Wow, what took you so long? Comcast bends net neutrality rules

It's not the internet, stupid! It's our managed network


Comcast has started bending the intent behind net neutrality rules with a new service, just as those rules are heading to a DC court this week.

The telco giant has announced a "Stream TV" service that is available only to its Xfinity internet customers. It will cost $15 a month and it comprises a small group of TV channels from its normal cable package, but notes that the service will not impact people's internet data caps – a practice known as "zero rating."

The service has net neutrality advocates up in arms, however, for two reasons. First, the inclusion of "zero rating" services – as T-Mobile recently and controversially has done with its Binge On service, where it excludes specific video services from its data caps – means that network operators are carving out ways to charge content providers in future.

But second, the Stream TV FAQ section contains some interesting semantics that show that the company is determined to implement the very market differentiation that net neutrality rules were designed to prevent.

In response to the self-asked question: "Will Stream TV use data from my Xfinity Internet monthly data usage allowance?," Comcast responds:

No, Stream TV is a cable streaming service delivered over Comcast's cable system, not over the Internet. Therefore, Stream TV data usage will not be counted towards your Xfinity Internet monthly data usage.

Under the FCC's rules, it is debatable whether this is allowed: a company selling internet access with a data cap decides that, for a small monthly fee, the data cap won't apply if you use specific services.

The fear is that telcos – and mobile phone operators – will use control of their networks to make certain "preferred" services more attractive to their millions of customers, and then turn around to content providers and demand payment from them to be allowed on the preferred list. It's the scenario that the Open Internet Order was designed to tackle (among other things).

When is the internet not the internet?

Comcast is obviously aware that this service – and its accompanying money-making opportunities – may fall foul of the FCC and so it is clearly preparing to argue that the net neutrality rules don't apply to it because it isn't using the internet per se, but its own managed network. That you have to be a customer of its internet service to sign up to the service is just by-the-by.

It's not entirely clear how anyone will be able to tell what service is provided over the internet and what is provided over Comcast's network, since they come through the exact same wire. But Comcast's lawyers are no doubt looking forward to arguing that point for many years in the courts.

Of course it is also worth noting that for years, Comcast has been "discounting" its internet access package if people also sign up to its cable service, to the extent that it can work out cheaper to have cable and not use it than pay "full price" for internet access.

Meanwhile, what the rules will come down to and how strongly they will be applied is also causing AT&T similar concerns.

Politico reports that the company's senior VP Robert Quinn said at the Telecom Symposium on Tuesday that the company didn't feel it could provide the same service as T-Mobile's Binge On plan because it wasn't sure how the FCC would react.

He went on to note that the company has "had to shelve a bunch of stuff because we've got to wait and see," saying that there have been weekly calls with AT&T's business units and their lawyers to "figure out whether that stuff we've invested in ... would be a violation of the order."

To court!

In other words, exactly what net neutrality advocates feared would happen was already in the wings, and now the telcos are trying to figure out how to make those new services – which rely on the telco being able to control or restrict what data is allowed to flow over its network – work regardless.

All of which makes the hearing this Friday in Washington DC all the more relevant. It will be the first oral hearing of the case brought against the FCC by the big telcos over its net neutrality rules.

As you may recall, the last set of rules over the internet was thrown out by the exact same court after Verizon challenged them. Although the FCC spent several months longer than expected checking that its plan would hold up to an inevitable legal challenge, it is far from certain that the court will agree to them.

If they do hold, it looks almost certain that the FCC will quickly be back in court trying to enforce them – and semantic variations on them. ®

Narrower topics


Other stories you might like

  • Experts: AI should be recognized as inventors in patent law
    Plus: Police release deepfake of murdered teen in cold case, and more

    In-brief Governments around the world should pass intellectual property laws that grant rights to AI systems, two academics at the University of New South Wales in Australia argued.

    Alexandra George, and Toby Walsh, professors of law and AI, respectively, believe failing to recognize machines as inventors could have long-lasting impacts on economies and societies. 

    "If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge," they wrote in a comment article published in Nature. "Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions."

    Continue reading
  • Declassified and released: More secret files on US govt's emergency doomsday powers
    Nuke incoming? Quick break out the plans for rationing, censorship, property seizures, and more

    More papers describing the orders and messages the US President can issue in the event of apocalyptic crises, such as a devastating nuclear attack, have been declassified and released for all to see.

    These government files are part of a larger collection of records that discuss the nature, reach, and use of secret Presidential Emergency Action Documents: these are executive orders, announcements, and statements to Congress that are all ready to sign and send out as soon as a doomsday scenario occurs. PEADs are supposed to give America's commander-in-chief immediate extraordinary powers to overcome extraordinary events.

    PEADs have never been declassified or revealed before. They remain hush-hush, and their exact details are not publicly known.

    Continue reading
  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022