Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Wednesday January 08 2020, @06:15PM   Printer-friendly
from the sudden-outbreak-of-common-sense? dept.

US finally prohibits ISPs from charging for routers they don't provide:

Even by the low customer-service standards of the cable and telecom industries, requiring customers to pay a monthly fee for equipment they own is pretty rude. But that's exactly what Frontier Communications does to its customers, as we wrote in July 2019. Frontier customers who use routers they own themselves must still pay Frontier $10 a month in a "Wi-Fi Router" fee, even if the router they use is fully compatible with the service and requires no additional work on Frontier's part.

As Frontier's website says, its customers are forced to pay "a monthly lease fee for your Frontier router or modem—whether you use it or not." That statement makes it sound like Frontier automatically provides the device to all customers—but the customer in Texas we wrote about never received a router from Frontier and was still required to pay the fee.

In mid-2020, Frontier should be forced to change its ways. A US government spending bill approved by Congress and signed by President Trump last month includes new requirements for television and broadband providers.

A new "consumer right to accurate equipment charges" prohibits the companies from charging customers for "covered equipment provided by the consumer." Covered equipment is defined as "equipment (such as a router) employed on the premises of a person... to provide [TV service] or to provide fixed broadband Internet access service."

The companies may not charge rental or lease fees in cases when "the provider has not provided the equipment to the consumer; or the consumer has returned the equipment to the provider."

The new law is an update to the Communications Act and is scheduled to apply six months after passage, which would be June 20. The law gives the Federal Communications Commission an option to extend the deadline by six months if the FCC "finds that good cause exists for such an additional extension." As we've previously written, the FCC hasn't done much of anything to protect customers from bogus rental fees.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday January 08 2020, @06:33PM (3 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 08 2020, @06:33PM (#941145) Journal

    Since spectrum is a limited resource, isn't another job of the FCC to allocate it in a way the serves the pubic interest?

    --
    To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 08 2020, @06:41PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 08 2020, @06:41PM (#941146)

    What does that have to do with the sale or distribution of wireless routers by ISPs? Key fobs for cars involve wireless spectrum too, that doesn't mean it's the FCC's job to make sure Carmax gives you two of them with your purchase.

  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday January 08 2020, @08:50PM

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday January 08 2020, @08:50PM (#941191) Journal

    Yes, but my point is that this here is a consumer issue, nothing to do with RF allocation, totally out of the FCC's jurisdiction. Their job is to keep the channel open. The trade commission can deal with pricing.

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Wednesday January 08 2020, @11:34PM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 08 2020, @11:34PM (#941249) Journal

    isn't another job of the FCC to allocate it in a way the serves the pubic interest?

    Do you really want your porn regulated by FCC?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford