Some of those who have been following the net neutrality debate may remember a spoof poster that showed what might happen if ISPs were allowed to charge you differently, based on which sites you were allowed to visit. Well, in Spain, which has no laws against this sort of thing, a similar situation has actually happened: one ISP is selling you addons to a basic broadband cap based, not on the amount of extra data you want, but on what you want to use it for. Their “Vodafone Pass” product offers tiers like €3/month extra for a “Social Pass”, or €5/month for a “Music Pass”. <https://pplware.sapo.pt/informacao/vodafone-portugal-pacotes-smartnet/>, referenced from <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20171030/12364538513/portugal-shows-internet-why-net-neutrality-is-important.shtml>
On 1/11/17 9:34 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Well, in Spain, which has no laws against this sort of thing, a similar situation has actually happened: one ISP is selling you addons to a basic broadband cap based, not on the amount of extra data you want, but on what you want to use it for. Their “Vodafone Pass” product offers tiers like €3/month extra for a “Social Pass”, or €5/month for a “Music Pass”.
I'm not seeing the issue here. An ISP is allowing you unmetered content to a set of sites for a set fee. There is no compulsion to use these value added services, and if the base plan has enough data for your needs, you don't need to take them. The same thing happens in Australia too. For example, selected Optus SIM plans include - in addition to the data available in your chosen plan - 10GB to use on Netflix, Stan and ABC iView/ABC Kids/ABC Me, and unmetered usage of Google Play Music, iHeartRadio and Spotify. Which seems pretty much the same was what Spain are offering. And while Optus isn't charging an extra fee for the additional data, it is only available on selected plans and you can betcha they have added it to the price of those plans. -- Simon (personal opinion only)
On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 10:28:57 +1300, Simon Green wrote:
An ISP is allowing you unmetered content to a set of sites for a set fee.
Can you say “conflict of interest”? As the Internet was originally designed, those in control of the network itself only had the job of passing bits around, it was none of their business what those bits represented. All the smarts is at the end points. And in particular, those wanting to create new services do not need permission from the owners of the network to do so. (Think how Facebook, Google, YouTube, Netflix etc got started.) But once you have these cosy deals between the ISPs and the providers of the existing endpoint services, that puts newcomers, wanting to offer new services, at a disadvantage. In other words, it stifles competition.
On 1/11/17 10:44 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 10:28:57 +1300, Simon Green wrote:
An ISP is allowing you unmetered content to a set of sites for a set fee.
Can you say “conflict of interest”?
As the Internet was originally designed, those in control of the network itself only had the job of passing bits around, it was none of their business what those bits represented. All the smarts is at the end points. And in particular, those wanting to create new services do not need permission from the owners of the network to do so. (Think how Facebook, Google, YouTube, Netflix etc got started.)
But once you have these cosy deals between the ISPs and the providers of the existing endpoint services, that puts newcomers, wanting to offer new services, at a disadvantage.
Do you have any evidence of these 'cosy deals'? I ask because the Techdirt article doesn't mention this. The Spanish ISP is simply offering to not count usage of a set of sites for a set fee. They are not discriminating access to those sites based on if you do or don't have the add-on. If you set up the next big thing™, you don't need the permission of the ISP for your users to access your site. While in an ideal world it would be great if all mobile providers offered unmetered data, the fact is the majority of them do not offer this, as it would cause congestion on the network (between the cell tower and the mobile device). Even in New Zealand, Spark's "unlimited" 4G plan puts the breaks on after 22 GB of usage in a month, and bans tethering and hot-spotting. Is this an example of breaking net neutrality since they are restricting how I use the Internet on the plan? -- Simon
On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 11:08:29 +1300, Simon Green wrote:
Do you have any evidence of these 'cosy deals'?
Start by doing a web search for “net neutrality”, and learn a bit more about the subject. Some samples (with lots of references), to get you going: <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170531/11283837488/netflix-admits-it-doesnt-really-care-about-net-neutrality-now-that-big.shtml> <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161129/05065936147/att-just-showed-us-what-death-net-neutrality-is-going-to-look-like.shtml> <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170523/13491237437/if-net-neutrality-dies-comcast-can-just-block-protest-site-instead-sending-bogus-cease-and-desist.shtml>
On 1/11/17 9:34 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Some of those who have been following the net neutrality debate may remember a spoof poster that showed what might happen if ISPs were allowed to charge you differently, based on which sites you were allowed to visit.
