Top
1080°

US Court Strikes Down Net Neutrality: Prepare to Pay for Online Games - News

Christmas came 345 days early for Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, and their US internet service provider bretheren. Today a United States Federal Appeals court ruled that the FCC does not have the right to regulate the way in which ISPs provide access to the internet. I'll spare you the complex details, but the cliffnotes are that it's not completely legal for service providers to throttle or even block access to parts of the internet they don't want you to use. For example, Comcast could disable Netflix access so that you are forced to use their TV and streaming services.

Read Full Story >>
gamrreview.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Eonjay923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

Basically it means that Comcast and Verizon can now charge you extra for using streaming services or for access to certain feature like gaming access, NetFlix and can now block you from sites they don't want you to visit.

Net Neutrality prevented them from charging you for using your service to go to sites like Netflix. Now, if you wont pay for their services, you will have to pay extra for streaming. If you are a gamer, you can now be charged extra for accessing Xbox Live or PSN.

cyguration923d ago

Thanks for explaining it so clearly.

Bubs+

thorstein923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

In a statement Tuesday, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler indicated he was considering an appeal to the decision.

"We will consider all available options, including those for appeal," Wheeler said, "to ensure that these networks on which the Internet depends continue to provide a free and open platform for innovation and expression, and operate in the interest of all Americans." -FCC

"Judge David Tatel, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found that the network neutrality rules contradicted a previous FCC decision that put broadband companies beyond its regulatory reach." -Washington Post

EDIT: My previous post was in error and I amended it.

Eonjay923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

@thorstein
Being able to charge higher rates to get access to streaming sites or gaming sites is the same thing as blocking access. The point is the Netflix offers access to content and the ISP will charge you extra for it.

edit: okay gotcha thanks for the update.

NukaCola923d ago

This is horsecrap. We pay to lease an IP address, not port numbers.

JBSleek923d ago

Thank you for commenting on N4G! That’ll be $.50, unless you’d like to upgrade to our “Commenters+ Package” for all of your blog commenting needs!

shuuwai923d ago

In other NEWS VPN went up by 75%.

It'll be lame if they block my vpn. lol.

I hope this idea is drop, i don't want this idea creeping into Canada or anywhere around the world.

webeblazing923d ago

So your saying they could charge you to access mp which we we already have to pay now. So that's internet + plus extra charge + psn and xblive to play a $60 game. And if we Dont the $60 game worth less than it already is. If the happen gamers gonna be paying 3 subscription prices lol. I like I said before this only the beginning but gamers like getting pushed over by big businesses. Most likely they saw how much people are paying for services which Dont do much. Streaming is the only service that actually give contain. But most likely they're mainly because their on demand sucks and they Dont want to match the value.

Hope this BS Dont happen but if they do what's gonna stop them. There's only one cable company to choose from in each county most sometimes even half the state. Time warner constantly over charge for poor service and you can't even do anything about it because it not another IP in the area. They get real cocky when they know this.

thorstein923d ago

Well. Verizon already sells a tiered system of speeds. If you have FiOS in your area you can see that they have 3-4 different "tiers." Each with a different speed. I have the fastest since I game alot.

I do have a different router once I got the upgrade. But, I don't think they can charge more, there will be more options.

SilentNegotiator923d ago

Federal Appeals court judges make stupid mistakes all of the time. It won't stand in higher courts. Not personally worried.

AliTheSnake1923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

NOW is the time for these Hackers to hit and make a statement.

Edit: Petitions already started
http://cms.fightforthefutur...

Skip_Bayless923d ago

lol so how much is it to torrent, watch porn, and pirate??

GarrusVakarian922d ago (Edited 922d ago )

Wow.

The greed of men knows no boundaries, why isn't enough ever enough for these money hungry suits?. This is complete BS, i hope this never passes in the UK, i would rather cut off my internet and game exclusively on singleplayer for the entire gen than pay unnecessary extras to these greedy,corrupt companies.

