3 ms·

Zero rating is about billing (i.e. giving away for free certain content), not bandwidth throttling. It used to be called 1-800-Data in the early days because ca

Zero rating is about billing (i.e. giving away for free certain content), not bandwidth throttling. It used to be called 1-800-Data in the early days because carriers likened the concept to toll free phone lines. Conceptually, consumers aren't up in arms about toll free phone lines. I'm surprised Pai hasn't brought that up yet. Bandwidth throttling specific sites would be a more serious concern (à la Netflix and Verizon). Bandwidth throttling certain types of content (e.g. steaming video) seems to be the border that carriers are willing to push.

blackflame7000 9y ago
I see what you're saying with the toll-free analogy but it seems fairly common for ISPs to throttle speeds after a monthly cap has been reached. Since the throttling wouldn't apply to zero-rated services(ie their own) isn't the end effect an unfair degradation in competitors services?
- otoburb 9y ago
  I understand why you are making the leap assuming zero-rated services would somehow be exempt from throttling, but that is outside the scope of zero-rating. In cases of throttling (cap thresholds, adverse network conditions, etc), all content (zero-rated or otherwise) should be throttled. If zero-rated services are exempt then that's a whole new kettle of fish. The idea of selective, named, service throttling vs. blanket throttling based on service type is surely bouncing around within network operator groups due to the Title II FCC vote, but that could apply whether content is zero-rated or not. Selective throttling != zero-rating.
  - blackflame7000 9y ago
    Ahh ok I see the distinction, good info. However, I know for a fact that AT&T does not count directv streaming as part of its data limits and therefore it is never throttled. I did a little more research based on your explanation and from what I can discern, it's technically against the law, but companies like T Mobile and AT&T continue to push the limits until someone confronts them. It still seems to be a very gray area.

blackflame7000 9y ago

I see what you're saying with the toll-free analogy but it seems fairly common for ISPs to throttle speeds after a monthly cap has been reached. Since the throttling wouldn't apply to zero-rated services(ie their own) isn't the end effect an unfair degradation in competitors services?

otoburb 9y ago
I understand why you are making the leap assuming zero-rated services would somehow be exempt from throttling, but that is outside the scope of zero-rating. In cases of throttling (cap thresholds, adverse network conditions, etc), all content (zero-rated or otherwise) should be throttled. If zero-rated services are exempt then that's a whole new kettle of fish. The idea of selective, named, service throttling vs. blanket throttling based on service type is surely bouncing around within network operator groups due to the Title II FCC vote, but that could apply whether content is zero-rated or not. Selective throttling != zero-rating.
- blackflame7000 9y ago
  Ahh ok I see the distinction, good info. However, I know for a fact that AT&T does not count directv streaming as part of its data limits and therefore it is never throttled. I did a little more research based on your explanation and from what I can discern, it's technically against the law, but companies like T Mobile and AT&T continue to push the limits until someone confronts them. It still seems to be a very gray area.