Verizon Doesn't Like The Idea Of Open Internet” – Appeals FCC Net Neutrality Decision

Discussion in 'Android News' started by Malvado, Oct 2, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Malvado
    Offline

    Malvado DF News Team/Mod Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    38
    [​IMG]
    Verizon doesn’t like the idea of “open internet.” At least not the idea of it potentially cutting into their profits. Today, Verizon filed an appeal in federal court claiming the rules of “Net Neutrality” are unnecessary and will create confusion for investors. Verizon released this statement on their website:

    The Net Neutrality ruling just became official last week and if you haven’t been keeping up to date with your tech news, says that carriers can’t block legit law-abiding sites (or apps) that directly compete with their service. For instance, it would be like AT&T blocking you from visiting competing carrier Sprint’s website. Not cool, right? Here’s what the FCC had to say about the new Net Neutrality regulation that goes into effect November 20th.
    The internet should be free and open (we like that word around here). Anyone that disagrees well, probably has the title of CEO somewhere in their name.

    SOURCE: Verizon to FCC: Net Neutrality Rules 'Unneeded Regulation' (Phone Scoop)
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 2, 2011
  2. smokiedabong
    Offline

    smokiedabong New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    988
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Internet
    Can't believe somebody actually likes this post .
  3. Malvado
    Offline

    Malvado DF News Team/Mod Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Verizon is just mad because they will have to allow tethering apps in the market lol

    Sent from my Droid 3 directly to YOU!
  4. funwheeldrive
    Offline

    funwheeldrive New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did you see who it was? Not very surprising imo.
  5. czerdrill
    Offline

    czerdrill New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since tethering apps don't "directly compete" with them, I'm pretty sure they will continue blocking them with no issue
  6. kodiak799
    Offline

    kodiak799 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,837
    Likes Received:
    228
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Probably a gray area. Although I'd agree that's their motivation, along with the coming future of VoLTE - eventually all voice will be over data, I think, at least for mobile.

    In some ways, it's a gray area for consumer benefit, too. They pay a lot of money for spectrum and the infrastructure. If people start "gaming" the system with tethering apps and things like GV or GTalk, then VZW has no choice but to raise the price for ALL customers. I don't need or want to use my mobile data as a home ISP, so it's good that VZW charges them rather than raising the price $5 for everyone.

    Cafe-style pricing is nothing new nor unique to mobile voice/data. It's an important aspect of people paying for what they use.
  7. czerdrill
    Offline

    czerdrill New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No you're right I just meant as far as how it is now and the phrase "direct competition". The way the tethering apps work is "piggybacking" off what's already there. They're not offering an alternate paid service that could exist without VZW. So there's no direct competition with Verizon, because if Verizon were to go bankrupt and disappear off the face of the earth, so would all the tethering apps that people use on Verizon. That's why I don't see how there can be an issue if Verizon blocks such apps. The apps depend on VZW in order to work, and won't work (as they are now) without VZW. I don't think there's any gray area in terms of "direct competition" but obviously I'm not the one making that decision.

    They might provide some "indirect competition" as far as Verizon's ISP services, but again it's more of a "stealing service" issue then a "direct competition" issue.
  8. Hugh Jass
    Offline

    Hugh Jass Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,564
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
  9. TyrantII
    Offline

    TyrantII New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boston
    Except the tethering App would work just fine if the Android system it's on is connected to the internet, through wired or wireless service.

    While it make little sense, there's nothing making it use exclusive to VZW. Your logic there is flawed. You could very easily make such an app a mobile Wireless network repeater to extend service.
  10. BayouFlyFisher
    Offline

    BayouFlyFisher Rescue Squad Rescue Squad

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,966
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Wouldn't they be concerned about the "Voice Over Internet" calling services. Go to Skype on your data plan and make all the calls you want to make without using a single calling minute. For those on unlimited data plans that could be significant. It could also be the end of unlimited data plans (yes I am starting to see everything as a threat to unlimited data).
  11. FcoT
    Offline

    FcoT New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Propaganda

    Please please, do not do the Federal agencies fighting! There is a lot more to this "open internet" bill than its devious name. This is a HUGE power grab! Think about it, can the internet actually be free under the regulation of the government? NO! Do not fall for the traps to convince you that this bill is good, they put in a few babies so when Verizon disagrees, you and the government will run propaganda on on thrash. We will be all losers under this bill. In its essence, this bill will give power to the FCC to regulate it, this power it never had, sure they promise openness, but guess what is next after that. Please read the damn bill before voting on it!
  12. czerdrill
    Offline

    czerdrill New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not sure I understand. If the android system is connected through a wireless service, which I take to mean some kind of mobile broadband service, then the Apps use is exclusive to that service. If your talking about wifi, not sure what the point of the app is...

