The anticipated passing of the FCC bill regarding Net Neutrality is being closely monitored, and for good reason. To many there is a great deal at stake because most opinions center on an all or nothing scenario – either consumers have freedom and choice without financial restrictions, or operators and service providers will create draconian pricing plans that completely abolish the current models and choke the masses’ access to information and entertainment.
And while healthy debate is always needed in a democracy, history shows that the polarizing views most of us see end up as just that – views that don’t reflect the reality of what ends of taking place in the marketplace. What is being forgotten in the recent media conversations (some of which is being stoked by a webinar with our own partner Allot) is that just because there is a potential to use a technology a certain way, that doesn’t mean you should. The webinar discussion is based in a fundamental reality surrounding bandwidth congestion that will impact everyone involved – operators and consumers alike.
To be clear on Openet’s stance – we sell technology. We do many times explore with operators HOW it can be used but we don’t ultimately make those decisions. The operators do. We do have a position on what they SHOULD do as outlined below, but this is purely an opinion rather than a planned course of action.
1. Right now the majority of media (and consumer online responses) are characterizing this incorrectly or incompletely. The majority seem to believe that we’re suggesting operators charge consumers merely for the ability to use certain applications and content. What we’re trying to make clear is that as the networks become increasingly congested; we have the ability to give some users a premium service. Some users don’t need it – all they need is the ability to check email and surf internet sites. ISPs can prioritize traffic, increase bandwidth and otherwise ensure a great experience during congestion for those users who want and need those capabilities.
2. This approach could help operators reduce their overall network build out costs and therefore can charge less to maintain profits. For example, with the ability to create a “surfers only” package (no video, VoIP, P2P, etc – or pay per use for these), operators can offer a “basic” service package for a far lower cost than they can now. Said another way, the current price plans are based around the average user rather than the low end user. With policy control, you can create packages targeted at any level of user.
3. Following on this, there’s value being delivered to those users described above and beyond that to users with simple requirements. Should the operator not have a right to realize increased revenue for increased value delivered? Do consumers expect a flat rate, all you can eat service from content and application providers? Even if the content or applications are free, over the top providers have the right to realize incremental revenue from advertising as usage increases (more eyeballs should equal more revenue, which will drive newer and better services).
4. One business model that Openet promotes is that the over-the-top providers share revenue with operators in order to have traffic prioritized and bandwidth shaped in order to guarantee high quality delivery. Openet isn’t of the opinion that the ONLY option is for consumers to pay extra fees. We simply believe that operators aren’t receiving a fair portion of the revenue in the value chain for their value within it.
5. Lastly, its Openet’s stance that whatever service packages operators deploy, they MUST treat traffic from over the top application and content providers in the same manner to traffic from their own internally offered applications and content. For example, Hulu and YouTube must receive the same traffic management as that from content aggregated and delivered by the operator themselves. Operators should NOT be allowed to discriminate against competitive over the top content and applications.
As we understand it the new rules will also require disclosure on any changes to a consumer’s billing status, giving users immediate and full transparency into what they are using and being charged for, and this of course is a good thing for all parties involved. As this debate evolves, we will continue to explore with operators the best way to deliver high quality experiences to their entire customer base, and we encourage all involved to approach the issues with the larger realities in mind.
