There must be something about their heritage as “Ma Bell” that leads them overplay their hand.<\/p>\n
The FCC gave a space for wireless providers, and AT&T jumped full in with a pay for play Internet<\/a>: <\/p>\n Today, AT&T announced a “Sponsored Data” plan that would put it in a position to pick winners and losers online. This plan would require that Internet services pay to make sure customers are able to view their content by exempting it from data caps. Service providers that can’t meet the price tag that AT&T sets could be left behind.<\/span> In addition to the more general philosophical concerns addressed above by Public Knowledge, the Daily Beast<\/i> observes AT&T’s new business model is primarily an attempt to stop investing in improving its network and start shaking down content providers<\/a>:<\/p>\n AT&T has proudly moved past the days when the iPhone crashed its network for millions of excited subscribers. In May of last year CEO Randall Stephenson told investors that AT&T anticipated reducing expenditures on its network and that data caps were really about charging content providers<\/a> He repeated his confidence in AT&T\u2019s network in December<\/a>.<\/span>
<\/span> The following can be attributed to Michael Weinberg, Acting Co-President: <\/span>
<\/span> “The FCC needs to protect consumers and creators from internet service providers (ISPs) who want to pick winners and losers online. This is but the latest example of how data caps are increasingly becoming used to threaten the open internet. As AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson announced in May, data caps are all about forcing content creators to pay and are no longer about any sort of network congestion. In December, Stephenson admitted to investors that they had addressed the network capacity issues that were used to justify data caps in the first place. It is time for the FCC to heed Public Knowledge’s over two year old call to investigate data caps and gather basic information about their use. It is impossible for the FCC to examine the impact of today’s announcement on net neutrality until it develops an understanding of data caps. <\/span>
<\/span> “When it was reported in May that ESPN was in negotiations with a major carrier to pay to be exempt from data caps, Public Knowledge highlighted that this was an obvious violation of net neutrality. The company that connects you to the internet should not be in a position to control what you do on the internet. AT&T’s announcement positions itself to do just that. <\/span>
<\/span> “In addition to being a ripoff for both consumers and content creators, AT&T’s plan erects a massive barrier in front of anyone hoping to be the next big thing online.”<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/span> The sponsored data plan itself further highlights AT&T\u2019s confidence in its network: if the network truly was fragile AT&T probably would not be inviting creators to dump a lot more content onto it. Any problems in the network that exist going forward should be traced back to the fact that AT&T is investing in its special paid access lanes instead of the parts of the network available to everyone else. <\/span>
<\/span> Furthermore, even if AT&T is painting an overly rosy picture to investors and deluding itself about its network capacity, monthly data caps are an incredibly inefficient way to deal with momentary network congestion.<\/span>
<\/span> But they are a great way to gouge content creators.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n