    The Apps require a preexisting connection... They don't provide their own connection, they don't act as an isp, or a mobile carrier.

    There is no direct competition between a tethering app and a carrier.
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2011
  13. Snow02
    Offline

    Snow02 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,342
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is exactly the kind of thing they're worried about long term. But that's only a small item on a long list of potential - read: potential - issues with allowing carriers to implement unregulated blocks and "quality of service optimizations". The current paradigm is data access as a "dumb pipe" - unfettered access to any service or content on the net. This is very pro-consumer, and the way we're accustomed to accessing the internet. The ISPs would like to be able to change this.

    There's plenty of articles written on the topic, so I won't rehash them here.
  14. TyrantII
    Offline

    TyrantII New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Boston
    Same reasons the telecoms made sure to kill Google's purchase of airwaves a few years back. OTA Broadband is the harbinger of death of both the telecoms and the cell providers. VOIP, G video talk, and finally bringing data rate costs down to their actual prices would kill both's business model.

    They will fight tooth and nail against something that valuable as a public good, and kill it any chance they get. If they don't, their model is kaput.
  15. kodiak799
    Offline

    kodiak799 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,837
    Likes Received:
    228
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You're right in relying on VZW data service, but the argument that would be made is the user is forced to use VZW's tethering app. In that sense it's anti-competition to block the app.

    It's possible the DOJ would say VZW either has to handle this through fees or some other service tech, rather than deny users access to the apps. Not sure how they accomplish that with rooted users flashing roms. Although VZW may be justified in simply not allowing the app to install on its handsets in the market - it is neither blocking the app from a search nor the user from getting the app elsewhere. Not sure which direction the DOJ would go with that, but I hoipe they side with VZW because I don't want to have to subsidize people abusing it for a home ISP, especially since with LTE they can get that service for $30 a month (which is extremely competitive with broadband providers).
  16. czerdrill
    Offline

    czerdrill New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ah yes, ok I understand the other side of the arguments now
  17. SquireSCA
    Offline

    SquireSCA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,228
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Tethering in and of itself is not "gaming" the system, unless as a result you use too much bandwidth.

    Bandwidth, and the excessive consumption of it, is what stresses and clogs a network, not tethering itself. If someone tethers and uses 1.5gb a month, there is no difference whatsoever to the network than a non-tetherer using 1.5gb a month. None.

    The problem is two-fold, from Verizon's perspective:

    1) The person that tethers their PS3 to their phone and chews up 15gb a month. That person is eating up bandwidth and clogging up the system.
    2) The rest that tether, VZW wants $20 a month for, regardless of how much data they use. You might pay a total phone bill of $130 a month for an unlimited plan, as I do, and use an average of 300mb per month because most of the time you are on WiFi and not even using their network, but if you want to send one 5mb email from your laptop, they want $20 a month for it.

    So VZW has a real problem with tethering, and a perceived one. One has a small number of people really chewing up bandwidth. The other is just greed. They could solve the bandwidth issue by throttling anyone using too much data, as they SHOULD do, whether the person is tethered or not.
  18. SquireSCA
    Offline

    SquireSCA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,228
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    If this law kills their ability to block tethering, and it should, then it will simply force VZW to just bundle it in with your data plan and increase the cost, forcing you to buy tethering whether you want it or not. This is exactly what they are doing with texting.

    Sending texts is extremely cheap for VZW. It uses almost no bandwidth, and texting plans have the highest profit margins out of any service that VZW offers, bar none. They are almost literally printing themselves money on these plans, the markup is incredible and it is almost all profit.

    But because there are a lot of apps that let you IM from your phone, people are switching to those and dropping text plans. So VZW's response? They plan to start making texting part of your data plan, requiring it basically, and charging you for it. That way, even if you don't use it, you are still paying for it and VZW's investors can stay happy and go buy another Lexus or something...

    I love Capitalism, it has made this country great, but there is something about cell phone carriers that rubs me the wrong way. Maybe they are just a little too cut-throat for my tastes, I don't know...
  19. czerdrill
    Offline

    czerdrill New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've gotta ask... What company do you know of that doesn't do things like this?
  20. FunN4Lo
    Offline

    FunN4Lo Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Messages:
    943
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The unintended consequences from government intervention like this is ALWAYS worse than the ill they proffess to correct.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.