[opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 02:54:42 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
First, the congestion problem WAS called out for what it was.
It was not a case of Comcast throttling service to its ISP
customers; it was congestion in the interconnection networks
Netflix was paying to deliver its bits to Comcast and
other ISPs. It was a matter of peering disputes.
Forget it, Craig, you're getting lost in the weeds. Even if there's some truth
in the old excuse, we're way past that now. What this most recent article
states is quite clear:
http://www.infoworld.com/article/3022750/internet/congress-to-cable-customers-stop-your-whining.html?token=%23tk.IFWNLE_nlt_infoworld_daily_2016-01-15&idg_eid=593b93817ad0a9726f889c7044a6e9d3&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=InfoWorld%20Daily:%20Afternoon%20Edition%202016-01-15&utm_term=infoworld_daily#tk.IFW_nlt_infoworld_daily_2016-01-15
----------------------------------
Not even Comcast is pretending that this new practice has anything to do with
congestion or network capacity. In a script leaked to Reddit, its customer
service reps are instructed to "never say that the data usage plan -- don't say
'data cap' (we do not limit a customer's use of the Internet in any way) -- is
about congestion management (it is not). Do say ‘fairness and providing a more
flexible policy to our customers.'"
What a beautiful example of doublespeak! "Got that?" writes Crawford.
This is about fairness, not congestion. Americans love the idea of "fairness."
But in this particular context "fairness" makes zero sense. No "power user" is
having any effect on anyone else's download experience -- there's plenty of
capacity. (The Netflix/Comcast fracas last year made this eminently clear: as
soon as Netflix paid up, presto, Netflix subscribers weren't faced with a
spinning wheel.)
----------------------------------
First, read that last sentence, before you take the old excuses at face value.
This was all about an excess of greed, and it's not just the throttling
incident anymore. The throttling incident did cause a public outcry. It led the
FCC to change its mind, after they heard the public outcry. The FCC got more
mail about this than any other time, Craig, because this is when people
realized that net neutrality was no longer something they could take for
granted. Now, the data caps are adding to this threat to neutrality (depending
how draconian they are, of course). They can become a means to make the
old-school broadcast linear streams appear more cost effective, artificially.
Quoting again, since you seem to have missed what the article says:
--------------------------------
Usage caps aimed at discouraging cord cutters who stream television shows
through services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon could end up defeating the
spirit of Net neutrality.
What Harvard Law School professor Susan Crawford calls the "sledgehammer of
usage-based pricing" allows broadband providers to "make the use of services
that compete with their own businesses feel expensive to consumers.
--------------------------------
As for your political views, let's just say that there is
significant disagreement and that the FCCs Title II decision
is being challenged on many fronts including the courts and
by Congress.
No, Craig. The people have spoken very loud and clear. To be blunt, for a
politician to be opposed to net neutrality is nothing short of stupidity.
(There's a reason why even some Republicans now call it, "the party of stupid.")
These are politicians. If they aren't on the take, they have no excuse for
opposing the wishes of their bosses -- that would be us. Tom Wheeler was smart
enough to understand this, even though his first reaction was NOT to reclassify
Internet service under Title II.
It's simple, Craig. If Congress won’t act to ensure net neutrality, guess what?
Local franchise authorities certainly will. People DO NOT want the Internet to
become just another walled-up MVPD service.
The decision to regulate the Internet under Title II only
gained traction at the FCC after Obama pressured the FCC
to take that approach.
You're absolutely wrong. I have to believe you didn't follow the proceedings.
The FCC reacted to an overwhelming amount of mail. The courts initially told
the FCC, if you want to enforce any sort of net neutrality, you first MUST
reclassify the Internet as a telco service. Here's a reminder:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/01/14/fcc-net-neutrality/4473269/
--------------------------
In an opinion handed down Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals in D.C.
ruled that while the FCC has authority to regulate how Web traffic is managed,
it cannot impose rules on companies like Verizon ***based on how they're
classified***.
"Given that the Commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in a
manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers, the (1996)
Communications Act expressly prohibits the Commission from nonetheless
regulating them as such," reads an excerpt from the ruling.
--------------------------
The courts were basically egging the FCC on, to reclassify broadband service as
a Title II service FIRST, then go on with any neutrality discussion. Whiuch is
precisely what happened.
If Bert truly believes that the Internet is creating competition
for "bad actors" in the video business,
It is patently obvious that the incumbent TV providers, and the owners of TV
content, have long understood that the Internet provides more competition.
Certainly, the owners of content have stated this on multiple occasions, and
responded by increasing their presence on the Internet. That's not up for
dispute, Craig, just as the fact that people like HDTV is not up for dispute.
The Title II decision does just the opposite, virtually locking
up the market for the cabled incumbents,
This is also totally false. For cables service especially, the incumbents are
locked in regardless, just like any other utility. They are locked in by the
impracticality of installing multiple competing systems in each neighborhood.
We've been over this way too many times. Whoever owns that last mile
infrastructure won't have competition to speak of. Not unless wireless 4G or 5G
becomes a more credible everyday alternative.
The bottom line, though, remains the same. It is simply STUPID for any
politician to go against the wishes of the vast majority of his constituents.
Do we really want to give broadband providers carte blanche to go back to their
old, walled-in, non-neutral roots?
Bert
b��ju
I@R ����^:��
5e��b��(���Rȧ��^PԔ �
�i��اʋ��ǫr�ߊ�jب�ǭ�)౫E�狊�l���ǧv)�jg�����)zwm�����-~���+-����+a����n�˛���m觶����r�b�
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld - Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress to cable customers: Stop your whining | InfoWorld- Manfredi, Albert E