This slide, produced to sell "network management" equipment, is the best argument for Net Neutrality around.

Want to visit Facebook?  That will be two cents per megabyte, please.  Skype?  You can get a real bargain this month — your ISP is only charging you $5 for an unlimited monthly permission pass.  YouTube?  All customers with a deluxe bundled broadband plan get a special discount — just 50 cents for up to 60 videos, this month only!

All of these charges, levied by your Internet Service Provider, are real world scenarios being sold by two equipment vendors — Allot Communications and Openet, for immediate use on Net Neutrality-free wireless broadband networks.  Thanks to Stop the Cap! readers Lance and Damian for sending us the story.

Both companies are excited by the potential harvest of bountiful revenue — for themselves in selling the equipment that will carefully monitor what you do with your Internet connection and then control what kind of experience you get, and for providers who can finally bend the usage curve down while “finally” getting average revenue per customer shooting sky high once again.

In the webinar, run last Tuesday and moderated by Fierce Wireless, the two companies carefully divided their one hour presentation between the technological and financial benefits of “network management” technology.  For every statement about how their bandwidth management system would improve the predictable responsiveness of the provider’s network, another comment followed, touting the enormous new revenue potential this technology will bring providers, all without costly network upgrades.

Poor provider. His stuffed pockets of profit are leaking your money paid to access websites you want to visit. But with Allot and Openet's products, the pot 'o gold is just a few steps away.

On Tuesday, the Federal Communications Commission will vote on a watered-down Net Neutrality proposal that would do nothing to prevent this nightmare scenario from becoming reality.  The webinar and its accompanying slides couldn’t illustrate Net Neutrality-proponents’ arguments better:

1. Such technology requires providers to carefully track and monitor everything you do with your web connection, obliterating privacy and creating a potential data trail that could be exploited for just about anything.  Indeed, Allot and Openet treat the data tracking feature as a benefit, opening the door to marketing campaigns to upsell your broadband connection or target upgrade offers based on your web history;

2. It’s all about the money.  Allot and Openet see their products as a cost-saver for providers to control expenses by cutting speeds/access for heavy users to provide a more consistent service for others, reducing the urgency to upgrade networks.  The companies also heavily focus on the revenue opportunities available from Internet Overcharging schemes;

3. The webinar includes a slide showing that providers can charge individual fees just to visit and utilize third party websites and applications, while letting providers deliver their own content, services and applications for free.  Got a bothersome competitor?  Just make a quick change with Allot’s product and your customers will face a withering admission fee in the amount you choose before they can even use the application;

4. The technology allows providers to wreak special havoc on peer-to-peer traffic, always the bane of traffic-conscious ISPs;

5. Want to extract more cash from an individual subscriber?  Providers can custom-design packages based on web site habits, usage, speed, and even the time of day the person is most likely to use the web.  Providers can then develop so many different usage packages, comparison shopping becomes meaningless.  The price you pay may be different than what others on your street pay, and you may never know by how much or why.

These Big Telecom workmen are not hard at work upgrading networks to meet demand. They are wrangling an Internet Overcharging scheme to reduce your usage while charging you more. (All of these slides were produced by the vendors themselves.)

Public Knowledge legal director Harold Feld saw right through the slide show: “If you want the slide deck to show why we need the same rules for wireless and wireline, this is it.”

Listen to the audio portion of “Managing the Unmanageable: Monetizing and Controlling OTT Applications,” which does not include the slide show. (60 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

<

p style=”text-align: center;”>

Broadband advocates have been warning providers have been dreaming of this kind of pricing for a few years now.

“I have been saying that this is where they want to go for a while,” Barbara van Schewick wrote to Wired. “The IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), a technology that is being deployed in many wireline and wireless networks throughout the country, explicitly envisages this sort of pricing as one of the pricing schemes supported by IMS.”

Although the system described by the webinar is currently being sold for use on wireless networks, nothing prevents providers from adopting similar schemes on their wired networks, arguing their use is about “intelligent network management,” not content or pricing discrimination.

It’s a scenario likely to be tested soon, especially with FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s watered down Net Neutrality proposals.  More than one observer believes the chairman has made a deal with the Big Telecom Devil: observe our watered down rules, don’t sue to have them thrown out, and the Commission will not invoke Title II and reinstate regulatory authority over broadband.

But as anyone who watches the broadband industry must realize by now, providers always break these deals.  They will sue the moment a controversy erupts that is not in their favor, and they are very likely to win.

In a welcome turn of events, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), which has routinely turned up as a member of Big Telecom-backed astroturf campaigns and takes money from AT&T, has come together with Latinos for Internet Freedom to issue a joint statement calling on the Federal Communications Commission to adopt equal Net Neutrality policies for wired and wireless broadband services.

