Netflix warns it will provoke customer protest if ISPs violate net neutrality principles

[Poke]

Leave our streaming alone..


http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/22/5...ustomer-action-if-isps-violate-net-neutrality

 

[Claude Greiner]

I actually agree with the ISP's when it comes to Netflix.

I hate to say it, Netflix has been riding on the ISP's coat tails for years providing a low cost video service, and at the same time causing customers to cancel the video portion of their cable internet service.

The cord cutters are soon going to realize they not saving any money going to a streaming video service over getting traditional cable TV.

 

[mike123abc]

I actually agree with the ISP's when it comes to Netflix.

I hate to say it, Netflix has been riding on the ISP's coat tails for years providing a low cost video service, and at the same time causing customers to cancel the video portion of their cable internet service.

The cord cutters are soon going to realize they not saving any money going to a streaming video service over getting traditional cable TV.

As a cable internet subscriber, I view my $99/month 50mbit internet connection as a pipeline to any content I want on the internet, including but not limited to Netflix. Why should they charge me for internet then say oh we are going to limit who you can talk to over it?

Netflix has the right idea and should let every customer know the phone number to their congressman if the local cable company attempts to throttle their connections in order to extract money from netflix. If the cable companies did not want the customers able to use the internet speeds they were sold, then they should be regulated as an utility. Internet is more important than cable TV.

 

[Kraven]

I view my $99/month 50mbit internet connection as a pipeline to any content I want on the internet, including but not limited to Netflix. .

Right on. the contact I signed with getting cable didnt specify which sites I cant or cant visit.

 

[Kraven]

I actually agree with the ISP's when it comes to Netflix.

I hate to say it, Netflix has been riding on the ISP's coat tails for years providing a low cost video service, and at the same time causing customers to cancel the video portion of their cable internet service.

The cord cutters are soon going to realize they not saving any money going to a streaming video service over getting traditional cable TV.

Nver thought I'd see the say where someone wants to pay more.. Congrats Claude!

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Customers can protest, but for High Speed Data, there isn't really anywhere for them to move to and get the same or better speeds. I feel that will be an issue.

Netflix pays their ISP for their bandwidth and I pay for ISP for mine. Why should Netflix have to pay again for the bandwidth when we are both already paying for it?

That would kind of like me being a AT&T Cell Phone Customer not being able to call my friend because he is on Sprint. And if I want to talk to my friend on Sprint I need to pay AT&T more or Sprint has to pay AT&T to allow its calls to go over its network.

 

[Tampa8]

The part that Claude brings up about losing income from their own programming is good point however. And may be at least one reason why bundling will reduce your internet cost.

 

[jayn_j]

The part that Claude brings up about losing income from their own programming is good point however. And may be at least one reason why bundling will reduce your internet cost.

It is difficult to show any instance where Netflix content overlaps anything available on traditional cable.

 

[whitewolf8214]

Netflix Wins on Net Neutrality
By Michael Comeau Jan 23, 2014 12:35 pm
http://www.minyanville.com/sectors/...lity-netflix/1/23/2014/id/53466#ixzz2rKWau8Ym

 

[king3pj]

For people who think your ISP will start blocking Netflix, why do you think they would stop there? Why not block all Dish and Directv on demand too? Why not just block access to Dish's/Directv's whole website to make it harder for people to sign up for those services? They could even make it redirect to their own TV packages.

The answer is that they can't just start blocking everything. The internet is for information access. The minute they start restricting our access to that information there will be an uproar. If they start blocking everything they don't like the government will step in and make them stop.

 

[mike123abc]

If an ISP can find a magic way to get internet to and from a consumer without using any public right of ways it would be a different story. Cable TV systems by the very definition depend on public right of ways to string their cable/fiber along. I am sure they are very aware of this and see how easy it would be for them to be called a common carrier and become highly regulated if there is consumer demand.

 

[Tampa8]

For people who think your ISP will start blocking Netflix, why do you think they would stop there? Why not block all Dish and Directv on demand too? Why not just block access to Dish's/Directv's whole website to make it harder for people to sign up for those services? They could even make it redirect to their own TV packages.

The answer is that they can't just start blocking everything. The internet is for information access. The minute they start restricting our access to that information there will be an uproar. If they start blocking everything they don't like the government will step in and make them stop.

I do think that. If there is competition I'm not so certain the Government will just step in, or certain they even can. It isn't under the same laws as broadcast TV.

 

[Foxbat]

The question isn't should Comcast be able to block Netflix, but should ISPs be allowed to own content creators. There should be no "conflict of interest" in the first place.

I have U-verse Internet and Telephone. They penalize me for calling non-U-verse customers by limiting me to 250 minutes a month before charging 10 cents a minute overage (that's the package I chose, so no complaint there). I knew that going in and pay a smaller fee per month.

