Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Pushes FCC To Crack Down On Data Caps (dslreports.com)

Netflix hates data caps. The on-demand movies and TV shows service has asked the US Federal Communications Commission to declare that home internet data caps are unreasonable and that they limit customers' ability to watch online video. From an article on DSLReports:Netflix has long has an adversarial relationship with ISPs, and often for good reason. Usage caps on fixed-line networks are specifically designed to protect ISP TV revenues from Netflix competition, allowing an ISP to both complicate and generate additional profit off of the shift away from legacy TV. "Data caps (especially low data caps) and usage based pricing ("UBP") discourage a consumer's consumption of broadband, and may impede the ability of some households to watch Internet television in a manner and amount that they would like," said Netflix in a new filing with the FCC. "For this reason, the Commission should hold that data caps on fixed Âline networks ÂÂand low data caps on mobile networksÂÂ may unreasonably limit Internet television viewing and are inconsistent with Section 706." Netflix's filing comes as ISP's increasingly turn to broadband usage caps to take advantage of the lack of broadband competition in many markets. Fearing FCC crackdown both Comcast and AT&T raised their caps to one terabyte, though many ISPs still cap usage at much-lower allotments. High, low, or somewhere in between, Netflix highlights that there is no good reason to implement caps on well-managed fixed-line networks, despite a decade of ISPs trying to justify the price gouging.

10 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. At&t doesn't even try to pretend it isnt extor by netsavior · · Score: 4, Informative

    Their official policy is that you have to pay them for TV no matter what. Either you subscribe to TV, or your internet connection is capped, and you will pay them for TV anyway in the form of overages.

    Seemed like a pretty good plan "Lets punish consumers and make them pay for our ill-conceived acquisition of Direct TV"

    Gee, I wonder why they are losing subscribers.

  2. Re:At&t doesn't even try to pretend it isnt ex by stinerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will be a continuing problem so long as the people who own the infrastructure also sell services over it.

    They almost got this right with the ILEC/CLEC split with DSL. The only problem is that they let the ILEC sell services over the infrastructure they owned.

    Don't let the guys who own the wires sell any services and this problem will fix itself.

  3. Re:Push netflix to have adjustable resolution/qual by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And also the ability to delay or offload content in cache. For example, if your bandwidth is currently funky (as is typical with oligopoly ISP's), then set the play to notify you when the download is complete or the buffer reaches a certain percent complete. A fuller menu would look something like:

    Bandwidth and Delay Options:
    Quality (higher quality may slow download):
        [x] Automatic
        [_] High-Definition [rate value here]
        [_] Medium [rate value here]
        [_] Low [rate value here]
        [_] Etc.
    Delayed Playback:
        [x] Don't play until buffer has ____ seconds of video [with a default but editable number]
        [_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, Auto-Play
        [_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, Pop-Up-Notification
        [_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, No notification (click video window to play when "Ready" indicated)

    But companies can argue these kind of options are too confusing to most consumers. Maybe a good UI designer could make them friendlier...

  4. If people only knew... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If people only knew how little it costs per household for ISPs to provide cable TV and internet service! While no real figures are published, by some estimates it costs most ISPs less than $15.00 a month per household to provide both broadband Internet and cable TV, in some cases less than half of that figure.

    Not only should the FCC remove all data caps, prices for broadband Internet service, and cable TV should be capped at $29.95 per month each. Our taxes have paid for the infrastructure for these services, yet we are massively price gouged for these services. One reason that this price gouging goes on is that ISPs have managed to stifle any hint of competition in most locations in the U.S., even buying draconian laws against cities that wish to provide their citizens with reasonably prices broadband Internet and Cable TV services.

    I would also like to see the FCC mandate that as long as costumers are paying for their cable TV service, it should be commercial free, as we were promised at the very beginning of cable TV roll-outs!

  5. Monopolies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given that Comcast enjoys government granted monopolies in its markets, it seems reasonable for the government to require them to remove data caps.

    Of course, the better approach would be to tell Comcast fine, charge whatever you like, but we're going to open all of your markets to competition.

  6. Re: Push netflix to have adjustable resolution/qua by danbob999 · · Score: 4, Funny

    My kids don't care when I drop youtube down to 240 resolution,

    Someone calls child care services at once!

  7. Re:no caps on internal or CDN traffic by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I kinda wish it was like the old days of dialup.
    You have two bills.
    1 for the Infrastructure (Telephone Line)
    1 for your ISP

    The problem now is they are both the same... I should be able to say choose from Cable/Satellite/Cell/Fiber Optic. Pay x per month for the infrastructure which has its fixed peak speeds.
    Then you choose your ISP, who pays so much for caps or no caps, IP Address... Email and any other feature you want and don't want.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  8. Re:Channel saturation by YouGotTobeKidding · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bullshit.
    They don't even want to OFFER it. Instead they rather play word games and sell idiots on the idea of 'unlimited'.

    Its either unlimited or its not. If its not DON'T CALL IT UNLIMITED.

    Would you let a car mfg'er claim your new car has 400horsepower when it has a fucking 30cc lawnmower engine in it? No. Because its call truth in advertising.

  9. ISP perspective by pcjunky · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I own an ISP (WISP) that is virtually the only option outside of the two large incumbent carriers, Centrylink and Comast that residential users have. The other CLECs mainly, if not exclusively, sell commercial service. We have seen in the last 5 years demand for bandwidth increase nearly 500% mostly due to video streaming. The cost of the fiber and equipment has come down to be sure, but no where near 500%. So far we have been able to keep providing an essentially unlimited service. However if current trends continue, I'm not sure for how much longer.

  10. Re:Channel saturation by HiThereImBob · · Score: 4, Informative

    The caps are not put in place by ISPs to make people pay for TV as the summary claims. (Why would an ISP that has no video services at all have caps if that were truly the reason? What is T-Mobile's TV service?) They're put in place to keep people who think they ought to have 100% fulltime use of a shared resource from keeping other users from getting what they are paying for.

    So this is just about network management?

    Comcast VP: 300GB data cap is “business policy,” not technical necessity
    http://arstechnica.com/busines...

    Another Broadband CEO Admits: Data Caps Have Nothing To Do With Capacity
    https://consumerist.com/2016/0...

    Leaked Comcast memo reportedly admits data caps aren't about improving network performance
    http://www.theverge.com/smart-...

    Comcast Admits Broadband Usage Caps Are A Cash Grab, Not An Engineering Necessity
    https://www.techdirt.com/artic...