I'm not even American and signed the petition with both of my emails. **** these greedy a-holes. Here's the petition link, everyone needs to sign this! http://act.freepress.net/si...

user5575708922d ago

so basically now the cable companies can bone us even more then they already do

Consoldtobots922d ago

this is just like when that idiot Clinton deregulated the housing loan industry and the banksters went crazy giving out loans...we all know how that turned out.

for those that miss the point, this will enable uncontrolled greed to basically crash the internet business model.

UnwanteDreamz917d ago (Edited 917d ago )

@Consold

You think Clinton caused the housing crisis?

Here young man some real reasons

The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.

Democrates and Republicans caused it.

My point is it's never as simple as people tell themselves. This isn't just about greed people. This could potentially have far worse consequences than a high internet bill. The decision will be overturned on appeal.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 917d ago
Bigpappy923d ago

This is just one judge though, so this is phase one. There are higher courts who can toss this to the high heavens... or approve it.

This could kill the internet in the U.S as we know it. If could make me cancel my internet service.

clonerz923d ago

I've had enough with big f'n business. I hope we as consumers do not allow these companies to dictate how much of our Internet we use per month or risk paying more for it other countries are laughing at us Americans we are such fools. You do know what they say a fool and his money will soon part ways

thecastroregime923d ago

Unfortunately, the only other higher court that could hear this case is the United States Supreme Court, and the cases they select to hear are extremely limited (unless there are other, more niche, specialized courts with the requisite jurisdiction that could hear this sort of case, but I don't believe that likely).I'm not saying it's impossible that the USSC won't hear it, but it's gotta prove itself in the eyes of the public and business to be an important case worth hearing if we have any hope of the court lending its ear. I wouldn't count on this case going much higher up unless we get a huge reaction-backlash on the decision.

JohnnyTower923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

Once you set precedence, it becomes easier for the next case to run the same course. If you can show proof of a previous verdict for similar circumstances, it adds to the evidence of your case. One judge that may be, but they opened the door for others.

Conzul923d ago

Looks like we'll all be using MeshNet in a few years.

Fine with me. Screw Comcast.

Omegasyde923d ago

Bigpappy - Finally we are on the same page.

If anything ISP will now start selling tiered plans.

good service < Better service < Unlimited.

It will no longer be about speed that seperates plans. For certain area's in the US, there is only one broadband provider meaning if you don't like their rules, you are #%@#% out of luck.

This reminds me how ATT, Verizon, and Sprint phased out "unlimited plans" and enforced EULA's that prevent users from using video/voice and/or streaming services to circumvent using talk minutes.

If my bandwidth get's capped(or a is forcefully metered), I guess I will be playing single player only games.

ELpork923d ago

Obama came out and said that this is something he's against. Granted he's on the way out, so be careful who you vote for next.

As long as people keep voicing their concerns, this will keep getting tossed out.

Ittoryu923d ago

@Omegasyde

sprint still has unlimited. It's the other cell companies.

weekev15922d ago

If ISPs actually start doing this, someone needs to be opportunistic and become a reselling provider with no restrictions or add ons. I imagine every gamer would immediately move all services to them.

AndrewLB922d ago

What the heck are you guys smoking? Right now we're living under the free-market run internet where the FCC and Obama have ZERO control. It has ALWAYS been this way. Now you guys are going to believe these liars in Washington who want more control over your lives while lying to your face, claiming that without net neutrality you'll all get robbed by big business and butt-raped.

The reason why the internet has been as great as it's been is because the government HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. These "consumer advocacy groups" are nothing more than left wing front groups who want a government takeover of the internet through SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA so they can tax every single email and byte of data sent/received. AND so they can sensor content, speech, and liberty.

Remember how Obama promised everyone if they like their doctor they can keep him? Or Keep their health care plan? Remember the lies? These communists live by the mantra "the ends justify the means" and will say and do anything to grow government, authoritarian rule, and to make everyone beholden to the government.

Why do you think the education system in the US is failing? If the democrats know best, why isn't it the model of success? It's because It's supposed to fail and that's what keeps them in power. As long as the population is uninformed, uneducated, and dependent on the government for hand-outs, the lies and propoganda will continue to work and the democrats will keep winning elections.

Proof? Just look at how much better the education system, economy, and crime are in cities, towns, and states run by conservatives. Now look at Detroit, Philly, Los Angeles, Chicago, DC, and every place where the left has run the show since the 1960's.

