2 ms·

> The customer is still paying for the delivery, even when it is zero-rated. I don't think I understand what you mean. If it doesn't count against their dat

> The customer is still paying for the delivery, even when it is zero-rated. I don't think I understand what you mean. If it doesn't count against their data limit, they're effectively not paying for it. > It comes down to the fact that the ISP is incentivizing users to use the zero-rated service over its competitors. Which is no different from any other company providing financial incentives for their customers to continue using their products. Net neutrality is about addressing secretive and coercive disincentives to use competing products. Conflating the Zero-Rating issue with NN dilutes the argument for NN.

sigmar 10y ago
>If it doesn't count against their data limit, they're effectively not paying for it. Not true. If I stop paying for my ISP bills, I will no longer have access to those zero-rated services. >Conflating the Zero-Rating issue with NN dilutes the argument for NN. Every single Net Neutrality organization agrees that zero-rated data violates the principles of NN. You can think everyone else is wrong to be against zero-rated data, but you cannot argue that zero-rated is not a violation of NN when the people that created the concept of NN say it is. http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2016/03/01/how-wireless-carriers-are-messing-your-mobile-service http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2016/03/01/how-wireless-... https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/zero-rating-what-it-is-why-you-should-care https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/zero-rating-what-it-is...
fastball 10y ago
Right, but you are assuming a world where everyone has the choice to pick any ISP. However, that's not the world we live in. Many people can only choose between one or two ISPs, which is partly what Net Neutrality is supposed to counter: it helps prevents this lack of competition from being exacerbated further.

sigmar 10y ago

>If it doesn't count against their data limit, they're effectively not paying for it. Not true. If I stop paying for my ISP bills, I will no longer have access to those zero-rated services. >Conflating the Zero-Rating issue with NN dilutes the argument for NN. Every single Net Neutrality organization agrees that zero-rated data violates the principles of NN. You can think everyone else is wrong to be against zero-rated data, but you cannot argue that zero-rated is not a violation of NN when the people that created the concept of NN say it is. http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2016/03/01/how-wireless-carriers-are-messing-your-mobile-service http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2016/03/01/how-wireless-... https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/zero-rating-what-it-is-why-you-should-care https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/zero-rating-what-it-is...

fastball 10y ago

Right, but you are assuming a world where everyone has the choice to pick any ISP. However, that's not the world we live in. Many people can only choose between one or two ISPs, which is partly what Net Neutrality is supposed to counter: it helps prevents this lack of competition from being exacerbated further.