> manual sponsored data Ha! Clever. I like this angle. I agree I would have no problem with that. > But if manual sponsored data is allowed, it is then hard t

> manual sponsored data Ha! Clever. I like this angle. I agree I would have no problem with that. > But if manual sponsored data is allowed, it is then hard to make the case that it is bad to allow ISPs to facilitate it by offering a service where they track the usage for you Let me take a stab at it. In the case of manual sponsored data, companies are refunding you the rate ISP's are charging you for data. It's a neutral effect on the market. And further, any company no matter how large or how small can do it without the ISP's consent. BUT, when a company goes directly to the ISP, the ISP can charge them a different rate than the ISP would normally charge the customer. ISPs use bandwidth limits as a price discrimination tool, so they charge artificially high rates, but with direct communication between the ISP and the company, the deals offered can be strategic. The ISP can give the company a sweetheart deal as a means to manipulate the market. Then, as with classic zero rating, they simply clamp down on bandwidth limits as in zero rating so they remain a useful price discriminator. That's the difference. "Manual Sponsored Data" negates the ISP's ability to manipulate the market. "Sponsored Data" gives them the exact same powers as "Zero Rating" does. I've never thought to categorize these activities separately for this reason.