Case closed.

Sci0n922d ago

If this happens I am canceling my internet and my phone threw Comcast and will only game offline

dantesparda922d ago

Wow AndrewLB, what a conspiratorial rightwing clown you are. "Communists"? then by that standard you are nothing more than fascist. Its funny cuz if you knew anything, you would realize that these "ran by Democrats" states are all far richer than the Republican ran states. And the people make more money there and the education systems are better in them also and crime is down from the 70's, 80's and 90's. Those are the numbers, those are the facts, not some garbaged spewed out by some foaming at the mouth rightwings clowns (like you). You sit there and talk crap about Obama's "lies" like they compare to the Bush's lies that got us into 2 wars that have cost this country how much blood and treasure? Get out of here with all this wingnut crap. And the same liberal groups that want to protect net neutrality really just wanna tax us and control us?! You're a f-ing nut! Its funny how the the pro-republican companies (Comcast, Verizon, AT&T) are the ones trying to do this to us. Not the "liberals" now take off your tin hat and stop spewing all that stupid sh!t you are

GiantEnemyCrab922d ago (Edited 922d ago )

Yeah Dante, it was the Democrat controlled Senate who agreed with the wars. And these are not pro-republican companies, heck Obama regularly golfs with the CEO of Comcast. Liberalism is a mental disease thanks for proving it.

dantesparda922d ago (Edited 922d ago )

@ Crab

The only disease here is your way of thinking, The Democrat senate? wow! it was a republican majority ran senate and house kid, get your facts right. Rightwing conservatism, its a mental disease, thanks for proving it.

And Comcast is not a super pro conservative company? You're crazy kid! And aint it funny how Republicans are all for this yet its the Democrats that are for this right? You people are delusional

UnwanteDreamz917d ago

@AndrewLB

Spoken like a true sockpuppet. If you think for 1 second that the Republican party is any less responsible for the nations problems, then you are deluded. You buy that 2 party song and dance? How cute...

Last I checked after 8 years in the highest office neither party left the country better than they found it. You have been brainwashed.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 917d ago
Oh_Yeah923d ago

Can't wait till google rolls out google fiber across the whole USA and puts these companies on the brink of closure, and then they have no other choice but to lower their service cost to a few dollars a month because they can't keep up with the immaculate speed and value that is google fiber.

Blaze929923d ago

they never planned nor are they going to roll Google Fiber across the whole USA. They dont even want to be an ISP - its simply to make real ISPs "get on their shit" from Google's competition.

Bigpappy923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

Google could get greedy too. I believe a democratic Government (by the people for the people) has a roll in keeping the internet accessible to all. The internet is like the highway system, it must remain accessible and access should not be dictated by profit. I am not always for Government control, but things like general access to roads and the internet, should not be managed by profit hungry Corp's, or the economy would collapse.

So in this case, I side with the FCC over Verizon.

mpnothanks923d ago SpamShow
AndrewLB922d ago

Good! Competition means these companies will have to compete to stay in business. That's a free-market mentality which is what works!

Net Neutrality, SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA are ALL anti-free-market government takeover bills that want to destroy the private-sector run internet that we've all used most of our lives. Net Neutrality is the cause of every single bad thing these "consumer advocate ake government advocate" groups claim it's going to prevent.

We've had decades of the internet WITHOUT the government's hands on things and it's worked out quite well. Our health care system was the same way... until Obamacare f**ked it all up by putting the government in charge of your plan, it's price, and who lives and dies.

just wait till you low information voters get duped into handing the internet control to the government. You think the DMV sucks? Ha!

