FTC & FCC Watch Thread

[Macallik86]

Drop FCC-related news here

 

[Macallik86]

FCC chair to investigate exactly how much everyone hates data caps

ISPs clearly have technical ability to offer unlimited data, chair's office says.

arstechnica.com

Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel wants the FCC to open a formal inquiry into how data caps harm Internet users and why broadband providers still impose the caps. The inquiry could eventually lead to the FCC regulating how Internet service providers such as Comcast impose limits on data usage.
Rosenworcel yesterday announced that she asked fellow commissioners to support a Notice of Inquiry on the topic. Among other things, the Notice would seek comment from the public "to better understand why the use of data caps continues to persist despite increased broadband needs of consumers and providers' demonstrated technical ability to offer unlimited data plans."
The inquiry would also seek comment on "trends in consumer data usage... on the impact of data caps on consumers, consumers' experience with data caps, how consumers are informed about data caps on service offerings, and how data caps impact competition." Finally, Rosenworcel wants to seek comment about the FCC's "legal authority to take actions regarding data caps."
"In particular, the agency would like to better understand the current state of data caps, their impact on consumers, and whether the Commission should consider taking action to ensure that data caps do not cause harm to competition or consumers' ability to access broadband Internet services," the press release said.

Tell FCC about your data cap experiences​

Although the proposed Notice of Inquiry requires a commission vote before it can be issued, the FCC already created a "Data Caps Experience Form" and encourages Internet users to use that form to "share their unique experiences and challenges with data caps." The FCC said it wants to hear from users of fixed services (e.g., home Internet) and wireless broadband, "including those with disabilities, low-income consumers, and historically disadvantaged communities." The FCC also wants details on how data caps impact "access to online education, telehealth, and remote work."
The chairwoman's office noted in its press release that "many broadband ISPs temporarily or permanently refrained from enforcing or imposing data caps in response to the COVID-19 pandemic."
"Internet access is no longer nice-to-have, but need-to-have for everyone, everywhere," Rosenworcel said. "As we emerge from the pandemic, there are many lessons to learn about what worked and what didn't work, especially around what it takes to keep us all connected. When we need access to the Internet, we aren't thinking about how much data it takes to complete a task, we just know it needs to get done. It's time the FCC take a fresh look at how data caps impact consumers and competition."

FCC still lacks Democratic majority​

Rosenworcel probably can't take any major regulatory action on data caps with the current four-member commission split evenly between Democrats and Republicans. Rosenworcel has led the FCC without a Democratic majority for President Biden's entire term because the Senate refused to confirm Biden nominee Gigi Sohn.
Biden is trying again with the nomination of Democrat Anna Gomez. The Senate Commerce Committee scheduled a nomination hearing to consider Gomez on June 22. Confirmation requires a vote of the full Senate.
Rosenworcel's proposal to issue a Notice of Inquiry was praised by advocacy groups that focus on broadband access. "Service provider limits on how data can be used can cause already disadvantaged consumers to refrain from a range of essential online activities, such as telehealth appointments or educational programs, for fear of exceeding monthly subscription limits. In effect, data caps curtail online activity and suppress residents' full participation in a digital society," the group Next Century Cities said.

Data caps called “confusing and pernicious”​

Benton Institute for Broadband & Society Executive Director Adrianne Furniss said the group "supports the FCC's inquiry into data caps which limit the amount of access consumers have to data before they are charged surplus fees or cut off from service. There is scant evidence that such caps are necessary and their consequences can be especially disastrous for vulnerable populations."
"Data caps are particularly problematic for low-income individuals who may find themselves facing unexpectedly large fees at the end of the month as a result of surpassing a data cap," Furniss also said. She called data caps "insurmountable barriers for low-income consumers trying to access life-changing services online, such as educational tools," and said the caps are "particularly debilitating for the deaf and hard-of-hearing consumers who rely on Video Relay Service (VRS) in order to communicate."
She argued that data caps can "limit access to telehealth services which otherwise reduce medical costs through video technology, support real-time treatment by first responders through the use of wireless devices, and enhance senior wellness and preventative care through telemedicine and remote in-home monitoring. In general, data caps are not popular with consumers, nor are they an effective means of managing network congestion."


Harold Feld, senior VP of Public Knowledge, also urged commissioners to approve the Notice of Inquiry. He said:

Data caps are one of the most confusing and pernicious aspects of subscribing to broadband. How on earth can a wireless carrier offer multiple "unlimited" plans, each with different consequences for exceeding a different "soft" limit? How can subscribers measure their data consumption with any accuracy? This isn't like minutes or number of texts. And what about subscribers with no choice but a cable or satellite plan that imposes a data cap? How many subscribers have to put off a remote doctor's appointment rather than risk overcharges, or pay overcharges for the privilege of using a streaming or gaming app? How does anyone even know how much bandwidth their smart house uses?

