from an antenna is a sucking void that will pull you into a world of static inside your TV set if you change to an unused channel by accident! "They're heeeeeere!"

Re:Pass the cost to the end user

[TheCarp]

> It should be perfectly legal, and publicly known, that credit card transaction fees are charged
> to the person making the purchase

It should but its actually a complicated problem; mostly due to the way card processing works now.

My knowledge of this comes directly from my Wife, who worked in the POS industry (that is sale and setup of cash registers and assorted paraphernalia) for several years.

Basically, what you see, and I see them around too...mostly at gas stations, is the "two price" scenario, one for cash, one for credit. It may be described as a "cash discount", but I have never seen it called a "credit fee", and part of the problem is...the fees are NOT fixed, they vary from card to card.

So, if Alice and Bob both walk into Carolmart on the same day, of the same year, at the same time and buy the same item, they will both pay the same price. However, if Alice uses her Capital One Card, and Bob uses his Discover.... Carolmart will, in fact, actually be charged two different fees!

That is right, if you have a card with "Cash back" or some "rewards program" they actually charge the retailer who takes the card more to cover the rewards! So if they really were to implement such fees, the fee would depend on what card you use (as well as other factors like how much business the store does).

There is some ability to deny specific cards: this is the very reason "American Express" is commonly not accepted because they have some of the higher fees (ditto for discover). However this breaks down a bit when you factor in how many different cards all work under the VISA or MASTERCARD brands.

Not saying any of this isn't fixable, just that its grown up somewhat complicated and there is a lot of interest in not fixing it or making it more transparent.

Comcast is already twisting the screws.

[Bill_the_Engineer]

They finally flipped the switch and capped their "unlimited" internet to 300GB. They will automatically upgrade my service (with increased monthly fees) for every 50 GB over the original 300 GB. I can manually downgrade my service back to the original 300 GB whenever I feel 300 GB is enough. Xfinity video service doesn't count towards the cap but YouTube and Netflix does.

Other shenanigans from Comcast includes: Charging extra ($35) for the battery inside the cable modem to keep the telephony working during blackouts and starting in January they will charge $2 each per month for the simple digital converters they gave for free more than 3 years ago when they eliminated their analog signal. Funny how it was free when converters were on sale everywhere. Now that the supply dried up, they'll start charging for what they gave away.

Welcome to Comcast!

Re:Comcast is already twisting the screws.

[WOOFYGOOFY]

Other shenanigans from Comcast includes: Charging extra ($35) for the battery inside the cable modem to keep the telephony working during blackouts

Get OOMA, the get used to paying virtually nothing in the way of a bill . Get a UPS that kicks in when the elec goes out. It will run your router + OOMA for a *very* long time.

Done.

Re:Comcast is already twisting the screws.

[N0Man74]

The cap is only in some markets. They are testing it. People need to express their dissatisfaction while the testing phase is still happening.

Error in the write up

[plopez]

"a more captured market-oriented approach from the FCC"

There we go. Fixed it. Remember, no business droid in their right mind wants a level playing field. They want a playing field tilted in their favour.

Net neutrality needs to be over turned

[LordToranaga]

By all means get rid of net neutrality, with one caveat: The Verizon's, AT&T's, Comcast's et al of the world must not be allowed to sue either local municipalities or the federal government for creating their own competing delivery systems when it comes to high speed access. And as soon as said companies file a lawsuit the networks of named litigants are immediately open to other network and content providers (aka Optimum) to provide services for as long as the lawsuit is active.

Net Neutrality solution

[WOOFYGOOFY]

Shoot anyone against it.

Also. The FCC is filled to the gills with politically well connected, revolving door sycophants there to do industry's bidding before jumping back on the gravy train. It's the poster child for a watchdog agency overrun and infested with regulatory saboteurs and common's-hating overpavers.

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/20/136492206/new-republic-the-fccs-revolving-door-is-shameless

http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/search_result.php?agency=Federal+Communications+Commission&id=EIFCC

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62718-2004Nov19.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/30/business/la-fi-mo-powell-20130830

http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/20/3670940/michael-powell-fcc-chariman-cable-companies-mercy-contet

Re:Net Neutrality solution

[WOOFYGOOFY]

What we ought to do is just let Munis have community WIFI. They have actually been stopped by the courts by the telcos. Sorry, but that is just corruption. The idea that private corporations can stop the democratically elected local governments from enacting laws which are otherwise not unconsitutional is new to me and I wonder where the legal basis for such comes from.

  People need to wake up and educate themselves as to what's at stake here. Allowing auction style bidding wars for bandwidth to decide the price of bandwidth is preposterous. Should we do the same thing for access to highways? Maybe make trucking companies bid for the right to use them? I wonder what effect that would have on competition and ultimately the price of delivered goods , i.e. everything.

The fact is the FCC is a fox watching the henhouse. These people just need to go on back to their true home- the industry to be regulated- and let actual regulators attend to the process of regulation for the general welfare of society. It's not that hard to get straight on this, people just need to contact their representatives and let them know they're aware of this issue and how they feel. The telcos don't HAVE a constituency they didn't purchase and their pockets are not that deep. The solution is all about education and communication- it's not even a left-right partisan issue. Call your Congressperson and tell them how where you stand. This is how democracy works people.

.