Open up your eyes people. They're lying to you and you're buying into it. Net Neutrality is something they're only now trying to force upon the internet. If all these scare tactics were true, why weren't all these "consequences for not having net neutrality" already happening?

millerj2740922d ago

I'll start by saying I don't know the first thing about how ISP's and their regulations work. My whole understanding boils down to:
Step 1. Plug it in
Step 2. ...
Step 3. Profit

That being said, would it be possible for Sony/Microsoft to become their own cable/isp's? They're both already moving in that direction with live TV, right?

fiveby9922d ago

@Bigpappy Bear in mind many highway systems are toll roads or enforce commuter lanes. They are all not free open access. I don't have a problem with the internet being managed by profit hungry companies. Sure oversight and some regulation is appropriate. However I do think healthy competition by 'profit hungry' companies can spur innovation. Way back when, there was Ma Bell. That was it and long distance fees were expensive. Today with deregulation domestic long distance is essentially a flat rate. We need to seek a balance here which must always be reviewed to keep pace with technology and changing needs. That being said, I am a proponent of net neutrality with regards to not shaping traffic just to enhance profit. But I am also wary of government excessive meddling. Be very careful about giving too much power to government as despite intentions it can often become more control than you envisioned.

Sci0n922d ago

google fiber will go the same rout as these other companies if big brother imposes there will on all the companies and present a option to the businesses with greed that nobody can refuse.

UnwanteDreamz917d ago

If it wasn't for Karl Rove and his redistricting plans Republicans would be irrelevant. I give you dinosaurs 10 more years tops before you lose it all. The country is moving past your fear mongering B.S. Change or be left in the past.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 917d ago
showtimefolks923d ago

damn i hope this decision gets reversed, i am already paying $70

nope111923d ago

$80 here, and my connection is garbage.

Bigpappy923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

OK. I read a bit more on this from the Reuters news website. This is actually case #2 (the appeals court. Next step the Supreme Court or Congress. These paragraphs stand out:

"The ruling is a victory for Verizon and other broadband providers, who saw the FCC rules as government overreach into how they operate their networks. The largest providers on Tuesday pledged that they would not restrict how customers use the web, but consumer advocacy groups said they worried that providers may begin charging content companies such as Netflix, Facebook or ESPN for faster Internet speeds."

"Democratic leaders in Congress on Tuesday urged the FCC to take advantage of the oversight power the court did recognize over broadband and offered support in rewriting the rules. Republicans urged the FCC to stay hands-off."

Looks like Internet providers want to go after companies to try and shake them down for some of that profit. Seems like the Republican are cool with that, and the democrats are with the FCC deciding the way forward (status quo).

I think the co-operations will work around this, and the customers will be nickel and dimed by these ISP's who are compelled to make higher and higher profits every year.

Eonjay923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

"Democratic leaders in Congress on Tuesday urged the FCC to take advantage of the oversight power the court did recognize over broadband and offered support in rewriting the rules. Republicans urged the FCC to stay hands-off."

Well fuck the Republicans then. They make it so easy. No offense to any conservatives but this isn't okay. You are right. These corporations only objective is to find new ways to charge us for everything.

Tru_Ray923d ago

@ Eonjay. Agreed. F##ck the Republicans. To them, the poor are invisible, everyone has the opportunity to get rich in America, and religious dogma triumphs over logical discourse. In reality, not everyone has the opportunity to become a millionaire, the wealth disparity in America is growing exponentially, and religion is a superstition.

I already pay COX about $180 dollars a month for phone, internet, and cable. How much more flipping money do they need?

/end off topic rant

Tru_

oof46922d ago

Damn Republicans. To hell with the lobbyists.

Sci0n922d ago

if we get Romney or any other rich republican in office who is more so for the rich then anyone else we will get screwed real hard on this matter. The rich and elites won't care about spending more and we who care will all be forced to roll with the punches or cancel our services. This is some scary stuff that greed is flowing over into ISP world when our gaming these days revolve so much around the internet.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 922d ago
extermin8or923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

Wow... and from the perspective of someone in the UK they rip quite alot of you guys off with what they charge per month as it is :s The inventor of the internet must be very depressed by the way corperations are trying very hard to monetise every aspect of the internet for their own gain and greed. Considering he gave it to the public and buisnesses to use for free... wonder if he ever regrets that decision if for no other reason but to have maintained control and made it easier for people to afford access not harder...

Also this is a dodgy decision many of the large companies will actually be behind FCC on this I think. It's in companies like Apple, Google, Sony and Microsofts interest that they cannot block your access or charge you more as many of their services would receive a lot less subscriptions/users if this were the case.

