Post Reply Internet fast lane and Crunchyroll
8240 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / State of Confusion
Offline
Posted 5/15/14 , edited 5/15/14
Due to the recent FCC approval for a proposal to create an Internet “Fast Lane” where internet streaming companies such as Netflix, Hulu, and our own Crunchyroll will have to pay extra to have their content delivered to their customers on a given network. I would like to know if Crunchyroll intends to pay the internet extortion that the FCC allows ISPs’ to charge. Or are we, your poor Anime junkie customers, going to have to suffer the inevitable snafu that this is going to cause my future amine viewing.

I know full well that this was out of your hands folks, please don’t think that I am blaming anyone but the FCC for this cluster. I do hope that someone files suit to prevent this moronic proposal. But I would like to hear what you folks have to say.

8240 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / State of Confusion
Offline
Posted 5/15/14
Just so everyone knows what I am talking about, I know this is dry and boring, Sorry.
Here's the full announcement from the FCC:

The Federal Communications Commission today launched a rulemaking seeking public comment on how best to protect and promote an open Internet. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking adopted today poses a broad range of questions to elicit the broadest range of input from everyone impacted by the Internet, from consumers and small businesses to providers and start-ups.

The Internet is America’s most important platform for economic growth, innovation, competition, free expression, and broadband investment and deployment. The Internet has become an essential tool for Americans and for the growth of American businesses. That’s because the Internet has been open to new content, new products and new services, enabling consumers to choose whatever legal content, services and applications they desire.

The FCC has previously concluded that broadband providers have the incentive and ability to act in ways that threaten Internet openness. But today, there are no rules that stop broadband providers from trying to limit Internet openness. That is why the Notice adopted by the FCC todays starts with a fundamental question: “What is the right public policy to ensure that the Internet remains open?”

The FCC proposes to rely on a legal blueprint set out by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in its January decision in Verizon v. FCC, using the FCC’s authority to promote broadband deployment to all Americans under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. At the same time, the Commission will seriously consider using its authority under the telecommunications regulation found in Title II of the Communications Act. In addition, the Notice:

Proposes to retain the definitions and scope of the 2010 rules, which governed broadband Internet access service providers, but not services like enterprise services, Internet traffic exchange and specialized services.

Proposes to enhance the existing transparency rule, which was upheld by the D.C. Circuit. The proposed enhancements would provide consumers, edge providers, and the Commission with tailored disclosures, including information on the nature of congestion that impacts consumers’ use of online services and timely notice of new practices.

As part of the revived “no-blocking” rule, proposes ensuring that all who use the Internet can enjoy robust, fast and dynamic Internet access.

Tentatively concludes that priority service offered exclusively by a broadband provider to an affiliate should be considered illegal until proven otherwise.

Asks how to devise a rigorous, multi-factor “screen” to analyze whether any conduct hurts consumers, competition, free expression and civic engagement, and other criteria under a legal standard termed “commercial reasonableness.”

Asks a series of detailed questions about what legal authority provides the most effective means of keeping the Internet open: Section 706 or Title II.

Proposes a multi-faceted process to promptly resolve and head off disputes, including an ombudsperson to act as a watchdog on behalf of consumers and start-ups and small businesses.
ItsMev 
32939 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Melbourne, Australia
Offline
Posted 5/16/14
Prices will definitely go up unless there's a form of scheme in place to soak up the costs.

Either way, I will continue to support Crunchyroll / Netflix.
36388 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 5/16/14 , edited 5/16/14
Unless crunchyroll was paying for such deals or for priority bandwidth already, with my technical knowledge in mind I don't see them reacting to this and pushing hiring prices to you for this. In fact, they may even BENEFIT from this policy as they use a tiny fraction of the bandwidth netflix and hulu use. Nevertheless, I can see why you're asking the question yourself. Alot of the articles online about this decision/proposal aren't worded well...the press is trying to simplify the nature of said decision with non-technical jargon when it would be way simpler and easier to understand for even novice computer users if you added a few terms like "bandwidth", "latency", and "direct connection to the ISP's network".

Here's a better article describing the matter.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/05/12/internet-fast-lane-revision/8994875/

So here's my summary and some relevant background I know about the subject...

According to that article, the FCC is proposing that all ISPs to treat internet traffic the same way, and not give bandwidth or latency (order of service) priority to any connections. This means essentially turning ISPs into dumb tubes (which imho is what we want). However, because of this, if ISPs were reserving bandwidth for services like netflix on their network, they will no longer be able to do so. This could possibly make streaming services like netflix slower.

But several companies already proposed a solution to the bandwidth problem that the FCC doesn't want to interfere with. ISPs people like you and me subscribe to actually connect to other ISPs on the internet (companies you've probably never even heard of like Cogent Communications) to access most content. This creates latency, and the traffic could also encounter bandwidth bottlenecks outside of your ISP's control between your modem and the source of the content. A while ago, Netflix proposed to increase the performance of their services to consumers by taking out the middleman (the other ISPs) and offering an "openconnect" service where they would hook up additional video servers directly to the consumer ISP's network, thus going around other ISPs and increasing the performance of the service. Several ISPs, including Google Fiber and Cablevision opt to use this service. As long as companies like Netflix make this option available equally to all ISPs, whether or not ISPs accept the opportunity, the FCC does not want to interfere.

Considering how niche anime is (thus there isn't as much of a need for crunchyroll bandwidth as opposed to netflix or hulu bandwidth), I don't see crunchyroll offering such a service anytime soon (thus they won't have to pay for it). They were running just fine when net neutrality (these rules) WAS actually in effect/was being observed before anyway (the aforementioned rules actually aren't new...the regulations were actually just thrown out of court when Verizon complained about the FCC's legal inability to enforce them earlier this year. The FCC now however wants to legally reclassify broadband internet access as a sort of essential utility (like water or electricity) so Net Neutrality can be enforced again).
Posted 5/16/14
if there's one thing I remember from Economics class is that... consumers pay for everything... increases in tariffs etc. all of these costs are passed down to the consumers. Businesses don't pay these costs, otherwise they won't make a reasonable profit...

so yes, we can expect a price rise...
39155 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 5/16/14
Yeah. CR will pass the costs to us. It's how the Internet will die. And we will all gradually stop surfing the web so much because it will be too expensive, and most of our favorite places will go out of business.
You must be logged in to post.