"In addition to burdening subscribers, these data caps potentially burden the economy as a whole," Feld added. "By limiting the online activity of consumers, they severely limit the capacity for innovation."

 

[Macallik86]

The knives are out for Lina Khan right now. Today, most of the articles are critical of her attempt against Microsoft/Activision to the point that I'm questioning whether there's an ulterior motive I'm missing.

I can't really comprehend how these publications entrenched in tech are pro-monopoly w/o leading to a quasi-conspiracy re: conflicts of interest.

 

[hashmander]

yeah it's like "why is she wasting time suing big companies." and if you don't sue they say oh feckless govt oversight, they're in bed with the corporations. now i start to see why the govt looks for settlements. everyone will have their knives out if you lose in court which is more and more likely these days as the law is on the side of powerful corporations.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

The knives are out for Lina Khan right now. Today, most of the articles are critical of her attempt against Microsoft/Activision to the point that I'm questioning whether there's an ulterior motive I'm missing.

I can't really comprehend how these publications entrenched in tech are pro-monopoly w/o leading to a quasi-conspiracy re: conflicts of interest.

Kahn did the right thing, of course the media outlets that are owned by these people are pissed off

 

[MAKAVELI25]

Kahn did the right thing, of course the media outlets that are owned by these people are pissed off

They hate Lina Kahn for the same reason they hate Elizabeth Warren. She understands the intricacies of the fortresses they've built and she knows exactly how to dismantle them.

 

[Pressure]

She's not racking up the wins so people are obviously going to question the value of her ideological approach as opposed to a more pragmatic one.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

She's not racking up the wins so people are obviously going to question the value of her ideological approach as opposed to a more pragmatic one.

She’s doing fine, mind you me and you rarely agree on anything

She’s been one of bidens best appointees

 

[Pressure]

She’s doing fine, mind you me and you rarely agree on anything

She’s been one of bidens best appointees

There's legitimate concern over her success rate and potential negative precedent set as a result.

I understand you're happy with it because you agree with it from an ideological approach, but unless she starts racking up wins I could see her not maintaining her post if Biden wins reelection due to the scrutiny she will receive.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

There's legitimate concern over her success rate and potential negative precedent set as a result.

I understand you're happy with it because you agree with it from an ideological approach, but unless she starts racking up wins I could see her not maintaining her post if Biden wins reelection due to the scrutiny she will receive.

That’s a fair argument but just having that challenge will make people think twice. That’s kind of the goal. The governments job is to push back aganist big business not work with them

 

[Pressure]

That’s a fair argument but just having that challenge will make people think twice. That’s kind of the goal. The governments job is to push back aganist big business not work with them

You're not going to get an argument here from me.

 

[Pressure]

Looks like it's already begun with the hearings

 

[Macallik86]

Consumers will finally see FCC-mandated “nutrition labels” for most broadband plans

The labels should make it easier to comparison shop.

www.theverge.com

It appears that a nearly eight-year-long battle by the FCC to require internet companies to display information on the costs, fees, and speeds of their broadband services is finally over. Starting on Wednesday, all but the smallest ISPs will be required to publish broadband “nutrition labels” on all of their plans, the regulator announced. The FCC’s intention behind the labels is that they’ll allow consumers to more easily comparison shop between plans and avoid any hidden fees.

The next time you shop for either a standalone home or fixed internet plan, or a new mobile broadband plan, you should notice such a label. Each label will include monthly broadband prices, introductory rate details, data allowances, broadband speeds, and links to find out about any available discounts or service bundles. Links to network management practices and privacy policies should be listed as well. The labels should appear both online and at physical stores.

Most of the information in the labels is publicly available but would require some time and research for the average consumer to sleuth out. In the past, the broadband industry has published advertised speeds for broadband plans that misrepresent the actual connection speeds available for most customers. The new labels should cut down on this practice; ISPs must now publish “typical” download and upload speeds with each plan.

Major broadband providers have fought vigorously over the years to kill the rule, arguing that such labels would be too costly and complicated to implement. Some consumer advocates also criticize the FCC for not addressing the more serious problem of regional broadband monopolies. Many Americans, especially in rural or less economically prosperous areas, only have one or two options for their broadband provider. Adding to the sense of urgency is that a program that gives low-income Americans additional money to purchase broadband internet plans is set to expire at the end of the month.

Regional ISPs with only one or zero competitors have little incentive to lower their prices or improve their speeds. Dozens of cities have tried to address the problem on their own by building out their own municipal broadband networks, though, of course, the telecom industry is trying its best to fight this.

So far, Verizon, Google Fiber, and T-Mobile have released labels ahead of the deadline. Although the FCC’s official deadline for compliance (if you’re a major ISP) is April 10th, small ISPs (with fewer than 100,000 lines) have until October 10th to implement the nutritional labels.