AT&T and Verizon Facing FCC Scrutiny After Exempting Their Own Apps From Data Caps

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
7,446
8,508



Both AT&T and Verizon offer apps and streaming services that don't count against the data cap they impose on customers, a practice that the United States Federal Communications Commission does not approve of.

The FCC this week sent letters (via The Verge) to both Verizon and AT&T, claiming that the data cap exemptions, called "zero rating," raise net neutrality concerns and could impact consumers and competition.


AT&T and Verizon each offer programs that allow content providers to pay a fee to be exempted from customer data caps, programs that they themselves take advantage of with their own apps and services.

DirecTV Now, AT&T's recently introduced streaming television service, does not use data when streamed on the AT&T network, for example. DirecTV Now pays for the data, but as an AT&T subsidiary, AT&T is just paying itself. Verizon, meanwhile, exempts its own Go90 streaming service from using data on the Verizon network and does not pay fees to do so.

The FCC first sent a warning to AT&T in early November, but was not pleased with the response it received from the company. In this week's letter, the FCC says that it has come to the "preliminary" conclusion that the Sponsored Data program inhibits competition, harms consumers, and violates Open Internet rules. It asks AT&T to answer a series of questions about its Sponsored Data practices.
We find that those responses fail to alleviate the serious concerns expressed in our November 9 letter regarding the potential anti-competitive impacts of a wholesale Sponsored Data program for zero-rated mobile video services. Indeed, your submission tends to confirm our initial view that the Sponsored Data program strongly favors AT&T's own video offerings while unreasonably discriminating against unaffiliated edge providers and limiting their ability to offer competing video services to AT&T's broadband subscribers on a level playing field.
A similar letter sent to Verizon expresses concern over the "FreeBee Data 360" program and says it has the potential to "hinder competition and harm consumers" because Verizon does not need to pay to participate in the Sponsored Data program when it exempts its own app, but competing content providers do.
The position that the participation of Go90 in FreeBee Data 360 is the same as that of third parties, however, fails to take account of the notably different financial impact on unaffiliated edge providers. For example, while there is no cash cost on a consolidated basis for Verizon to zero-rate its own affiliated edge service, an unaffiliated edge provider's FreeBee Data 360 payment to Verizon is a true cash cost that could be significant.
AT&T and Verizon have responded to the letters sent by the FCC in statements given to the media. AT&T says the government should not take away a service that's saving customers money, while Verizon says its practices are good for consumers, non-discriminatory, and consistent with the rules.

The two carriers have been given a December 15 deadline to respond to the FCC's concerns.

Article Link: AT&T and Verizon Facing FCC Scrutiny After Exempting Their Own Apps From Data Caps
 
  • Like
Reactions: OttawaGuy

oneMadRssn

macrumors 601
Sep 8, 2011
4,740
11,031
New England
bundling cell phone, landline, cable, etc., would be illegal.
Bundling is bad for consumers. That's a good example you gave. When Comcast forces you to buy cable tv and a landline phone, when you only want an internet connection, you end up paying more for services you never use.

The UK has had unbundling regulations, which resulted in lower costs for consumers, and their cost of internet and cell phone service are significantly lower than in the US.

Just like cable companies bundle channels together, and consumers always want a-la-carte channels, aka unbundled.
 

benjitek

macrumors 6502a
Sep 23, 2012
865
434
So many mergers... so many rules... AT&T and Time Warner hooking up seems like the nail in the coffin towards an overpriced spiral of a multimedia and internet access world :mad:
 

jigzaw

macrumors 6502
Oct 12, 2012
422
186
Today it's using apps without data caps and tomorrow it's "decency" and banning porn. The FCC should have zero jurisdiction over the internet. This is one thing where I really was bummed that Obama broke that seal by encouraging the FCC to claim jurisdiction. So their first act, getting rid of something customers actually like. Lol
 

Doogh2004

macrumors newbie
Jun 16, 2016
4
28
So, lemme get this straight... the FCC, acting as "consumer protection" in theory, is telling AT&T and Verizon that NOT charging me for services hurts me.

