4 ms·

The argument that Netflix needs to pay Comcast is absurd. Why are people buying high-bandwidth plans from ISPs? Because they want to use services like Netflix.

The argument that Netflix needs to pay Comcast is absurd. Why are people buying high-bandwidth plans from ISPs? Because they want to use services like Netflix. Netflix is not costing ISPs money, it's giving them something to sell. Imagine that taxi drivers want to charge the airport for overwhelming them with passengers and you'll see the absurdity.

guiambros 9y ago
> The argument that Netflix needs to pay Comcast is absurd. Absurd for you, not for the carriers. And, unfortunately, they are the ones dealing the cards now. Outrageous, for sure, but according to Chairman Pai's plan, carriers will be able to charge both consumers and content providers.
- mring33621 9y ago
  That's fine. If the charges are onerous enough, then the content providers may choose to build new carriers of their own.
  - notirk 9y ago
    That's fine?! Consider the fixed costs of building a new carrier! Today's carriers will price it below where it makes sense to "build your own carrier", these costs will be distributed among consumers and we'll all be paying more for the same access we have today. The only difference is today's carriers have higher profits and a stranglehold on our access to the internet.
  - nathan_long 9y ago
    > the content providers may choose to build new carriers of their own Oh sure. Suppose I'm about to found yaymoviesyay.com to compete with Netflix. I learn that if I don't pay Comcast, its subscribers can't use my site. Same deal for AT&T and Charter. Before this rule change, my cost to do business was "hosting costs." Now it's either: A) hosting costs + payola to ISPs B) hosting costs + cost of building my own last-mile network Guess how likely I am to start that new business? A) Super incredibly unlikely B) Ridiculously unlikely C) Extremely, ludicrously unlikely
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    I'd rather not hope and pray that they're able to do this. Plus, I know that in many parts of the country, they won't be interested.
- jimktrains2 9y ago
  > Absurd for you, not for the carriers. Yup, and only because those same carriers are making competition impossible, if not illegal.
marcosdumay 9y ago
It's completely absurd. Yet, it is the one high impact case that actually happened in real life and led to the FCC imposing neutrality onto the ISPs.
barrkel 9y ago
Comcast is like the road, not taxis; the last mile is where all the expense is in consumer internet. And congestion charging is a legitimate thing. Why should Granny have to pay more on her internet connection to subsidize your Netflix addiction? Because equal pay for equal access is that: a subsidy from light users to heavy users.
- y4mi 9y ago
  so you're arguing that the ISPs are unable to price their packages at a reasonable value, essentially selling it at cost to consumers, and netflix has to pick up the tab? thats just silly, come on! if that were the truth, and it isn't, then they'd need to increase the price for the monthly package or decrease bandwidth for consumer packages. /Edit: going with your example: amazon doesn't have to pay to keep the streets in service, despite causing lots of (heavy) traffic through their deliveries. they pay their delivery provider. just like netflix pays for its bandwidth to their ISP
- pwagland 9y ago
  Assume that this is the case… then just do the same as they already do in Australia, and put caps on how much you can download. I assume that you are totally cool with that, and indeed they already do this with a lot of mobile plans. Then Granny, who obviously doesn't watch Netflix, can get a cheap very limited plan. The issue here is that what comcast really want, is to sell Granny a cheap plan, and sell Netflix a plan, and google, and Apple (that app store and updates you know). Oh but wait, Netflix you are already paying a bunch to throw data on the net by the bucket? That doesn't matter… you have your last mile, and you also need to pay for everyone else's last mile as well. Oh, and Google, you also need to pay for everyone's last mile as well. It's just like a Winfrey episode: You can pay! you can pay! You can all pay!!
- vaishaksuresh 9y ago
  I don't get what you're saying. How am I making Granny pay more? There are bandwidth caps and data usage caps, I pay for what I use. If I'm paying less than the cost of the resources I'm using, charge me more. Why does Granny or Netflix have to pay comcast for what I do on the internet? My electricity provider does not charge differently for setting up and maintaining the connection based on what I do with the electricity, they just charge me for what I use. Why should an ISP be treated differently?

guiambros 9y ago

> The argument that Netflix needs to pay Comcast is absurd. Absurd for you, not for the carriers. And, unfortunately, they are the ones dealing the cards now. Outrageous, for sure, but according to Chairman Pai's plan, carriers will be able to charge both consumers and content providers.

mring33621 9y ago
That's fine. If the charges are onerous enough, then the content providers may choose to build new carriers of their own.
- notirk 9y ago
  That's fine?! Consider the fixed costs of building a new carrier! Today's carriers will price it below where it makes sense to "build your own carrier", these costs will be distributed among consumers and we'll all be paying more for the same access we have today. The only difference is today's carriers have higher profits and a stranglehold on our access to the internet.
- nathan_long 9y ago
  > the content providers may choose to build new carriers of their own Oh sure. Suppose I'm about to found yaymoviesyay.com to compete with Netflix. I learn that if I don't pay Comcast, its subscribers can't use my site. Same deal for AT&T and Charter. Before this rule change, my cost to do business was "hosting costs." Now it's either: A) hosting costs + payola to ISPs B) hosting costs + cost of building my own last-mile network Guess how likely I am to start that new business? A) Super incredibly unlikely B) Ridiculously unlikely C) Extremely, ludicrously unlikely
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  I'd rather not hope and pray that they're able to do this. Plus, I know that in many parts of the country, they won't be interested.
jimktrains2 9y ago
> Absurd for you, not for the carriers. Yup, and only because those same carriers are making competition impossible, if not illegal.

marcosdumay 9y ago

It's completely absurd. Yet, it is the one high impact case that actually happened in real life and led to the FCC imposing neutrality onto the ISPs.

barrkel 9y ago

Comcast is like the road, not taxis; the last mile is where all the expense is in consumer internet. And congestion charging is a legitimate thing. Why should Granny have to pay more on her internet connection to subsidize your Netflix addiction? Because equal pay for equal access is that: a subsidy from light users to heavy users.

y4mi 9y ago
so you're arguing that the ISPs are unable to price their packages at a reasonable value, essentially selling it at cost to consumers, and netflix has to pick up the tab? thats just silly, come on! if that were the truth, and it isn't, then they'd need to increase the price for the monthly package or decrease bandwidth for consumer packages. /Edit: going with your example: amazon doesn't have to pay to keep the streets in service, despite causing lots of (heavy) traffic through their deliveries. they pay their delivery provider. just like netflix pays for its bandwidth to their ISP
pwagland 9y ago
Assume that this is the case… then just do the same as they already do in Australia, and put caps on how much you can download. I assume that you are totally cool with that, and indeed they already do this with a lot of mobile plans. Then Granny, who obviously doesn't watch Netflix, can get a cheap very limited plan. The issue here is that what comcast really want, is to sell Granny a cheap plan, and sell Netflix a plan, and google, and Apple (that app store and updates you know). Oh but wait, Netflix you are already paying a bunch to throw data on the net by the bucket? That doesn't matter… you have your last mile, and you also need to pay for everyone else's last mile as well. Oh, and Google, you also need to pay for everyone's last mile as well. It's just like a Winfrey episode: You can pay! you can pay! You can all pay!!
vaishaksuresh 9y ago
I don't get what you're saying. How am I making Granny pay more? There are bandwidth caps and data usage caps, I pay for what I use. If I'm paying less than the cost of the resources I'm using, charge me more. Why does Granny or Netflix have to pay comcast for what I do on the internet? My electricity provider does not charge differently for setting up and maintaining the connection based on what I do with the electricity, they just charge me for what I use. Why should an ISP be treated differently?