Omegasyde923d ago

The reason its a monolopy is because the cable companies actually invest into the infrastructure (be it copper or fiber).

This means the cable companies "segregate" parts of cities. DSL is more lenient but not as reliable (depending on how far the Telco central office/sub-station is).

Sadly WiMAX is taking too long to build...

weekev15922d ago

@ omegaside its the same in the uk. BT pretty much cover the uk in cables but OFCOM (our regulator) have said keeping this to themselves gives BT an unfair advantage and has forced BT to split into 3 companies. Now we have BT openreach who maintain the lines, BT Wholesale who look after the exchanges and sell the internet to all providers which also includes BT Retaik.

I think its a really good way to go and we are seeing BB costs come down as a result of the competition and In my experience the service is also getting better.

extermin8or922d ago

@Weekev yes plus we have companies that have alot of their own lines aswell as being able to get usage on BT's in the form of virgin media and Sky. Plus BT have been moving into TVO boxes and services themselves or have agreements with the companies that do that and something like iplayer is funded by tax but would suffer from any charges for streaming-it was discussed in parliament about a year ago but decided to be impractical and unfair on consumers and companies relying on streaming to make them money. Thus was rejected.However they do try and block certain sites like torrents etc (although their are smple circumventions to get onto torrents...)

ITPython923d ago

Companies like Comcast should realize that if they start limiting peoples internet and charging for things like Netflix, or even Youtube, it would be a death sentence for them. And it seems really unlikely it will happen anytime soon.

Also people seem to forget about capitalism. If you don't like Comcast charging extra for Netflix (or whatever), then choose another provider who will!

Nobody is forcing you to pay Comcast (or any other ISP) a dime if you don't want to. And if they are the only game in town, then it is your responsibility as a consumer to decide whether or not you want to keep giving them your business. Simple as that. But most people nowadays don't want to suffer the inconvenience, so they keep getting crapped on by these companies who know they can push you around.

Stop trying to push this responsibility to the government, which has no business dictating to companies what services they can and cannot offer. Get off your lazy asses and stop paying for services you do not want rather than trying to get the government to force companies to change for you.

DeadMansHand923d ago

I don't know where you live but in my city is comcast or nothing. I could go with satellite but their speeds are horrible. This sucks.

Bigpappy923d ago

I am all for capitalism, but it is not a perfect system, and we can not go back to the wild, wild west where only the strongest survive. We have evolved and realized that we need some rules and some stability to encourage fair competition. Right now competition is very limited in most cities in the U.S. So Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T ... all have customers in a bad place.

Customers are edited the always connected life style, but setting prices to high could wean them of quickly.

I see this as a move for the cable providers to now go after the Facebook, Netflix and Google of the world like they have done with broadcast TV who need the cable feed to survive.

Veni Vidi Vici923d ago

Please tell me where the hell capitalism is in all this? It's a monopoly and everyone knows it. You sound like the judge that was paid off. "If you don't like it just choose another provider". Really? Most people only have ONE choice and if you're lucky enough to have other choices, it's usually only one and they don't offer anything better. And then to say that if you don't have any choice it's the consumer's responsibility to decided if they want to keep paying for it? Are you F'in serious? The internet has become more than just some luxury. In most cases, it's become a necessity for school and jobs. You HAVE to have a connection. I really want to go on but I'm worried I might get banned for what I really want to say. It's your kind of thinking that is allowing corporations to ruin this country.

ITPython923d ago

Here's the thing folks, capitalism does work because the consumers ultimately decide what they like and do not like, which changes how companies operate and do their business. If that company keeps receiving your money, they assume you like the service. If you cancel on them, then they assume you don't like the service. Comcast may come out and say "Sorry people, you now have to pay extra to use Netflix". But then shortly thereafter Verizon comes out and says "Hey people, we are not charging any extra to use Netflix, come over to us!". This results in Comcast possibly losing tons of business, and Verizon cleaning up. All in the name of capitalism and competing businesses.

Think the provider in your area has a monopoly? Don't like that? Then stop paying them money to screw you over! If everybody stopped paying those crooks then they would go out of business or their profits would be hurting which would force them to change their ways, it's really as simple as that.

