FCC asks for more public input on whether to let Charter impose data caps:
The Federal Communications Commission is taking another round of public comments on Charter's petition seeking permission to impose data caps on broadband users and charge network-interconnection fees to online-video providers, following a court ruling that may complicate the FCC's decision.
The deadline for comments on Charter's petition passed on August 6. But in a public notice issued today, the FCC said it is opening an additional comment period that will last until September 2, giving people time to weigh in on the impact of the court ruling.
"To ensure that the [Wireline Competition] Bureau has a full record upon which to evaluate the effects of the conditions, we initiate this additional comment period," the FCC notice said, while also inviting commenters to "address the effect" of the new court ruling on the FCC's consideration of Charter's petition. As before, comments can be submitted on the docket by clicking "New Filing" or "Express." There are more than 1,500 filings, mostly from consumers who object to data caps.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @03:18AM (6 children)
I think data caps are pretty cool and dope. Please allow Charter Communications, Inc. to impose strict data caps for the good of its customers.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Friday August 21 2020, @03:44AM
Reminds me of a supermarket near me that used to be open 24 hours. A couple of years ago I go at 12:10 AM and there's a sign: "to better serve you we now close at 12 AM." I'm still trying to figure out how I was better served...
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday August 21 2020, @04:07AM
Yeah! Especially on Netflix!
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @04:15AM
Weirdly I can imagine a world where caps make sense. Think cell phones where you can buy unlimited for x and capped for x - y price. Because enough competitors exists and because not everyone needs a ton of cell phone data (or want phones for making calls), it is rational to have price distinctions. The problem is that there is no/little competition and no reasonably priced tiers (e.g. 10 bucks for 500 gigs, 19 for 1 tb, 35 for unlimited), so caps suck. I also like how some cell phone providers have weak caps, where if you exceed the cap, you get slower service. That model would be nice or it could work like how the power company can regulate your AC usage in summer for a small discount. These are based upon different network planning needs, with a discount oriented approach, not a fee to punish a large class of users. That makes a big difference.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @12:08PM
I'm sorry IRS. I couldn't file my taxes online in time due to reaching my data cap limits for the month. I'll file once my data caps reset.
I'll probably just use more bandwidth at work for things I used to do at home.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Friday August 21 2020, @03:27PM
I'd mark you troll, because you're definitely trolling the Charter Communications and this thread, except that's some fine trolling. One might even call it satire.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Friday August 21 2020, @04:26PM
Noooooooooooo!
I can't wear my MAGA cap and my Data cap at the same time!
Is there a chemotherapy treatment for excessively low blood alcohol level?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by gmby on Friday August 21 2020, @03:27AM (1 child)
With more people working from home and schools doing remote learning. It's a wonder that "THEY" didn't start this months ago.
Oh... and Charter sucks!
Bye
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday August 21 2020, @04:29PM
I'll have you know that Charter has the best connections that yolw;l2k00gu[0bz qq; 3;k;l
NO CARRIER
Is there a chemotherapy treatment for excessively low blood alcohol level?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @03:55AM (1 child)
Does the FCC give-a-fsck about the public's input on data caps? My guess, is that it doesn't.
The only winning move, is not to play.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @06:59AM
This is plain old white-wash. Just like net neutrality issue, this is an opportunity to present company shills and fraud to be presented as "see, we told you that people love caps"
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @03:57AM (1 child)
FCC asks Americans if you like to get reamed in the ass.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @04:01AM
That's phobic.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @05:22AM
Data caps are great! Especially the part about not knowing exactly when you will run ou
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @05:59AM (1 child)
I plan on submitting a comment to the FCC blasting Charter. Instead of just posting here, tell the FCC that Charter is acting in bad faith. I've already ripped Charter once here [soylentnews.org] but it's worth expanding on that.
If we ignore the government subsidies for infrastructure expansion that companies like Charter receive and their government-backed local monopoly, it could conceivably make sense to charge heavy users more for their service than others who use less data. The argument that heavy users are harming Charter's network is absolutely dubious. If it was an issue, everyone working remotely back in April would have caused far more disruption to their network than it did. But let's ignore that.
Mobile providers do charge heavy users more to a limited degree with data caps, either through overage fees or throttling once a certain usage threshold is reached. But there's an alternative pricing model, one that's been standard for a long time going back to the days of dial-up internet. If you want faster speeds, you pay more for those speeds. Instead of imposing a data cap, there is no limit on the amount of data transferred, but people pay more for higher speeds. This has been standard practice in the industry for decades.
Nobody wants data caps. Nobody. People do want cheaper internet plans, especially with Charter's bad faith efforts to constantly raise cable bills with things like bogus surcharges. But these plans could be offered simply by providing lower speeds. Instead of starting at 60 Mbps, Charter could offer a 15 Mbps plan or a 30 Mbps plan that would be cheaper. Charter could offer these plans right now and wouldn't run afoul of their agreement with the FCC. The only issue, of course, is that these plans wouldn't have overage fees that can line the pockets of their shareholders. This is pure greed from a company that, as I explained in a prior comment, shouldn't have shareholders at all.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Friday August 21 2020, @08:20AM
I'm not a USian. But remember net neutrality, when it turned out the anti-neutrality lobby was run by shills and bots? That had a great effect in galvanising support against the FCC. Another similar round, while disheartening, will further galvanise support. Note there are Big Corps interested - YouTube/alphabet being obvious one - so you are not alone, and you can help them.
(Score: 5, Informative) by PiMuNu on Friday August 21 2020, @08:26AM (1 child)
Another point - note it is an election year in the US (of course). Trump has shown that he is keen to appoint shills, the FCC being a case in point. A vote for Trump is a vote for Pai.
I realise there is more at stake, but always worth bearing that in mind. So much for "draining the swamp".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2020, @12:14PM
I was thinking the exact same thing!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Opportunist on Friday August 21 2020, @07:32PM
C'mon, seriously? It's just gonna be net neutrality all over again. That "public input" will be another flood of bot messages by the relevant parties and, wonder of all wonders, the people will be as much for limiting their data caps as they were for axing net neutrality.
How stupid do you think we are? I mean, seriously, I feel insulted.