3 ms·
You're kind of assuming that services B and C have the ability to choose to enter agreements to give you unmetered access and have chosen not to. There is no su
by philipodonnell 9y ago
You're kind of assuming that services B and C have the ability to choose to enter agreements to give you unmetered access and have chosen not to. There is no such restriction as far as I know.
Any ISP would be free to sign an "exclusive" agreement with a Spotify and B+C are now stuck having their customers charged more without any ability to control the price or do anything about it.. Or the exclusive agreement could be with a carrier-owned service and A, B and C are all stuck.
- dis-sys 9y agoISPs around the world are the same, they are commercial companies to make $, it signed an exclusive agreement with A because B/C refused to match the conditions put forward by A. Are you suggesting that ISPs are knocking back better $ offers from B/C in favour of A? I doubt that. Unless the ISP is downgrading the service quality of B/C or charging you more for using the same services from B/C, I don't see any problem if they choose to make services from A unmetered. The entire argument is so flowed - using such logic, one can jump up and argue that unmetered Spotify traffic is bad because people are "forced" to listen more music and spend less time on sports/reading/<insert your favourite stuff here> related apps/services - what is the difference here, they all compete for your time/attention.