Commentary

FCC Asked To Examine 'TV Everywhere'

by Wendy Davis , Staff Writer @wendyndavis, September 2, 2009

Cord-cutters might be in the minority for now, but as more programming moves online -- and as broadband connections continue to become faster and more reliable -- it's inevitable that consumers will increasingly eschew pricey TV subscriptions in favor of watching video online.

Cable companies are all too aware of this possibility and already appear to be preparing preemptive strikes. Earlier this year, Time Warner threatened to extend unpopular pay-per-byte pricing to four new markets. Had the company done so, consumers would have had to pay $150 per month for unlimited broadband access -- up from the $40-$50 a month they currently pay.

Time Warner backed off from that plan, but said it would revisit the topic later. Meanwhile, other Internet service providers continue to experiment with bandwidth caps and tiered pricing that would limit people's ability to watch video online.

Additionally, cable companies are reportedly gearing up to launch "TV Everywhere" -- an initiative that could require Web users to subscribe to cable video before they can watch TV programs online.

These strategies might be lawful but, even so, they don't appear to mark a change for the better. Certainly they're not sitting well with some advocacy groups. Today, Public Knowledge said today that it intends to ask the FCC to scrutinize TV Everywhere as well as limits on bandwidth consumption that could limit people's ability to watch video on the Web.

"The commission should closely examine any practice that discourages users from viewing Internet video, to the advantage of an ISP's own video offerings," Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, says in a statement. She adds that TV Everywhere "could discourage innovation if it requires, encourages or allows programmers and content providers to sign exclusive deals with cable companies."

broadband, isps, video

2 comments about "FCC Asked To Examine 'TV Everywhere'".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Douglas Ferguson from College of Charleston, September 2, 2009 at 7:29 p.m.
It's really difficult to muster sympathy for bandwidth hogs. The caps won't affect 99% of us who stream and download a normal amount of material. Think of all the things in life that are ruined for everyone by a few miscreants. For example, speed bumps in residential neighborhoods. Think of bandwidth caps as speed bumps for the Internet, caused by a handful of irresponsible users.
Reply

Arienne Josseaume from Evetech, September 3, 2009 at 5:10 a.m.

It's very interesting how they plan to do this. As Douglas mentioned bandwidth restrictions are the main problem for any emerging streaming technology. The ISP telecomms are constantly decreasing the bandwidth of end users to increase their own profits since bandwidth is relatively costly when given out in huge numbers - of course it begs the question of misleading their customers and false advertising in terms of what they advertise for usage. They claim "watch hundreds of hours of streaming video", "download files blazingly fast". Hundreds of hours of streaming video would require at least several gb of bandwidth something to the tune of 100gb say a month, while many of these packages are limited to something low like 30gb a month (that's both incoming and outgoing transfers btw). They assume that such technology and demand will not rise to challenge these limits as most users are likely to only watch a few videos and just check their email and do some casual surfing.

Of course they are dead wrong as services like http://www.ustream.tv http://www.freetubetv.net and hulu are the pinnacle of pushing these boundaries and end users are becoming more and more frustrated and insatiable in demanding video content.