Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Monday September 12 2016, @08:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the I-want-my-internet-tv dept.

Jon Brodkin over at Ars Technica is reporting on a filing submitted to the FCC by Netflix last week asking thc FCC to "declare that home Internet data caps are unreasonable and that they limit customers' ability to watch online video."

From the article:

Netflix submitted a filing last week for the FCC's annual investigation of broadband deployment, a review that is mandated by Congress in Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act. Specifically, Congress requires the FCC to determine whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion and "take immediate action" to accelerate deployment if it's not happening to the commission's satisfaction.

The commission's assessment generally focuses on availability and speed, but Netflix wants the commission to add data caps to the mix. "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," Netflix wrote. "For this reason, the Commission should hold that data caps on fixed-­line networks ­­and low data caps on mobile networks­­ may unreasonably limit Internet television viewing and are inconsistent with Section 706."

[...] Netflix argued that a 300GB-per-month allotment "is required just to meet the Internet television needs of an average American," without accounting for other things consumers want to do on the Internet, like Web browsing and downloading games and applications. "The Commission should recognize that data caps and UBP on fixed line networks are an unnecessary constraint on advanced telecommunications capability," Netflix said.

Comcast, the nation's largest home Internet provider, recently raised its caps from 300GB to 1TB, making it easier for customers to watch online video instead of Comcast's own cable TV service. But consumers' data needs are increasing quickly enough that "today's 'above-average' Internet consumer is tomorrow's average Internet consumer," Netflix said.

Data caps also aren't necessary for network management, Netflix argued. The online video provider pointed to a government survey from 2014 in which ISPs told regulators that congestion wasn't a problem on their networks. ISPs have alternatively described data caps "as a way to align consumers' use of the network with what they pay," Netflix said.

So what say you, Soylentils? Do data caps discriminate against online video providers?

Do data caps negatively impact other types of Internet usage?

Is online video the bulk of the data you consume through your Internet connection?

Do you have a data cap? If so, what is it and how often do you exceed it? If you do exceed it, what steps does your ISP take in response?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Monday September 12 2016, @10:20PM

    by bob_super (1357) on Monday September 12 2016, @10:20PM (#400976)

    Microsoft is made every W10 machine a P2P hub for updates just over a month ago... Lawyers are probably very busy crafting their class-action lawsuits.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 12 2016, @10:33PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 12 2016, @10:33PM (#400981)

    Right because Windows is the only thing that ever autoupdates, Linux distros never check for updates, major browsers never download new versions of themselves, ...

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday September 12 2016, @10:37PM

      by bob_super (1357) on Monday September 12 2016, @10:37PM (#400986)

      Kindly remind me the Window market share and Wupdate size?

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday September 13 2016, @01:05AM

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday September 13 2016, @01:05AM (#401038) Homepage Journal

      WTF kind of ate-up version of Linux are you running that automatically downloads and applies updates instead of simply notifying you they exist?

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13 2016, @01:41AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13 2016, @01:41AM (#401056)

        Both Debian-based and Fedora-based distros have automatic updating built in. They can even be set to automatically reboot in case there is a kernel update or some other piece of software that is being updated. I believe Ubuntu even has "unattended upgrades" turned on by default, due to their target audience.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13 2016, @03:06AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13 2016, @03:06AM (#401094)

      Right because Windows is the only thing that ever autoupdates, Linux distros never check for updates...

      In my experience, that is a mostly-accurate statement. Everything checks for updates, however...

      • OS X notifies you if there are updates but you choose if/when to download them.
      • Linux -- the handful of distros I play with -- notifies you if there are updates but you choose if/when to download them.
      • Windows -- fuck you, I'm soaking up your bandwidth and then I'm going to take half-an-hour applying them when you just want to shut down, and if you don't specify otherwise I'm going to soak up even more of your bandwidth sharing what was downloaded with others -- has limited choice and flexibility when it comes to auto-updating.