Slashdot Mirror
FCC Calls Out AT&T, Verizon For 'Zero Rating' Their Own Video Apps (zdnet.com)
U.S. regulators are calling out AT&T and Verizon for exempting their own video apps from data caps on customers' smartphones. The FCC has sent letters to the country's biggest wireless carriers saying the way they handle the practice, known as "zero rating," can hurt competition and consumers. From a report on ZDNet: AT&T launched DirecTV Now earlier this week. AT&T Mobility customers can stream video data over LTE without impacting their data allowance. Verizon offers something similar with its go90 service. AT&T and Verizon don't see any wrongdoing. In a statement Friday, AT&T said exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money. Verizon said its practices are good for consumers and comply with regulations. "We will provide the FCC with additional information on why the government should not take away a service that saves consumers money," AT&T wrote in a statement Friday. The FCC hasn't released any official ruling on "zero rating," just guidance. It said on Thursday a similar letter was sent to AT&T in November, but the FCC didn't like AT&T's original response.
Just wait about a month and a half AT&T and Verizon. Everything will be a-ok.
"the government should not take away a service that saves consumers money"
But the only reason it costs money in the first place is because you decided it does.
With the anti-net neutrality people the new administration is putting in place in the FCC advisory committee, they just need to stall for a few months and it'll blow over. Then they can continue their anti-competitive ways in peace.
"AT&T said exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money. "
No, it doesn't. Wireless network costs are shifted onto consumers who don't buy their streaming services. If all the costs of streaming bandwidth are included in the price of the streaming service, then reduce the cost of that service and let the consumers pay for the bandwidth directly, just like customers who use competitive streaming services.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
The primary cost factor for wireless bandwidth is the wireless part (see wired networks and their unlimited bandwidth for far less money or, in cases where there is throttling, SIGNIFICANTLY more data allowance for less money). Since these zero rated services share that same wireless medium, any use of them will require higher data rates(money) for any other traffic so that those other services welfare the zero rated service. IE: it will cost me more for data for my own use, or for use for other non-zero-rated products.
AT&T and Verizon aren't involved in anti competitive vertical integration, which is why they're zero-rating all video services... right?
... why would they care NOW about what the FCC "calls them out", why would this change, a month before Trump?!
ONLY apps can app apps, which is why AppT&T and Verappzon are apping apps while apping other apps. That's why the LUDDITE FCC hates them!
Apps!
Pricing their video service over cellular implies that the cost of the cellular hop is zero, and that the expense of transmitting the video to the viewer is all in the Internet link. Since their own video service is hosted locally, there is no Internet bandwidth consumed, and thus the price should be zero (which was what Netflix offered these guys for free on their landline ISP service and they turned it down). For a market economy to function properly, the minimum pricing has to reflect the expense incurred by the seller.
I can understand zero rating as a temporary promotional measure (e.g. streamed video doesn't count against your cap for the first 6 months if you use our service). But making it the standard price is equivalent to dumping to try to kill off competition. Especially if they're using revenue from other sources to subsidize this service, like say, extra money they're collecting from Netflix in contravention of Net Neutrality.
Ethically/morally/etc it's one thing. It gets a bit trickier. When you offer a service like that, it also pushes more traffic onto the network, which affects other users of said network.
Personally, I think it's interesting that the FCC is calling out a company early (though this would have to be fought outside the FCC in the end). If I'm paying for bandwidth that isn't throttled and don't abuse it, it seems a bit lopsided that my bandwidth gets throttled by the heavy usage of others that were encouraged to use the LTE network for a service that eats a lot (especially the more users are using). Basically, it's throttling without throttling.
In terms of what I think is a better idea, that's not something I can technically address without impeding on the morals of others. From a technical standpoint, it's dumb, and I don't want to be pigeonholed by dumb. I might be going overboard, but if there will be lots of video eating up available short-bursts fast bandwidth, I don't want to be paying for it. Lower my cost or fix the technical dilemma. Just an opinion, and I know that doesn't matter. :)
It means there's a loophole in the data cap, and if any form of data is zero-rated, then every form of data can also be zero-rated, by making it look like zero-rated data.
"We will provide the FCC with additional information on why the government should not take away a service that saves consumers money," AT&T wrote in a statement Friday hey AT&T, if you can save them money by giving them YOUR data stuff for free, why not save them a bunch more and do that for all data? idiots.
"exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money"
Cool. Netflix is a a service like DirecTV Now. I assume you will be exempting it from data caps to save customers money as well...
If Verizon wants to charge nothing for data to their video apps, I'm fine with that. After all, they know best what their services are worth.
As soon as the FCC decides that is the fine for someone who keeps violating net neutrality they send an email to Mr Trump.
Dear Mr Trump, Trump Man, Trumpster!
Today Net Neutrality made 10 Billion dollars toward paying of the US debt. It can keep making money like this! We just fine the people who break it and the $$$ rolls in like hot bloc women to a single billionaire.
Sincerely
The FCC.
Looking at a quick way to start raking in cash while helping Americans, I think Trump will tell his anti-net neutrality appointments that if they do not strengthen Net Neutrality, then they will be out faster than a wife who has lost her looks.
Comcast are not Zero Rating. When the network is used for competitors streaming they earn nothing so they cahrge for the bandwidth. When it is using their apps they get an opportunity to show ads and earn from ads so they do not charge from bandwidth. Its no differnt from google not charging for its search Engine because they get to show us ads. If there was a way to switch off Google Ads and still use Google Search Engine then surely Google would start charging for those Searches.
The Network providers did try to go the Google way and make it compulsory to use their apps if you use their bandwidth but they were shut down by Netflix lobbyists aka Net neutrality advocates. This is the next best thing they can do to compete fairly.
**Life is too short to be serious**
The FCC cannot take any action at this point. They had the chance to do it years ago, but wimped out. Thus ensuring the total screw-over of consumers.
We are about to see the rape of the U.S. by the 1%, starting early next year.
I think this is great! My sister is a technophobe, whom watches lots of video on her ATT cell phone. She goes over her data allowence by a few gigabytes every month. She is in a new apartment, without a landline. mwahahaha! Watch all your video in HD on the cell phone my pretty! ATT is paying for it!