Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 361 posts

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#61

Post by djcapelis »

josh2600 wrote: post #54
Arjuna wrote: post #46

Awesome response to the C&D, via spokesman Jonathan Friedland: "This is about consumers not getting what they paid for from their broadband provider. We are trying to provide more transparency, just like we do with the ISP Speed Index, and Verizon is trying to shut down that discussion."

Playing Devil's advocate here for a second: If Netflix is 35% of global internet traffic at peak capacity (as per the Akamai CEO's comments at a number of events), is it really fair to treat them like every other company? That is to say, if Netflix is really the sole driver of Network upgrades, why does Verizon have to subsidize their costs of business? I'm not taking the stance that this is correct, only querying as…

If you want to play devil's advocate then let's advocate for all the devils.

If Comcast wants to offer their customers video over a traditional cable network, they pay content providers.

Why should the Internet be different? Shouldn't ISPs be paying people who provide the content their customers are buying?

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#62

Post by jessaustin »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #48
scrabble wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do they mean WiFi won't work? How is that anything other than a blatant lie? Reminds me of the late 90's when my ISP told me I couldn't get cable Internet because I didn't have a 486. I lied and told them I did to have the modem sent to me to hook up myself. It's a computer network, once it's in my house I can expose it as I like.

What do they mean WiFi won't work? How is that anything other than a blatant lie? They probably mean the WiFi built into the cable modem.

How would that be anything other than a blatant lie? Are they going to mail the customer a different model of modem? Do any current cableco-provided modems not have built-in wifi?

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#63

Post by vog »

ilyanep wrote: post #31
Karunamon wrote: post #20

This is a genius move. It's exactly what needs to happen to get consumers to realize that it's their ISP fucking them over, not Netflix. The average joe isn't outraged enough about net neutrality. If only they'd start doing this to other known bad actors coughcomcastcough , that might just be what the doctor ordered. I wonder why they ponied up the money to the protection rackets first, and only then started pointing…

It could be so that the ISP can't claim "if you had peered with us, we wouldn't be so congested" or some other BS.

In Germany, this would actually be a great thing! If the German Telekom (biggest provider here, formerly owned by the state) played that card, other providers could start to demand peering with them. The strange thing with German Telekom is not that peering with them would be too expensive, it is that they don't take part in the big peering points at all. As a "smaller" provider, you can connect with Telekom on by becoming a Telekom customer, but not on eye level as a peering partner.

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#64

Post by hugolm84 »

Im sure most of the internet providers cap their bandwidth to services like this. I am confident that the main Swedish ISP provider Telia is capping as we speak.

I can see that ping times increases and it's always reoccurring around 9-10pm Fridays. Around 9:30 buffering speeds up, meaning most of the people giving up and switching to regular TV. One could argue that this is the time that Netflix/Youtube/Hbo/ViaPlay or any other service is used the most, but my suspicion is that capping occurs at those times, to validate the Fastlane/slowlane argument when the it arrives here in Sweden too.

I am currently collecting statistics to validate this. However, its insane that a ISP can cap and provide lesser service's on certain ports and argue that the fault is at the entertainment provider. Its also insane that when going from a "torrent way of life" to becoming a paying stream customer, I cant even watch my favourite show, when i want, on 100/100Mbit line.

ISP's are in the business of providing fast connections and high bandwidth, and that's what I'm paying for, however I want to use it. It shouldn't matter if I'm streaming from YouTube or downloaded illegal porn. Though it seems it looks like they want to sell me bad gasoline that doesn't take me anywhere, and say my engine is at fault.

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#65

Post by eisa01 »

josh2600 wrote: post #54
Arjuna wrote: post #46

Awesome response to the C&D, via spokesman Jonathan Friedland: "This is about consumers not getting what they paid for from their broadband provider. We are trying to provide more transparency, just like we do with the ISP Speed Index, and Verizon is trying to shut down that discussion."

Playing Devil's advocate here for a second: If Netflix is 35% of global internet traffic at peak capacity (as per the Akamai CEO's comments at a number of events), is it really fair to treat them like every other company? That is to say, if Netflix is really the sole driver of Network upgrades, why does Verizon have to subsidize their costs of business? I'm not taking the stance that this is correct, only querying as…

If it wasnt't Netflix, it would be another streaming service or a hundred. The total capacity required would still be the same.

