3 replies to this topic

[Nvyseal]

images/news/internet.jpgNew York Democratic Representative Eric Massa called TWC's proposal to switch its 8.4 million cable broadband customers to metered internet billing an "outrageous plan to tax the American people."

Massa, a longtime blogger at the liberal site DailyKos, says he will be joined by a "legion of activists" and called the fight against usage caps a "national issue of generational consequences." However, Massa's fight will not get far without support from powerful House members,including Virginia Democrat Rick Boucher who now controls a key committee on telecoms and the internet.

Critics say usage caps will cost users more and hurt innovation on the net — especially in new video services, as subscribers begin to calorie-count their internet usage.

TWC's new tiered pricing structure for its Roadrunner internet service starts with a $15 for 1GB a month usage plan with a overage charge of $2 per GB. The company say that bandwidth hogs need to pay their fair share and that if the company doesn't get enough money to build new infrastructure, "internet brownouts" will be inevitable.

Company spokesman Alex Dudley said the company cannot comment on the proposed legislation since it has not seen it, but company officials did participate in a townhall meeting with Rep. Massa last Thursday.

Read On @ Wired

[hog]

I sincerely hope that this will work. Let's face it: 1GB is NOTHING! Off course there is abuse, like in everything else, but with business plans like this one, everyone is penalized, and the ones that abuse of the system will find a way to dodge the obstacles the companies throw at them one day or another anyways. By putting up ridiculous caps like this, most people probably will watch their usage more carefully, yes, but the companies' argument saying their infrastructures can't keep the pace is cow crap. Internet connections are getting faster and faster, there is more an more streaming and other bandwith-heavy activities are getting popular.

The growing in bandwith demand is therefore inevitable. ISP's should not regulate their customers' usage, but invest in new and more performant infrastructures in order to not only keep the pace, but with such investments at the same time stimulate more demand, thus giving birth to even more new online, bandwith-heavy "stuff". It's a spiral going upwards for services offered to internet users AND the economy (we all know that we need to spend money in order to create more wealth...) By applying bandwith limitations, ISP's are creating a downward spiral instead...

[highlander]

bandwidth capping is the same thing as data capping to a degree so there is absolutely no difference at all...

bandwidth = data/time.

So cap the bandwidth like they are doing and you get the same type of capping... The advantage would be that you get max speed for certain services that need it and still be below your data cap.

My only gripe is that companies ADVERTISE unlimited crap and don't honor it... Other than that.. they will EVENTUALLY have again unlimited plans and such.

This is also like capping minutes by cel companies....

Edited by highlander, 15 April 2009 - 04:55 AM.

[Camaro]

I agree advertising unlimited then turning around and capping is false advertising and they should be penalized for that. I think this is shooting themselves, in the very short run it might help them but soon they will lose business, someone will step in to take there place, it is already happening they just dont see it because they think they have market monopolies. They should have been investing all that money the received from customers into the infrastructure instead of counting the profits. They have been over selling for many years eventually it was bound to catch up. sure when few actually used the high speed it had no problems. but now everyone is downloading their media, the "pipes" are overfull.