“Although we disagree on some of the components of the proposed network neutrality regulations, there is one point on which we are in lock step: the FCC’s network neutrality rules must apply equally to wireline and wireless internet access.  Of course we understand that what is ‘reasonable network management’ may be slightly different over different types of connections.  Cost is the primary barrier to broadband adoption, and Latinos are turning to their mobile phones as their only onramp to the internet.  We are committed to finding ways to lower broadband costs by increasing competition through wireless access and other means.  It is therefore essential that the FCC ensures that users of wireless and wireline services are protected by its openness rules.”

Of course, broadband providers’ demands for deregulation and unified opposition to Net Neutrality have never delivered and will never provide cheaper Internet service to anyone.  In fact, the court ruling that eliminated the FCC’s authority over broadband gave providers nearly a year of a wide open marketplace, yet many providers are now sending out notices they are -increasing- broadband prices for subscribers.  Net Neutrality has never been enforced against wireless networks either, and as a result most either usage cap, throttle, or charge enormous overlimit fees for users deemed to be “using too much.”

Increased competition can bring lower prices, but only if it extends well beyond today’s duopoly.  In areas where one provider is likely to maintain a de facto monopoly, effective oversight is required to ensure consumers receive adequate service at fair prices.

Still, it is a surprising and welcome change to see LULAC recognizing the true nature of broadband access for many economically-challenged Americans, especially in minority communities where unemployment continues to be catastrophic.  Some consumers are finding prepaid wireless broadband service to be one way onto the Internet, yet Big Telecom has sought to keep those networks exempt from any Net Neutrality consumer protections.  That cannot be allowed to happen.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Verizon vs. Latinos for Internet Freedom.flv[/flv]

Watch these two competing spots from Verizon and the Latinos for Internet Freedom.  One is self-serving and a tad condescending, the other calls for a free and open Internet where individuals get a level playing field to tell their own stories and live their own lives without fear or special favor.  (2 minutes)

Time Warner Cable is one of many cable companies that try to convince their customers Verizon FiOS and other true fiber-to-the-home providers offer nothing special.  After all, they proclaim: “we’ve got fiber, too!”

Time Warner Cable put this "special notice" on its website for cable subscribers.

More innovation from the late 70s.

In California’s Southland, stretching from the San Fernando and San Gabriel Valley across the Inland Empire to deep within Orange County, the cable operator just finished installing 361,149 miles of fiber, telling the LA Times it has enough fiber to wrap around the equator nearly 15 times.

Unfortunately for residential subscribers, the cable company can’t manage to stretch some strands your way.

Most of the $120-million expansion program is designed to benefit area businesses — some 125,000 across the Southland that could potentially tell the phone company to take a hike.  The Business Class expansion delivers service to business parks and campuses across the sprawling region that the cable operator has not wired before.

While Time Warner likes to say they are running “an advanced fiber network,” for many customers it’s the same technology cable companies have been using since the 1990s.  Once it reaches your neighborhood, classic coaxial cable brings service the rest of the way, and some of that coax has been around since the late 1970s.

That makes at least part of Time Warner’s network as fresh and innovative as — the Sony Walkman.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Time Warner Cable Fiber Ad.flv[/flv]

A Time Warner Cable ad implying the cable company delivers a fiber optic experience to customers in southern California.  (1 minute)

Some 1100 communities will have to wait until next year to learn if they are among the one(s) chosen for Google’s new 1 gigabit fiber to the home network.

An announcement on Google’s official blog broke the news to anxious readers this morning:

We had planned to announce our selected community or communities by the end of this year, but the level of interest was incredible—nearly 1,100 communities across the country responded to our announcement—and exceeded our expectations. While we’re moving ahead full steam on this project, we’re not quite ready to make that announcement.

We’re sorry for this delay, but we want to make sure we get this right. To be clear, we’re not re-opening our selection process—we simply need more time to decide than we’d anticipated. Stay tuned for an announcement in early 2011.

Google has also been working on a “beta” network, serving 850 private homes and condominiums on the main campus of Stanford University, owned primarily by the faculty.

That a company the size of Google faces delays from the challenges involved in building a fiber-to-the-home network speaks to similar delays that often slow down municipal broadband deployments.  Community broadband critics often seize on such delays as evidence the networks are not viable and run by unqualified personnel.  But as Google illustrates, such delays are common whether they are run by private or public entities.

Last year's glossy mailer gave fair warning what subscribers could expect in 2010 were rate increases.

Time Warner Cable customers in several areas of the country are now receiving good tidings in their mailbox — the annual glossy mailer that portends the company’s annual “rate adjustments.”