U-verse also has a pay TV service that I am not going with because I like my Dish HD. Should AT&T charge me more because I'm streaming Netflix and Dish Blockbuster? In a way; I'm probably paying more per month for the two separate service providers than I would be if I just used AT&T for everything.

I believe "bits is bits": I contract with my ISP for a maximum of "n" Mbps and they do their best to make that happen. It shouldn't matter if those bits come from SatelliteGuys, Netflix, Apple, Amazon, or Netflix. Bits is bits...

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

If an ISP can find a magic way to get internet to and from a consumer without using any public right of ways it would be a different story. Cable TV systems by the very definition depend on public right of ways to string their cable/fiber along. I am sure they are very aware of this and see how easy it would be for them to be called a common carrier and become highly regulated if there is consumer demand.

They were classifed as Common Carriers a few years ago, then they got the FCC to reclassify them, which is how they won the loophole in Net Neutrality.

 

[Tampa8]

I do not agree with the opinon in that article either. http://www.minyanville.com/sectors/t...#ixzz2rKWau8Ym

"The content Netflix offers is way more valuable to the viewer than the pipe that delivers it." That is so wrong as to be funny. The vast majority of people who have home internet do not subscribe to netflix. And even if they do, the internet is used for thousands of things many more important to users than Netflix.
I don't think carriers will jump into blocking things but as I pointed out in another post a couple did block Slingbox for awhile years ago. If you think it just won't happen, that's where I disagree, I think it might in some form especially if they continue to win in Court.

​

 

[Tampa8]

The question isn't should Comcast be able to block Netflix, but should ISPs be allowed to own content creators. There should be no "conflict of interest" in the first place.

I have U-verse Internet and Telephone. They penalize me for calling non-U-verse customers by limiting me to 250 minutes a month before charging 10 cents a minute overage (that's the package I chose, so no complaint there). I knew that going in and pay a smaller fee per month.

U-verse also has a pay TV service that I am not going with because I like my Dish HD. Should AT&T charge me more because I'm streaming Netflix and Dish Blockbuster? In a way; I'm probably paying more per month for the two separate service providers than I would be if I just used AT&T for everything.

I believe "bits is bits": I contract with my ISP for a maximum of "n" Mbps and they do their best to make that happen. It shouldn't matter if those bits come from SatelliteGuys, Netflix, Apple, Amazon, or Netflix. Bits is bits...

That indeed is the question, owning content. Good post.

 

[Tampa8]

It is difficult to show any instance where Netflix content overlaps anything available on traditional cable.

Most anything they have. Less reason to subscribe to a movie channel, or get movies on demand. Possibly in some cases less reason for a higher package because some of the shows you watch in it is on Netflix.

 

[king3pj]

I do not agree with the opinon in that article either. http://www.minyanville.com/sectors/t...#ixzz2rKWau8Ym

"The content Netflix offers is way more valuable to the viewer than the pipe that delivers it." That is so wrong as to be funny. The vast majority of people who have home internet do not subscribe to netflix. And even if they do, the internet is used for thousands of things many more important to users than Netflix.
I don't think carriers will jump into blocking things but as I pointed out in another post a couple did block Slingbox for awhile years ago. If you think it just won't happen, that's where I disagree, I think it might in some form especially if they continue to win in Court.

​

I think you missed the point of that quote. They weren't saying Netflix is more important than the rest of the internet combined. They were saying people care about the content they get from the internet more than the pipe it comes down. Most people probably have more brand loyalty to the content they receive over the internet than the ISP that provides that internet. If they have other options they would be willing to switch to one that isn't restricting the information they have access to.

We are also seeing towns start to become ISPs. The next town over from me just started offering free WiFi and apparently their coverage is pretty good. People seem to assume that ISPs are actively going to try to ruin the internet and make all of their customers hate them. I think they know that isn't the best way to do business especially if their competition continues to increase.

 

[avg1joe]

I guess I don't get it. I pay for a certain speed that lets me watch things like netflix/amazon/hulu/youtube videos seamlessly. If my isp does not let me utilize my speed to watch the things I need speed for, then I don't need that speed and I will choose a slower connection, possibly from a different company. I currently have cable internet which is much faster at my location. If you take away or throttle streaming then I'm just doing facebook and email. I will go with a different provider, a lower speed, and a cheaper bill. Netflix IS the cable internet's bread and butter.

 

[mike123abc]

I guess I don't get it. I pay for a certain speed that lets me watch things like netflix/amazon/hulu/youtube videos seamlessly. If my isp does not let me utilize my speed to watch the things I need speed for, then I don't need that speed and I will choose a slower connection, possibly from a different company. I currently have cable internet which is much faster at my location. If you take away or throttle streaming then I'm just doing facebook and email. I will go with a different provider, a lower speed, and a cheaper bill. Netflix IS the cable internet's bread and butter.

Another good point. Why would consumers buy a high speed (more expensive) tier if the provider throttled down the services they wanted? Cable companies make more money on the internet than they do pay TV. They want to sell the fast tiers to more customers.