Warning

It seems that ISP's want to charge per minute for Internet usage or at least usage where it concerns games, Virtural Worlds, Streaming media etc...

Here is a artical from CNN, apparently this might mean that to use Second Life might result in bills to ISP's that could range into the 1,000s of US dollars.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/02/27/net.neutrality.ap/index.html


My Advice is that everyone write their ISP and protest any fee changes and rate increases.

Also if you go to MSNBC in the Tech and Science section, they have a video that talks about this as well.

and this from Center for Digital Democracy

http://www.democraticmedia.org/issues/netneutrality.html

The comments made by some idiot about Google and Yahoo 'freeloading' on the internet, remind me of something I have seen on these forums. Can't quite remember what it is ...

Well thats the funny thing. Yahoo and Google already tried this and got nailed to the wall. Seems the Stupid and impotent ISPs can't get a clue or are totally blind or so full of Greed they don't care if they loose 100% of their customers.

100%, wow, that's a bold statement. I take it you asked them all?

Well if the ISP's had an ounce of sense, they would say, when their competition starts charging per minute for the Internet, "Ok they are per minute, but we are flat fee and will not change" With-in a week they would be swamped with customers while the per minute ISP would be out of business.

Not sure how that relates to 100% of their customers. To be honest, not sure if it's the same in the US or not, but in Europe there's an awful lot of "capped" ADSL services, where you have a set GB limit per month and you're charged for anything over it - this seems kind of similar to that mentality.

Plus I don't think anybody on that first article is saying that you would have to pay for that prioritized service, are they. It would be there if you wanted it. And sure, some ISPs will no doubt use different business models to attract customers.

I guess I don't see what the big problem is. If you want the prioritized service, you'll pay for it. If you don't, you won't.

You need to watch the video from MSNBC they will charge a per minute fee for streaming media, games etc.

The problem is the rate they will charge may mean, after 30 minutes in Second Life, you will be hit with a bill for 500 US Dollars.

What the whole purpose of this Thread is about, is an alarm for US customers that ISPs want to increase their Greed Margins,.

I wouldn't worry. If some ISPs decide to do that, then there will be a huge market for those who don't.

Where exactly did you get the figure of 30 minutes in SL = 500 US Dollars?

Yes, this thread certainly is an alarm.

500 dollars? Where the hell do you live, Antarctica?

It'd likely be a 'fraction of a cent per minute' fee if they where to charge it. Meaning yes, you'd probably get that after staying logged into SL constantly per month. If they were to charge more than a fraction of a cent, we'd sue them.

The problem is these dumbasses seem to think that content providers (ie, the places that make the internet worth accessing) should pay for priority transfer rates through their Last Mile networks. If they were to actually engage something like that, and someone will try it, it would stifle any startups or new services that didn't have any backing. If know if SBC tried to pull something absurd as that there'd be riots.... or at least I'd be rioting.

I'd get rid of SL and There and all other time-wasting, resource sucking programs and just check my email and maybe look for something on ebay.


If it happened it would get a lot of people offline and back into reality, which may or may not be a good thing.

Unless legislators are that blindly ignorant this week, it won't happen. This is strikingly similar to the fact Telecos have to "share" landlines with competing companies; otherwise they would have chopped the grid up into competing, AOL-like services years ago that all amount to little more than their share of the pie.

(Note there was a recent victory for the cable companies on this front. I doubt that will last in practice, though)

In fact, AOL and Yahoo are in a lot of hot water over their "premium email service" this week, as it happens to be a de-facto tax on free speech. I especially love the number of people signed on this:
www.dearaol.com

And then there's Vista. We won't go there.


Suffice it to say, these companies most certainly have the power to set us back a decade. Will they? Guess that all depends on how stupid this nation really is. And I guess I can't really blame them for trying to scre^H^H^H^H charge their customers now that they're in a position to do so.

If you allow ISP to charge per minute for streaming media and games then they can charge whatever they wish. This is why people need to write their ISps and tell them no do not charge in this mannor

First of all, they're not listening. At all. AOL's response to the DearAOL campaign was essentially "screw you all." I'd be willing to source that if I have to.

However, "charge whatever they'd like" is a valid point. Currently the ISP market is in a pretty good position to collude with one another and jack up the price considerably (bad), at risk of having anti-trust and anti-collusion law dropped on their heads (good).

Given the political climate, this sort of thing could happen to the tune of a minimal fee for the extreme short term. Longer term, nah-ah. Even the folks in Washington can understand that much.

