The Secret of Signals

Two stories of interest this week.

The first story is about the FCC's decision to open the so called "white space" spectrum, to allow for new wireless services. This is good news for those hoping for more competition in the broadband market, and has been long anticipated by companies such as Google, Dell, and other companies. The decision wasn't without caveats. For instance, since wireless mics use the same spectrum, in larger cities, white space broadcast services cannot be located near stadiums or theaters.

This is about the only positive glimmer of news to those of us who also heard this week that AT&T is now testing broadband caps in the Reno, Nevada market. Broadband caps which will, most likely, be rolled out to the rest of the country early next year.

The caps are aggressive, too. For instance, Comcast set its cap at 250GB, but AT&T is looking at only 20GB for its lowest subscriber plan, and 80GB for its highest vanilla DSL account. You only get the 150GB cap the company mentions most frequently in the press releases, bundled in with the company's Uverse services.

How will this impact on services such as Netflix's WatchNow, which has also been so much in the news, recently? Especially with the new Netflix WatchNow HD offerings on XBox 360 and Tivo?

According to DSLReports, Comcast is instituting a cap on its broadband customers. The cap will be 250GB a month, with one "freebie" month, where you can go over this amount without repercussion.

As caps go, this is one of the more reasonable. However, I expect to see other broadband companies following suit since one of the major players has now made a cap move. Eventually, this will most likely end up in front of the FCC, Congress, or court, as these companies will be forced to provide detailed operation information in order to assess whether they really have a congestion problem, or if their actions are anti-trust. This will also lead to questions about how much these companies reinvest profits back into infrastructure.

I also don't see how caps are going to overcome problems with congestion, because people could use most of their bandwidth allotment during peak times. Wasn't that the purpose of caps? To reduce congestion?

Stop the Cap! is a web site and weblog dedicated to the fight against broadband caps. From the Mission Statement:

We feel the current usage caps being considered by broadband providers are unreasonable, some moreso than others. Those below 10GB per month are outrageous. Others which may run above 100GB a month also represent a concern because of the future direction of the Internet. Consumers who exceed those caps may face immediate service termination or greatly overpriced “overage” charges for additional bandwidth, which we oppose. The industry’s marketing campaigns have always emphasized that among the benefits of subscribing is fast access to streaming video and audio, gaming, downloading songs and video, and other bandwidth intensive services. It should come as no surprise that customers have used their service exactly as their marketing intended.

From the Talking Points page:

Most cable systems plan to exempt customers from accessing content they own or control through their online portals. This represents an end run around Net Neutrality - a plan to allow big corporations to control the infrastructure and discriminating against the traffic they don’t own or control. Independent producers and businesses not affiliating with a cable company will have a hard time selling a business plan in a world where bandwidth caps make accessing those independent products and services prohibitively expensive.

There's considerably more at the site. Excellent. (via DSL Reports)