Slashdot Mirror
Oregon ISP Now Forcing Cordcutters to Sign up For TV to Avoid Caps (dslreports.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Oregon ISP BendBroadband has revised its usage-based broadband policies to favor customers that subscribe to TV services as well. According to a blog post by the company, Bend is deploying a number of new speed upgrades, including new Ultra 50, Ultra 100 and Ultra 300 Mbps speed tiers. The company is telling users on its Bronze and Silver Internet plans that they should be eligible for a free upgrade later this month. But another post adds a different wrinkle: Bend says it's removing its current usage caps if you bundle TV and phone service. These caps have historically ranged from 150 to 500 GB. "Customers who subscribe to Bronze or above internet (including Silver, Gold and Platinum) and Essentials or above TV (including Preferred, Preferred Plus and The Works) are no longer limited on data usage and will no longer pay overage fees," says the company.The report cites similar practices by other ISPs, suggesting that it's quickly becoming an industry standard.
The country with the actual claim to inventing the internet has one of the shittest internets. If any ISP around here even thought of having a cap on anything but the most basic of service they'd be laughed right out of business.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Don't worry, you can just go to one of the other cablecos in your area for a better deal.
Competition FTW! ;-)
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
A company is offering a service.
Here, let me fix that for you:
A government-sanctioned monopoly is offering a service, with no other competitors allowed to offer you a competing service.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
This pretty well seems to be the cable business response, to the Internet business making cable well obsolete. They went around and used their rights of way to make sure they were the Internet providers so they could make sure to get you coming or going.
Boy howdie did the telco industry really drop the ball. They should have aggressively laid fiber on their rights of way and brought out speeds coax cable was never going to compete with and priced them competitively. Hindsight is 20/20.
However the public sector really dropped the ball here too. High speed internet access is basically noncompetitive in the US because cities though it was a good idea to trample private property rights and grant rights of way to private companies. eminent domain should NEVER be used to give land to private enterprises. Its not right or fair. When it comes to things like fiber, telephone wires, electrical lines local governments (maybe counties for long haul lines and stuff) should build them and lease them out; or maybe decide not to build them if existing resident land owners want to vote to discourage development in certain areas.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
I'm shocked. Shocked that legislation would have loopholes in them that could be done through incompetence. Normally, those loopholes are due to lobbyists.
Shocked.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
I expect that soon cable companies will just increase the price of internet service by the amount a basic tv subscription costs and say that basic tv service is "free" with an internet plan.
Don't want tv? Fine, but it won't lower your bill.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
It's "free" for the insurance companies to give women birth control pills because the baseline cost without them includes the risk of covering your pregnancy.
Like wise for the ISPs they'd rather you were watching TV mulit-cast than streaming netflix on demand.
So they can offer you a bundle for less cost than they could sell you uncapped internet.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
My in-laws had their cable and Internet service through BendBroadband. They are light users and were still getting overage charges for using to much bandwidth to the point that they had to regulate their usage. I called up BendBroadband and they basically told me "we are a small company so we can't do anything about it". They have about the worst channel selection guide I have ever seen and their DVR is even worse. (Possibly the worse DVR implementation I have ever seen.) I had my in-laws switch to DirecTV with CenturyLink and they never had problems again. In fact, their monthly TV/Internet lowered by about 20% and they got a DVR that was actually useful.
"ISP offers unlimited broadband ONLY to TV subscribers" FTFY
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Wow, they're not even hiding it or lying about it anymore. Remember when the caps used to be about "congestion?" Now the truth is explicitly admitted. Everyone, before you lose your cool over this, think. This really is progress. We've reached the point in "LA Story" where the someone is politely told, "Hi. My name is Bob. I'll be your robber." No subterfuge, denial, etc. It's out in the open.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Why on earth would it be illegal?
This is why.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
Don't worry, you can just go to one of the other cablecos in your area for a better deal.
Competition FTW! ;-)
Exactly. I'd have no problem with bundle pricing if there were competition for each bundle element, but when there is a monopoly on one or more elements, then there can be abuse. In this case, cable co's can create a big disadvantage for IPTV competitors like SLING by making it cost a lot more for you to use your internet for IPTV alone.
I have less of a problem in general with those who use more data paying more, but don't tie that to cable content where there is a monopoly on internet access.
It's only the same cable if you buy phone/tv/internet from the same company. The fact that they can share the same cable for different services doesn't make them "naturally related". My vacuum cleaner and my refrigerator might plug into the same electrical circuit, but they don't have much in common in the way of functionality or purpose.
The incumbent cable company is the only broadband choice for many people in the US. Cable companies that adopt this policy are in violation of US anti-trust law.
Cable companies that use their monopoly status to harm competing video services should be held liable for the damages caused to the competing video services.
Microsoft tried this with a web browser and operating system years ago - and it tied them up in court for years.
Obama, are you listening?