Customers in areas from snowed-in western New York to fogged-in Los Angeles will find the company quick to congratulate themselves on their “achievements” in 2010 — achievements that someone has to pay for — you.

After you’ve finished reading all of the self-back-patting accolades, somewhere towards the bottom of the piece the company tries to break the bad news, telling you it must periodically “adjust prices.”  We know what that means and so do you.

The company’s new rate schedule for 2011 delivers price increases across the board, but the exact amounts and percentages depend on where you live.  For customers in western New York, expect around a 6 percent rate hike.  In southern California, rates for just about everything are increasing, some by a percentage considered high even for the cable industry.  The more services you bundle with the cable company, the less the total increase will bite your wallet.

Considering America’s inflation rate stands at less than 1 percent and will remain at that level through next year, a rate increase six times that amount is certain to start another round of package trimming and cord cutting from strapped subscribers.

“Everytime they increase their rates, I drop something to keep my bill manageable,” writes our reader David in Charlotte, N.C.  Rate increases in that state were announced in November.

“When I’m down to just standard cable and Internet, I’ll look to drop them,” he adds.

David says he used to have a fully-loaded package from Time Warner, taking every premium channel, Digital Phone, and Road Runner Turbo.  But not anymore.

“When they raised rates three years ago, we dropped several premium channels,” David said. “Two years ago we dropped the rest and some of their HD programming, and last year we chucked Digital Phone for our cell phone.”

What is going in 2011?  Road Runner Turbo.

“It’s a pointless product ever since they raised upload speeds for standard Road Runner customers.”

For customers in Rochester, the latest rate hike is the latest of several over the past year.  The company has been incrementally increasing prices on individual components of the cable package in an effort to drive more customers into bundled service packages.

In Los Angeles, it’s much the same.  Rate increases are on the way for DVR service and for set top boxes.  So are dramatic price hikes for virtually anything requiring an employee to come to your home. Want them to pick up or exchange equipment?  Pony up $29.99 (up 50 percent).  Need someone to install your phone or Internet?  That’s going up 65 percent to $32.99.

The company’s response to these increases?

The usual — programming cost increases.  The company also encourages customers to do installations themselves and drop off equipment at a local cable store to avoid the charges.

Columnists are using the occasion to scream once again for a-la-carte cable — allowing customers to pick and pay for only the channels they want to receive, always a Dead-on-Arrival idea for cable companies.

Tom Joyce from the Mount Airy News noticed as rates increase, the channels he wants to see either aren’t on the system, are being dropped, or are at risk of being dropped because of contract disputes:

What really irks cable television subscribers is that not only are we paying more, we are getting less for our money as well. It would be one thing to simply charge subscribers more for the same service, but what Time Warner seems to be doing is hiking prices while also diminishing the quality of its programming.

For example, C-SPAN2 recently was dropped from the system. C-SPAN2 is a great outlet for public-affairs programming and also focuses on books written on government, history and similar topics.

While some TV watchers might say good riddance to such a high-brow channel, I think it’s a shame viewers now have one less outlet that might actually broaden their intellectual horizons or help them become better-informed citizens.

Yet Time Warner’s cuts also could affect mainstream broadcast content as well. There have been announcements that Channel 48, a Triad TV station, is being dropped from the local cable system at the end of this month. I rely on Channel 48 for many entertainment shows, including late-night reruns of “The Office.” This trend isn’t new. It’s been occurring over the years, paralleling a scenario of constant price increases.

The cable package I receive once included the Fox Movie Channel, Encore Westerns and others that I found enjoyable, but which gradually fell by the wayside. Only one bona fide movie selection remains, Turner Classic Movies.

Channels that I now receive basically are a collection of commercial-laden garbage and cheap filler.

David Lazarus at the LA Times agrees:

“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Cable and satellite bills are too high, and it’s nuts that people have to pay through the nose for channels they never watch,” Lazarus writes. “It’s time for cable and satellite companies to switch to a la carte programming so we can start paying for products we actually want, rather than ones that we’re forced to accept.”

Lazarus also noticed Time Warner Cable’s efforts to placate subscribers with freebies backfired again this year as well:

As it did last year, Time Warner is again trying to make its annual rate hike more palatable by giving customers coupons to watch premium movies for just 99 cents.

The catch is that you have to mail in the coupon with your bill to have it redeemed. Or you can mail it separately if you want to add 44 cents in postage to your 99-cent movie.

But what about all those customers who have gone paperless — as Time Warner prefers — with automatic bill payments or electronic cash transfers? Isn’t this unfair to them?

When I suggested last year that maybe the cable giant should include a digital code on its coupons so that customers could redeem them online, a company spokeswoman said this was a good idea and she’d take it up with her superiors.

I suggested the same this year to Gordon. He said it was a good idea and he’d take it up with his superiors.