ISPs Told They Can’t Force Netflix, PlayStation Now etc to Pay More

Gamer Headlines writes: A recent European Parliament ruling has told Internet Service Providers that they will not be able to charge online companies that have data-intensive natures more. This has been an issue in recent years as broadband speeds have allowed for enormous amount of data to be streamed rather than downloaded.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
xX-StolenSoul-Xx2634d ago

That's a good thing :) Now here in America I know when we use Youtube, Netflix ect, the ISP tend to throttle our internet speed and this has been proven, lets fix that now.

pwnsause_returns2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

Yea this crap should be illegal , comcast is the biggest offender of this

zeal0us2634d ago

It should be but most of the ISPs in the US have their lobbyist and not to mention several paid off politicians. So passing a law or rule to prevent Comcast, ATT, Verizon, TWC and others would be difficult.

redwin2634d ago

Goggle internet is going to put an end to comcast. And here in America very seldom the corts side with the consumers, the latter and the big corporations are the real thrives in America . The FCC is fighting the ruling, saying that the consumers will be hurt in this goes through.

zeee2634d ago

Yes, those guys in Washington can't see pass 3 feet! Corporate world rules America. Always have, always will.

frostypants2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

@redwin, my limited understanding is that the judge practically TOLD the FCC that they could enforce net neutrality, if only they just re-classified internet access as a public utility. I'm confident that the FCC (and consumers) will win in the end. Right now though this is infuriating. Can you imagine if power companies controlled how much power was sent to each device in your home, and oh, by the way, also sold their own devices that conveniently had no such limitations? That's basically what these ISPs are doing with bandwidth...just instead of electrical devices/appliances, the item in question is media content.

AntoineDcoolette2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

Damn it! I was hoping this was for America T_T

Congrats anyway, Europe

GameSpawn2634d ago

The problem in the US is the FCC just doesn't have the balls to enforce net neutrality despite the fact the government has essentially given them the power to do so.

There was an article on the TechSpy sister site to N4G all about this.

This is a growing issue that is beginning to hit critical mass in the US.

ratchet4262634d ago


I agree with you on principle that US Net Neutrality should be upheld, but I'm not sure the power company analogy is the best example. The power company DOES limit what goes to your house via the service panel rating (100Amp, 200Amp, etc) so you can't just use whatever amount of electricity you want. Also, you are charged per watt of electricity you use, unlike most ISPs that have a flat per-month rate.

UltimateMaster2634d ago

Of course, this is for Europe.
If they do impose charges here in the US, I know there's always a better place to move.

LexHazard792633d ago

@ redwin,

I'll say this, its very sad that our own government lost this fight in behalf of consumers!

ShinMaster2633d ago

The problem is that most of these ISPs are also Cable TV providers and they hate that people are using on demand video streaming services like Netflix and many others to watch TV and movies.

Prime1572633d ago

Yeah, I've been preaching this since January, but no gamers seemed to care at the time... we'll see what happens. I'll hope for the best.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 2633d ago
G20WLY2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

Yes! This is great news for everyone. It's bad enough paying two fees for Netflix through Xbox, thanks to the pay wall. This could have made it three fees to access that service! :O

Fed up with being robbed - today is a good day for the consumer. :)

xX-StolenSoul-Xx2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

If ISP's were able to charge Netflix, Hulu, Playstation Now, to run on their services I'm almost positive those charges would have passed onto us. I like my 7.99, i don't need to pay more!

frelyler2634d ago

The companies may be protected, but who do you think ISPs will go after in retaliation? The answer is the consumer, we are the ones who need protection. The internet should be government regulated to keep costs low and affordable to all. It is becoming too large of an important commodity in everyday life.

xX-StolenSoul-Xx2634d ago

I agree, but regardless we consumers would get screwed one way or another.

frostypants2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

Not sure who is disagreeing with you. Sounds like some people are of the brainwashed "regulation = baaaad" brigade. Pretty much everyone agrees that what the ISPs are doing is wrong, yet virtually every solution is by definition regulation. The only other option is praying that the free market fixes things, but the idea that an unregulated market is necessarily a free market is naive to the fact that corporations will ultimately lock them down and control them on their own if left unchecked, especially when the primary infrastructure is so limited (e.g. telephone landlines, power, railroads...and cable). A free competitive market needs thoughtful regulation to ensure that it remains truly free (or as close to it as possible), just like a free society needs some laws in general.

