The last few weeks we've seen a number of the industry's biggest players unveil or announce so-called "zero rating" plans, which let some content bypass usage caps without a penalty. While making it clear the companies are not being "investigated" formally, FCC boss Tom Wheeler today stated the agency has sent letters to T-Mobile, Comcast and Verizon regarding all three companies' recent announcements that they'd be pursuing zero rating, albeit in notably different ways.
»twitter.com/b_fung/statu ··· 7039489
Critics have argued that zero rating, however it's implemented, should be considered a net neutrality violation because it immediately puts smaller companies at a disadvantage. But not all zero rating efforts are the same, and some are worse than others.
For example, T-Mobile recently announced Binge On, which lets the biggest video services bypass T-Mobile caps (albeit at 480p). T-Mobile tried to tap dance around concerns by announcing that users can disable the function at any time (though I've seen more than a few complaints that this isn't always easy), and any video provider can participate (though real details on this haven't been shared).
In stark contrast, Comcast's experiments with zero rating are notably more unapologetic. The company has stated that it's exempting its own streaming video service from the company's slowly-expanding usage caps, something Comcast insists isn't a net neutrality violation because its new Stream service "is an IP cable service delivered over our managed network to the home."
And that's different still from AT&T and Verizon's experiments with zero rating, which allow some companies to pay the telcos an extra fee to have their content specifically not count against user usage allotments. AT&T's Sponsored Data has been in trials for more than a year with little progress, while Verizon just announced their zero rating efforts will launch early next year at "reasonable rates" for companies.
While all different, many net neutrality supporters (myself included) believe that however they're implemented, the very act of putting a carrier in the middle of the content equation sets a horrible precedent if your goal really is a truly level Internet playing field for content and services. Swayed by carrier arguments that this is just like "1-800" or free shipping for data, others simply see this as creative pricing.
For its part, the FCC has vacillated from seemingly breathless support of zero rating (Wheeler called T-Mobile's plans "pro competition" and "highly innovative and highly competitive") to total silence. The agency's rules don't specifically ban zero rating (as do rules in half a dozen other countries), but the FCC says it will be taking a look at each effort on a case by case basis.
That appears to be what the FCC is doing here, though nobody is sure precisely where it intends to draw the line, and it's abundantly clear the agency is in no particular rush.
Update: Verizon reached out to state they've yet to receive an e-mail from the FCC, and remind us they don't yet have a zero rating product on the market, despite a recent announcement that they will soon:
quote:
One clarification: we did not receive a letter from the Chairman regarding this issue.As you note, Verizon has mentioned the issue recently, but we do not have a sponsored data product or service in market.