Yeah. The Premium fee for spammers to hit you...

1.) If you're still using AOL even if you're technically inclined enough to use something else, you're already paying too much.
2.) Yahoo is losing revenue and is trying desperately to not cave in from all the crap they've been pulling.

Interesting. I thought the ISP service format in the USA was normal in most countries.
I personally do not like the idea of never knowing how much the bill is each month. On anything.

If my ISP tries the same crap as my cell-phone, then gaming is history for me. Because they are the only ones around with high speed.

Thats probably for the better. Like my cell phone. I only use it for data and business. No chat time with family or friends.
So the computer becomes business only. No play time for any reason.
Yeah thats the way to go.

If it becomes a serious pull on gamers in that way. Then I can just see Sony, Microsoft, etc, would all have a little something to say. Seeing as a good branch of their business is from gamers.

Unless of course this spells out more profit for them in some other way.

I dunno, but if it turns out to be like our cell phone crap in the US, then I can only see those "Pay as you Go" ISP's being used by the few people who rarly get online, yet still want the quality and speed.

Magnum, you have an absolutely amazing ability to overstate situations and always err on the astoundingly dramatic and ridiculous. It's nice to see you plucked those absurd figures out of the air

I plan for the worst and let it happen as it will....if It comes to play that we are forced to pay yet more for the same quality service we recieve now....no thank you...But if I were to get a nice fibre jacked into the side of my house and have fast as heck internetting, I may consider it being worth while.

But in the meantime, I have all my favorite MMO's in single player or LAN style (ie emulators hehe) so if I do get a rate increase, they can shove it in the north end while they walk away to the south.

Too bad we can't have a LAN or stand alone SL...

My 2 cents: Let them charge me (in the USA) a per minute fee & see how fast I can give up the internet! Quite fast!!! I remember when I tried MSN "free" for a certain period of time on dial-up, and once your 3 Free Weekly hours were up they'd start charging by the minute. How's $700 in one week of usage sound? A bit pricey?

So PLEASE ISP's!!!! Charge me by the minute & watch me drop the internet access!! One less bill I gotta pay then!!

Maybe I've missed something... but I can't find -anything- in that article about per minute charges for the internet. Tiered internet, but not per minute. Oh, except one company from Brazil, but unless you're from Brazil, you should focus on what the north american companies have said.

What I do see is a plan to offer normal service, and premium service, not unlike plans that already exist up here in Canada. I can pay 45$ for Cable 3m/s or I can pay 60$ for Cable at 5m/s. It looks like they'd add another option... paying so much a month extra to get a higher fidelity connection that wouldn't lose packets.

Building an 'express' highway with toll booths doesn't ruin the normal highway for the rest of us... though it gives us a definite case of envy.

Heck, in Japan you get charged for the internet connection plus a per minute fee to use the phone lines..

Edit: While we're protesting.. what is it with Cable TV? How -dare- they expect me to pay more to get more/better service than regular TV... How -dare- Siruis charge me monthly for more/better service than regular free radio... How -dare- DSL charge me more than Dial up!

Come on guys, you want better service than the average Net user you pay more to get it.

Damn you, Kiari, for injecting some sense into this thread!

gosh that makes me remember the good ole (NOT!) days of genie and delphi.

This is like the Intelligent Design theory of the Internet.

It's stupid, supported by people who merely want more power, and will probably keep popping up.

Did you watch the MSNBC video? Its not per minute on the net, its on Streaming Media, On Games, on Virtural worlds

By the way... Do you work for the Cable company?

I do, actually, work for the cable company. This of course, means I dont pay a lick for internet. Magnum mentioned paying, so I doubt he does.

Thoughts on this. AOL and yahoo are two fading giants, companies who havent adapted to new standards and who are used to being on top. AOL is desperate because theyre shedding customers to high speed services, and yahoo is geting desperate because theyre losing their portal status as people get more web-savvy and losing their search engine status as google eats teh intarwebs.


What it really comes down to is the fact that customers in the US are going to balk hard at any mandatory price change to something theyve been used to getting for free. added services are one thing, but paying for functionality theyve enjoyed is quite another.

If there starts being some kind of usage fee for streaming content, theres either going to be one company that bucks the trend and pricegouges the rest out of it, or the cable companies will present a united front, and we'll have to deal with it. Im pretty sure the second one ends up badly for them monetarily, though, so Im not sure why they would kill the goose that is laying them very pretty golden eggs.