Copen2634d ago

The government has their hands in enough pies as it is here in the US so NO i and im sure many people don't want the government regulating our internet that's a absolutely horrible idea.

frostypants2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

@Copen, so you think there should be NO laws surrounding how internet is handed out to people? Seriously? This is what I mean...teanuts making these ridiculous blanket assertions that "regulation is bad, government is bad". You don't know what you're saying. Even as these corporations bend you over and take your money, you buy their propaganda and defend them. YOU'RE the reason this crap is happening. Use your head and get out of the talking point echo chamber. By the way, that evil US government you hate so much created the freaking internet, and subsidized the infrastructure you're using right now.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2634d ago
harrisk9542634d ago

Good for Europe. Unfortunately, here in the U.S., we are woefully behind in this position due to the large amounts of money/political donations and lobbyists being utilized by the cable companies, Comcast specifically.

SilentNegotiator2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

Actually, it was due to an FCC oversight (one of their own rules currently say that they can't regulate ISPs in that way) and changes are in the works to bring back net neutrality.

Freeball2634d ago


I hope you're right, but with a former cable lobbyist as the head of the FCC, I doubt much is coming in the way of consumer protection when it comes to the internet. There was a Wired article (I think) recently ranting about the Comcast/Time Warner merger where he said that the net is now a utility and should be regulated like the other utilities. I agree with him.

Godmars2902634d ago

In the US there's too much corruption to deal with.

xX-StolenSoul-Xx2634d ago

We just have to hope google fiber goes national, it will force every isp to change

frostypants2634d ago

You don't think there's corruption in Europe? They have plenty. Have you ever been to Italy? US politicians are bush leaguers compared to their Italian counterparts.

Cryptcuzz2634d ago

If Comcast wasn't the fastest available ISP in my area, I would have dropped them faster then one can slap me!

Come on Google Fiber to San Jose, CA!

HaVoK3082633d ago

Netflix already struck a deal with Comcast here in the US. Comcast wasted no time taking advantage of the courts failure to do its job.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2633d ago
JOEgolferG2634d ago

American ISP's sound awful compared to Europe.

bggriffiths2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

What sort of speeds do you get around there? I pay through the nose for a connection that randomly gives me 16-60Mb. £40 (about $66) per month with Virgin Media.

Would be interesting to hear prices/speeds folks get.

EDIT: @MIKE32UK. Yeah, that £40 includes compulsory line rental for a landline that never gets used.

TitanUp2634d ago

live in a small town in TN i get 150kbs download and 100kbs upload 40$ a month.

creeping judas2634d ago

$65 Canadian, for DSL with advertised speed of "up to" 30mbs. The best I have been able to record has bee 15.3mbs The big issue for me is where I live, the ISP has a monopoly and no other provider is allowed to service the area.

mike32UK2634d ago

£40?! Is that with phone line included?

sourav932634d ago

If you're on Virgin fibre optic, that speed range should be around 50 to 60 Mbps, not 16 to 60. You should call them up and complain, usually there's an easy fix, if not they'll send an engineer to your place to fix it. I've had issues before, and I've called them up and got it fixed. Unless of course the reason for the slow speed is because of speed throttling since you might have used too much bandwidth during peak times.

Are_The_MaDNess2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

getting 60/60 megabit for 550NOK/92USD/55GBP
its a fair price for us over here.

@Irishguy95 bellow. speed is always in megabits since we dont use that as a storage unit. byte is used as a storage unit. 8bits is 1 byte, not that hard to get what you have in MB instead of Mb.

Irishguy952634d ago


I get 3MB d/l most of the time. On a 70Mb connection

Do you guys mean Mega bits(Mb) or Mega Bytes(MB)? I always found it pathetic the way ISP's use Mb's when most people don't have a clue about the difference between the two.