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#66

Post by knodi123 »

joezydeco wrote: post #50
scrabble wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do they mean WiFi won't work? How is that anything other than a blatant lie? Reminds me of the late 90's when my ISP told me I couldn't get cable Internet because I didn't have a 486. I lied and told them I did to have the modem sent to me to hook up myself. It's a computer network, once it's in my house I can expose it as I like.

How many of us had to bluff our way through the first gatekeeper on tech support like this? Tech: "Could you please unplug your computer for 20 seconds and restart it?" Me: "Okay. . Okay, it's back" Or this gem? Tech: "What browser are you using?" Me: " Internet Explorer 6".

stop it, you're giving me flashbacks

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#67

Post by bachmeier »

scrabble wrote: post #39
mox1 wrote: post #21

It's frustrating that Verizon and friends can make grandiose statements in their advertising about "unlimited bandwidth", "faster wifi" ,"stream 5 things at a time", etc, etc. Or lie to customers, My mother just called Comcast to downgrade her service and the CS Rep said "WiFi won't work with our Economy Plus internet plan" Yet when another entity does something as simple as showing an error message that casts them i…

What do they mean WiFi won't work? How is that anything other than a blatant lie? Reminds me of the late 90's when my ISP told me I couldn't get cable Internet because I didn't have a 486. I lied and told them I did to have the modem sent to me to hook up myself. It's a computer network, once it's in my house I can expose it as I like.

Nothing new about tech support not knowing what they're talking about. After all, it's written into the script that they're told to read for that question.

A few years ago I was setting up a new internet provider for my mother, so I called to get the info to get email: Support: "You're using Outlook, right?" Me: "No, Thunderbird." Support: "We only support Outlook, so I can't help you." Me: "It's email, it won't matter if I use Thunderbird." Support: "Our email does not work with anything other than Outlook." Me: "Okay, I'll get rid of Thunderbird and use Outlook." I entered the information into Thunderbird as he gave it to me and then hung up the phone.

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#68

Post by notdonspaulding »

jusben1369 wrote: post #45

It doesn't state it anywhere but I assume Netflix can be pretty sure of where the bottleneck is happening before transmitting that message correct? Given all the other factors that can contribute to a slow down.

> ...I assume Netflix can be pretty sure of where the bottleneck is happening ...

It depends on how fancy they get with their detection routines. They can certainly see which networks the traffic is flowing over, but then there are multiple devices (and networks) in play to deliver that traffic to them.

For instance, just a one-way trip showing the devices that could slow down a packet of data can give you an idea of the number of potential bottlenecks:

    -> Chromecast CPU
    
     -> Chromecast WiFi chipset
    
      -> User's home network router (usually, but not always, provided by ISP)
    
       -> Cable/DSL/FiOS modem
    
        -> [[ ISP devices they directly control ]] 
    
         -> Transit provider's network
    
          -> Netflix's network.
Netflix could certainly jump through hoops to isolate the bottleneck to the ISP network, but are they? Who knows?

I'm not sure they really need to anyway. The hockey stick graph they have showing throughput before and after payment looks like a classic mafia shakedown.

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#69

Post by infogulch »

How do we get ISPs classified as common carriers?

Sue their pants off for the copyright infringement of their customers (and all the other illegal things customers can do). This why common carriers exist. They trade ultimate control over the transfer of content and treat it equally for the protections of being indemnified from the content itself. This is why the U.S. Postal Service can't be prosecuted for transporting a death threat letter. Make it about money and they'll jump on the common carrier bandwagon before you can blink.

Re: Netflix replies to Verizon cease and desist letter

#70

Post by crisnoble »

Karunamon wrote: post #20

This is a genius move. It's exactly what needs to happen to get consumers to realize that it's their ISP fucking them over, not Netflix. The average joe isn't outraged enough about net neutrality. If only they'd start doing this to other known bad actors coughcomcastcough , that might just be what the doctor ordered. I wonder why they ponied up the money to the protection rackets first, and only then started pointing…

Re: comments, I didn't believe you, now I wish I had.

> NetFlix will lose huge. Obama is protecting the Taliban now. That's the only reason Silicon Valley soared. Democrats (from Jan 2007) and Obama 'til his Taliban kiss.

Post reply on HN