Well, in Spain, which has no laws against this sort of thing, a
Also coming to New Zealand soon. https://www.vodafone.co.nz/pass/coming-soon It's very selective. The video pass includes Netflix, Sky and TVNZ, but not Lightbox, Three or Māori TV. The music pass excludes Spotify. -- Simon
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Simon Green <mail(a)simon.green> wrote:
On 1/11/17 9:34 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Some of those who have been following the net neutrality debate may remember a spoof poster that showed what might happen if ISPs were allowed to charge you differently, based on which sites you were allowed to visit.
Well, in Spain, which has no laws against this sort of thing, a
Also coming to New Zealand soon. https://www.vodafone.co.nz/pass/coming-soon
It's very selective. The video pass includes Netflix, Sky and TVNZ, but not Lightbox, Three or Māori TV. The music pass excludes Spotify.
It includes Spotify. Under View all music pass apps I quote: "Apple Music, iHeartRadio, Rova, SoundCloud, Tidal, Spotify. More apps coming soon." cheers, william.
On 27/11/17 12:34 PM, William Mckee wrote:
It includes Spotify. Under View all music pass apps I quote:
"Apple Music, iHeartRadio, Rova, SoundCloud, Tidal, Spotify.
More apps coming soon."
They've changed the wording since I made the post. It originally said "Apple Music, iHeartRadio, Rova, SoundCloud, Tidal, Spotify and more coming soon". I took that to mean "Apple Music, iHeartRadio, Rova, SoundCloud, Tidal" are available now and "Spotify and more coming soon". Glad to see the sentence has been corrected to remove ambiguity. -- Simon
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:34:06 +1100, William Mckee wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Simon Green <mail(a)simon.green> wrote:
Also coming to New Zealand soon. https://www.vodafone.co.nz/pass/coming-soon
It's very selective. The video pass includes Netflix, Sky and TVNZ, but not Lightbox, Three or Māori TV. The music pass excludes Spotify.
It includes Spotify. Under View all music pass apps I quote:
"Apple Music, iHeartRadio, Rova, SoundCloud, Tidal, Spotify.
More apps coming soon."
I wonder how this is controlled? Via proxies? Filtering based on IP address? Content inspection?
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo(a)geek-central.gen.nz> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:34:06 +1100, William Mckee wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Simon Green <mail(a)simon.green> wrote:
Also coming to New Zealand soon. https://www.vodafone.co.nz/pass/coming-soon
It's very selective. The video pass includes Netflix, Sky and TVNZ, but not Lightbox, Three or Māori TV. The music pass excludes Spotify.
It includes Spotify. Under View all music pass apps I quote:
"Apple Music, iHeartRadio, Rova, SoundCloud, Tidal, Spotify.
More apps coming soon."
I wonder how this is controlled? Via proxies? Filtering based on IP address? Content inspection?
idk, but I remember few years ago nz ISPs would offer steam game/nz server data (before unlimited was common). I think this was done by Jetstream. I remember being told by local internet cafe to only play on counterstrike 1.5 on NZ servers. ahh good times. Sorry I can't find an article. cheers, william.
On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:34:08 +1300, I wrote:
Some of those who have been following the net neutrality debate may remember a spoof poster that showed what might happen if ISPs were allowed to charge you differently, based on which sites you were allowed to visit.
That was hypothetical, but here <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20171129/22340038703/absent-facts-to-support-repealing-net-neutrality-ajit-pai-wildly-attacking-hollywood-tweeters.shtml#c532> is a (non-exhaustive) list of cases that actually happened in the US: 2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it. 2005 - Comcast was denying access to P2P services without notifying customers. 2007-2009 - AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn't like that there was competition for their cellphones. 2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except YouTube. They actually sued the FCC over this. 2011-2013 - AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their own wallet apps. This one happened literally months after the trio were busted collaborating with Google to block apps from the Android marketplace. 2012 - Verizon was demanding Google block tethering apps on Android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. 2012 - AT&T tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money. 2013 - Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place. 2014 - Netflix & Comcast sign a deal where Netflix will pay Comcast to stop throttling the service. The very next day, streaming problems vanish.
participants (3)
-
Lawrence D'Oliveiro -
Simon Green -
William Mckee