Skate-AK2634d ago

Alaska. I pay $65 for 15mbs with a 100gb cap. Fastest we have is 200mbs with a 500gb cap but it is $185 a month.

Zichu2634d ago

I'm from the West Midlands, live in a small town, so our internet isn't great. Currently on TalkTalk, originally on Virgin before we moved here, but they seriously p***ed us off by promising a date for fiber optics, but it wasn't available and would have been out of internet for a couple of months which we needed.

We get TV, Phone and Broadband for £30 a month, but we get like 3.2MB... Getting fiber optics on the 14th of this month, hoping to see a massive improvement. We can't do a lot on this connection. If one person is watching a video, the whole house has to suffer with watching no videos. You can still browse, but it's known at times to buffer videos and such.

Volkama2634d ago

Ah I live in a town with Virgin offering 100Mb and everyone on BT's lines offering 78Mb.

Except my street. Our cabinet somehow got missed in the fibre rollout about 3 years ago, so I am stuck on ~5Mb.

Thanks BT.

Software_Lover2634d ago

I pay 55.00 a month for 30meg svc. I get about 3.8 to 4 megabytes of download speed.

I have Charter.

jammmie72634d ago

I'm paying £25 for mine and get 30Mb all the time with Virgin Media. Living just outside Manchester and pay no line rental just broadband.

creatchee2634d ago

I love how ISP's use bandwidth caps, as if somehow they will run out of megabytes and gigabytes if they don't limit their customers to a certain amount. It's the same BS that phone companies have pulled for years with minutes and it's disgusting.

JunkieJedi2634d ago

Ouch! I pay Virgin Media £38 a month (including line rental and free weekend calls as well as my TiVo fee) and am at 120MB (soon to be upgraded for 'free' to 160MB). I'd give them a call mate and get that sorted out sounds like they're overcharging you somewhat.

xX1NORM1Xx2634d ago

I pay £80 a month for phone TiVo box with hd channels and Internet I get 100ish down and 6.something up with virgin media in the uk it's one of their collections premier I think it was 60down and 3up but they upgraded it for free if ur looking for a new ISP in uk look at virgin media when something goes wrong they can be slow but they are the best we've used

Palitera2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

Currently on Brazil: About 50 USD for steady 10 Mbps. Downloading, therefore, at 1.2 MBps. Global Village Telecom in a 2M people city.

Fun, but not funny at all, fact:
Here the government (the institutions are more corrupt than you can even imagine) made a nice rule... Companies are only obliged to deliver 20% of the speed you paid for.

EVERY 3G and 4G provider uses it. You have a contract for 1 Mbps, they deliver 0.2 and are completely allowed to do it.

The lack of honesty and respect permeates almost every relation.

Aceman182634d ago

Here in NYC I have FiOS at 75/35 and I pay between 55-60 a month on my bill.

sungam3d2634d ago

Aussie here.
ISP: iiNet
Bandwidth: 500GB
Speed: 24Mbit down (never goes above 12-13) 1.2mbit up.
Cost: All for $99.90 AUD a month!
($93USD, £56)

DeadMansHand2634d ago

Washington State here. I bundle two HD cable boxes, all tv channels (many as they offer), HBO and 30/15 Internet with 250gb cap for 120 a month.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 2634d ago
OC_MurphysLaw2634d ago

So the reality means the consumer will face more data caps and higher costs.

Are_The_MaDNess2634d ago (Edited 2634d ago )

the fact that there even is caps over there baffles me.
sitting on a 60/60 line with unlimited usage and no throttling. Torrents running wild at all times and i know for a fact that i have downloaded over 2.6TB in the last month of anime.
feel sad for the US and UK that have caps in general

OC_MurphysLaw2634d ago

Might I ask where you live?

Dark_Overlord2634d ago

Not all of the ISP's in the UK have caps :)

I'm with Virgin Media and they don't, Sky have recently changed to none and I'm guessing others will follow suit soon :)

candy_mafia2634d ago

EU ruling is good for UK, but Americans get a trashy deal most of the time. I pay for 60mbs service, but average around 15mbs. I am changing ISP since I'm 3 years out of my contract.

Show all comments (70)
The story is too old to be commented.