Oooookayyyyyy...

Thanks FCC!
See, here's the issue... They're spinning it to be positive.

Imagine if you had the choice between: A) Twice as much data
B) Free data through their services

Essentially, they're forcing you to sacrifice part of your data so that others that use DirectTV can have more data.

Now, imagine if they stop raising data caps... They're essentially forcing Netflix to be more expensive to use than DirectTV.

It's dangerous and anti-competitive.

If other utilities did this... Like water or electricity... The utility companies would be able to decide which businesses succeed and fail.
[doublepost=1480715361][/doublepost]
Today it's using apps without data caps and tomorrow it's "decency" and banning porn. The FCC should have zero jurisdiction over the internet. This is one thing where I really was bummed that Obama broke that seal by encouraging the FCC to claim jurisdiction. So their first act, getting rid of something customers actually like. Lol
No, you don't understand net neutrality.

It means ATT cannot make certain services cheaper than others. What if they make their news site cheap and other news sites super expensive? It prevents ATT from controlling competition. It doesn't give the FCC to regulate the contents of the internet.
 

doasis23

macrumors regular
Aug 23, 2012
220
29

joueboy

macrumors 68000
Jul 3, 2008
1,580
1,514
I have to say this over and over again, the data congestion they've always use as an excuse to throttle their unlimited customers didn't exist. They forced us to switch to that limited data plan by crippling people after using 5GB. Too bad FCC is too slow or maybe just a corrupt government institution.
 

moonjelly

macrumors regular
Aug 18, 2016
149
96
California
Nope. Offering me a discount on one service has no direct effect on the costs of other services.

By this same logic, bundling cell phone, landline, cable, etc., would be illegal.
It does hurt you. Do you not see? It is the same as selling you one speed for all content but giving you a higher speed for sponsored content for "free". Its hard for me to believe there are people so gullible and susceptible to marketing word games.

It isn't just about you. It also hurts smaller non-conglomerate services. It is monopolistic and unfair to smaller businesses. [which happens to be bad for the consumer indirectly]

Related - wired internet should have been made a utility 30 years ago. The capital for a nationwide fiber network would be paid for. Service would be regulated at cost plus minimal profit like other utilities. Phone, TV, and data would all be at cost. Media companies would have to compete on content on open public data channels like the broadcast days.
 
Last edited:

TheHateMachine

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2012
836
850
Even if the FCC act on anyone it won't matter come next year when Tom Wheeler gets replaced by a republican pick and aligns the FCC with what these carriers want. You can look at the voting history over the last couple of years and see how its right down party lines in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eastmanweb

Krevnik

macrumors 68040
Sep 8, 2003
3,218
626
It does hurt you. Do you not see it is the same as selling you one speed for all content but giving you a higher speed for sponsored content for "free"? Its hard for me to believe there are people so gullible and susceptible to marketing word games.
And this is on top of the fact that landlines are also getting data caps these days. Tune the caps right, and now you can get someone with overage fees because they didn't use a zero-rated streaming service.
 

2010mini

macrumors 601
Jun 19, 2013
4,103
3,687
Today it's using apps without data caps and tomorrow it's "decency" and banning porn. The FCC should have zero jurisdiction over the internet. This is one thing where I really was bummed that Obama broke that seal by encouraging the FCC to claim jurisdiction. So their first act, getting rid of something customers actually like. Lol
Wait, consumers like no choice of broadband companies in most regions? They like paying for equipment even after the amount has covered the cost? They like data caps that forces them to use "zero data" services which means less choice?
 

Julien

macrumors G4
Jun 30, 2007
11,140
3,828
Atlanta
Nope. Offering me a discount on one service has no direct effect on the costs of other services.

By this same logic, bundling cell phone, landline, cable, etc., would be illegal.
And next AT&T decides to charge you 4x data for streaming Spotify over Apple Music or YouTube over Vimeo or whatever your favorite service is? This opens a slippery slope.