Remember when you called up your ISP and, after an unholy modem screech, were billed for every minute you spent online? (Actually, it occurs to me that many Consumerist readers probably don’t remember this.) If ISPs’ current efforts pay off, we may all soon be paying for every little byte of Internet that we use.
ISPs have experimented with the metered broadband concept, and consumers (and consumer advocates) have kicked and screamed, but the looming specter of Net Neutrality has forced ISPs in turn to threaten consumers with tiered or metered broadband.
Some broadband providers argue that a pay-as-you-go Internet is unavoidable. “A flat-rate, infinitely expandable service is unachievable,”Dick Lynch, chief technology officer of Verizon Communications Inc., said at a recent industry conference, referring to the industry in general. “We’re going to have to consider pricing structures that allow us to sell packages of bytes.”
Advocates say unlimited monthly Internet service has been critical to the Internet’s growth and the formation of online start-ups. Paying by the amount of Internet traffic used could damp usage and the sort of tinkering that can lead to breakthroughs, they warn.
Well, streaming video, it was nice knowing you.
Carriers Eye Pay-As-You-Go Internet [Wall Street Journal] (Thanks, Joanne!)
(Photo: TheTruthAbout…)
More From Consumerist
-
Surprise, Surprise: Expert Says Many Broadband Meters Are Inaccurate
-
Time Warner Cable To Take Metered Broadband Offer Nationwide, Though We Have No Idea Why You’d Want It
-
Bill That Would Have Banned Public Broadband In Georgia Has Failed
-
Which ISPs Are Providing The Speeds They Advertise?
-
New Report Says “Cash Cow” Data Caps Are About Pleasing Investors, Not Relieving Congestion
Want to save bandwidth? Block annoying Flash ads. When I go to a website, I sure as hell don’t need a Flash *video advertisement* loading. Gah.
The AT&T man came out yesterday to fix my spotty sickly DSL. After working on all my wiring (which sucked) and getting it back up (yay!), he told me that they were getting ready to do UVerse here. I said big deal, I can barely afford the DSL right now, $35 a month is too much as it is.
I don’t know if it’s worthwhile to switch; I don’t know anything about UVerse. I don’t know if this metered crap would make what I have now downgrade or what. I sometimes watch video, but mostly stream music. If they mess up my music and chat, I will get seriously mad!
Also, please don’t cut off WHAT I look at. I have to look at some weird stuff for books; I’m probably already on a list somewhere.
Time to make internet a city or state issue… Like water of electricity, it needs to be highly regulated. Either that or make it a local issue and have the cities bring in their own cable and internet…
Sure, they’ll do it with the net, and then do it even harder than they already to with television service.
I can hear the pitchmen now.
“Call now to upgrade your service to our premium tier! You will get an unbeatable 15 minutes of actual show per hour and you’ll hardly notice the 45 minutes of advertisements! All yours for an unbelievably low $175 a month! This plan is way better than the five minutes of show and 55 minutes of advertisements on the $100 per month tier you’re on now. You can’t beat this deal! Call now and we’ll reduce your contract term to 3 years instead of 4! If you’re not satisfied in the first 42 months of service you can cancel and only pay a tiny little ETF of $450! But you have to act now for this incredible offer”
The only reason we have the availability of the internet especially land based internet was/is because of one big government sanctioned monopoly .
When the cry baby bells ruled the roost their government sanctioned monopoly recieved rights of way and/or easements because they were considered a utility . Because of the rights of way they were able to place poles , manholes , underground conduit then cable that not only are the cry baby bells using to this very day but the competitors are as well. The competitors who never had to fully build their very own networks are using/benefiting from those very same rights of way because they can rent infrastructure .
The ISP/telco plant on/in those rights of way on private and public property should be to BENEFIT the public and owners . The public benefits when the costs are controlled .
The lack of true competition does not help ISPs who chose to place and operate their network on/in mostly regulated paths to the customer . But until these ISPs/telcos are completely independent and detached from using the public federally regulated rights of ways AND airwaves I don’t think they should be allowed to operate like a Walmart or any other private sector enterprise .
And Dick from the cry baby bell – have a nice day …
@u1itn0w2day:
Yes, telcos and cable use rights of way and spectrum, but they PAY for those, through spectrum auctions or franchise fees.
If they go pay-as-you-go, won’t be long before consumer advocates will lobby Congress to bring out a public internet access and charge us through taxes.
The private price gouging ISPs lose.
The consumer loses.
The government gains.
I seriously want them to try that shit around here if they dare. It’s going to bite them in the ass some way or the other.
“…but the looming specter of Net Neutrality has forced ISPs in turn to threaten consumers with tiered or metered broadband.”
So lets explore the logic here: The FCC is finally in a position with a reasonable chairman to make a rule (Net Neutrality) that benefits and protects consumer rights. And not only does Net Neutrality protect consumers rights to explore freely on the internet, it will also help keep ISPs from negatively affecting innovation by allowing new start-ups to disseminate their products/services freely. Yet, the ISPs take this as a threat to their precious service and now will PUNISH consumers because we essentially got our way, i.e. got what should be allowed anyway. The moral of the story, then, is that if we the consumers influence service providers in ways that benefit us we get punished with the possibility of increased fees. WHAT!!!???
So if ISPs decide to charge us by ‘chunks’ of usage, which will most likely lead to higher costs, I say we tell them to shove it and not pay our bills if they make this change. Of course this sounds idealistic, but if the market is supposed to be the cure for all problems, and WE THE CONSUMERS ARE THE MARKET, then the easiest way to influence a provider is to not pay our bills. It seems like that would get the point across. And besides, if we can’t protest an increase in price by us marching over to AT&T, for instance, why not piss them off by not paying them. Otherwise, we as horribly addicted internet users, will continue paying more money for our “drug” of choice, while our “dealers” make an absurd amount of money off of our addiction.
Just a thought.