As an example look at Netflix, remember when they tried to split their streaming and DVD rental services? People started cancelling their Netflix service in huge numbers, which forced Netflix to re-think their business plan. Same goes for what MS tried to pull off with the XB1. The people stood up and spoke out about it with the threat of not giving MS their business, and look what happened... MS turned a 180 and completely changed their tune. Did it require government intervention with more regulations on MS of Netflix? Nope. That was pure capitalism at work. And Netflix didn't even have any competing companies either (at least for DVD by mail), they just didn't like the loss of customers.

The problem in today's society is people don't want to give up, or change, their precious cable TV or internet service to make a stand, they don't want the inconvenience. They think "Oh no, I cannot live without my 200 MB internet speeds, and going to a 50 MB connection speed with another provider is completely out of the question!" So things never change and companies gain more and more control over you.

Bottom line is you DO have a choice, and to keep paying these companies month by month, even though you hate them and their service, is completely against the whole concept of a free-market.

People these days need to learn how to make sacrifices instead of crying to the government to fix everything for them because they are unwilling to make a stand on their own and possibly have a few inconveniences in their lives. The entitlement culture we have created here in the US is mind-boggling.

ExPresident922d ago

@ITPython

Dude, have a bubble. Best comment I've read on this site in awhile. Someone still has common sense.

Many-hat5922d ago

I'm not an American, just a distant cousin, but I do think you are quite naïve if you think all of these companies are truly independent and competitive. Sure, on the surface they have to appear so, but really they are just giant cartels. They talk to each other constantly -behind closed doors, and agree what they should do. Do you really think any one of these companies would be brave enough to 'go it alone' ? The very reason why you don't often find many companies in the same area is because they agree not to encroach on each other - at least in areas where competition may hurt them. In the UK, we have the exact same problem with energy companies. Of course, you can switch to another provider and you may save money in the short term, but I can guarantee you that ALL the energy companies agree between them their pricing strategies. The banks and energy companies in the UK have been fined several times for exactly this behaviour, but the regulatory services are weak and the fines relatively low, so it continues.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 922d ago
jimbobwahey923d ago

Wow, that judge must have received a really nice chunk of cash for this.

Letthewookiewin923d ago

This is a great article explaining the whole thin on top of what Eonjay had said. It's not all doom and gloom people.

http://www.techdirt.com/art...

Veni Vidi Vici923d ago

Nothing in that article made me feel better about this situation. In fact, it made it worse by saying they'd be surprised if the USSC overturned it. Tell me how the FCC will be able to wrangle the ISP's "without overstepping their bounds" and then I might feel a little better but I don't think anyone will explain how that's possible because I don't think the FCC will be able to do it.

hazardman923d ago

People need to stop worrying to much about this. It makes no sense for all isps to charge more. There will always be a company who is smart and stay neutral because they know consumers will look for the isp who doesnt over charge or restricts your usage.

kneon923d ago

None of these worst case scenarios that people are freaking out about are likely to occur for the reasons you stated.

But ISPs need to make money, they aren't charities. If they start losing money because of competition from over the top services like NetFlix then they will have to increase revenues somehow. Usage caps and tiered pricing are the most sensible and fairest way to go.

Eonjay923d ago (Edited 923d ago )

@kneon

Comcast is headquartered in my city. The Comcast CEO here is also the highest paid man in my city. How can he lose money when he is already making more then everyone here? Its greed. Hopefully the FCC steps in and maybe the people who we higher to protect us can go ahead and protect us.

indyman77923d ago

Another thing that can develop with the tier pricing is. You can go anywhere for the top level, and you can only go to certain places, and use certain services for lower level tiers. They can decide who can afford to have freedom.

PSjesus923d ago

GOOGLE fiber cost extra with streaming TV service(the normal 70$per month with TV plan 120$).....that's mean 4K tvs aren't the future

fatstarr923d ago

when one builds a wall, someone builds a ladder to get over it.

greed will be the downfall.

ssj27923d ago

If they dare to abuse us like that. I will hack my internet or "barrow" it for free. I have done it before.

Prepare to dobthe same don't allow this kind of control.