FCC killed net neutrality. What does it mean for gamers?

mrneurosis

'In a 3-2 vote today, the Federal Communications Commission approved a measure to remove the tough net neutrality rules it put in place just two years ago.'

Is it the right time to freak out? this is big.

Panther2103

Rhoklaw said:

Well, if ISPs can prove the internet is in fact a utility and not simply a luxury, than it will pass through the courts and the internet will become another giant monopoly like all the other utilities.

It's already a pretty big monopoly. I've lived in countless areas that require you to use Comcast as they pushed out any other competition from that area. 

6stack_Chris

This has been the topic of many development discussions we have had as of late. Our development team has brought up concerns regarding how we will be able to properly distribute our game and also keep content flowing. Right now, we are fighting the good fight and rolling with the punches. We all need to keep optimistic and hope that the right people will make the right decisions.  

k61977

There are really only a handful of providers most of the country already.  Comcast and Timewarner pretty much have 2/3 of the country on lockdown.  They bought up most of the competition let them keep there name but all the money goes to them.  Just try going into an area that either of those as the major provider for landline internet and get someone else if you don't live in a major city.  So yeah there is already a huge monopoly in this country for this service.

Nilden

So what is going to change?

Ridelynn

Near term - nothing big will change.

Long term - anyone's guess. Maybe nothing and it's all just fear blown out of proportion. Or maybe something gets tied up in courts. Or maybe we see the complete and utter breakdown of civilization as we know it. I'm betting it's closer to nothing than apocolypse, but I've been wrong before.

I doubt it will hurt games too much, except possibly killing P2P style downloaders just 'cuz. I would think it would affect side gaming industries, such as Twitch and other streaming platforms, before it really hurts the games themselves.

anemo

Exactly what it has in the past while Net Neutrality rules were there (only now instead of risking getting caught ignoring federal rules and state laws, they can get away with not worrying about the repealed federal rules).   ISPs blatantly wracking the heads of competitors like Netflix, and High Profit companies like League of Legends to have acceptable speeds to consumers.

https://www.polygon.com/2017/2/9/14548880/time-warner-lawsuit-new-york-league-of-legends-netflix

Quizzical

Considering that this only reverts to the rules as they were in early 2015, freaking out only makes sense if you thought the Internet was some dystopian wasteland in 2014 and has gotten massively better since then.

Either the sky will fall or else it won't.  Most likely, returning to the light-touch regulatory regime that facilitated the rise of the Internet over the course of nearly 20 years preceding the FCC's arbitrary switch to Title II regulations in 2015 will similarly help facilitate future Internet improvements that we don't foresee today.

But it's also possible that ISPs will commonly roll out abusive and predatory business practices and block legitimate sites that they don't like or some such.  If that happens, then the view that heavier regulation of the Internet is necessary will become prevalent all across the political spectrum rather than the Internet being just another domain in with the left wants more regulation and the right wants fewer.  In that case, heavier regulations will come, hopefully in the form of Congress passing a bill properly authorizing heavier regulations.

And don't think that Congress is incapable of acting when there's overwhelming public support for an issue.  It's hard to pass laws when half of the public is in favor and half against, and that's by design, but it's much easier to pass laws when there is broad popular support and few people opposed.  For example, consider the CAN-SPAM act of 2003, which passed the Senate unanimously and the House by a vote of 392-5.

Quizzical

k61977 said:

There are really only a handful of providers most of the country already.  Comcast and Timewarner pretty much have 2/3 of the country on lockdown.  They bought up most of the competition let them keep there name but all the money goes to them.  Just try going into an area that either of those as the major provider for landline internet and get someone else if you don't live in a major city.  So yeah there is already a huge monopoly in this country for this service.

I'd submit that one of the most important considerations in any proposed regulations is what will it do to competition.  If you've got multiple good ISP options where you live, then your ability to switch to a competitor will do more to push them to offer you better service than any regulations ever could.

Let's also not forget that lighter regulations doesn't mean no regulations.  Ajit Pai has said that the main thrust will be informing customers of what you're doing.  It will remain very illegal for an ISP to throttle sites or block sites while claiming that they aren't.  On another net neutrality thread, someone linked to a list of bad things that various ISPs did that they were fined or otherwise sanctioned for and forced to stop before the Title II regulations were implemented in the first place.

chronoss2015

1st off not everyone live in the usa.....last i checked over

2nd when the rest of us start doing way better at lots a stuff ...the cry babies will really pick up and thats when thin gs might get perma changed for you all.....

like EA's star wars battlefront 2 , you all need to vote with your wallets and no worries there is so much crap on the net you won't miss much and it will HURT THEM HARD....

f tey dont restore your rights they can go live on the side street

Albatroes

Well one of the things too is that ISPs can charge other companies more if they want to push their particular content in certain areas. One thing that is being predicted to happen because of a chance of that happening is certain content providers just going into business for themselves to avoid the middle man.

Asm0deus

There's already a thread on this why start another?

SirAgravaine

It means we keep paying ISPs what they are charging because we want their service.

Asm0deus

SirAgravaine said:

It means we keep paying ISPs what they are charging because we want their service.

It means a whole lot more than that.

I posted some interesting links in the thread that's already been going about this:
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/469937/so-where-are-you-on-net-neutrality/p17

but since someone thought we needed this second thread about the same thing then here's a good idea of what we can expect.
https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/What-Happens-Next-With-Net-Neutrality-140889

Kyleran

Yet one more plus for my switch to single player games.

Loke666

We're screwed?

Daranar

It's nice to hear some reasonable people talking about this.  The sky isn't falling, we've merely gone back to pre 2015 regulations, when the internet was....virtually the same it is today.  

Theocritus

Sounds like much ado about nothing.

SirAgravaine

Asm0deus said:

SirAgravaine said:

It means we keep paying ISPs what they are charging because we want their service.

It means a whole lot more than that.

I posted some interesting links in the thread that's already been going about this:
https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/469937/so-where-are-you-on-net-neutrality/p17

but since someone thought we needed this second thread about the same thing then here's a good idea of what we can expect.
https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/What-Happens-Next-With-Net-Neutrality-140889

Sorry, I couldn't load your links, my ISP must have blocked those sites.

Albatroes

What's funny about all of this is that an ex-verizon lawyer pretty much did all of this. This dude is set when he decides to go back to that job.

SomethingUnusual

Albatroes said:

What's funny about all of this is that an ex-verizon lawyer pretty much did all of this. This dude is set when he decides to go back to that job.

You sure he ever left that job?

TheScavenger

Kyleran said:

Yet one more plus for my switch to single player games.

MMOs are already single player games

Hulluck

Meh, Reddit got people riled up. Competition will keep balance for the most part in the U.S. people seem to ignore that. Example: In the past few years it's gone from Google going on about bringing their 1000Mbps lines to major cities then now various companies offering those lines. I don't live in some major city. There's 2 companies atm in my neighborhood that offer 1000Mbps lines. The kicker is At&t (wow) is the cheapest at ($80) beating the other company by $10. I don't really have a need for a line like that personally. I'm happy at 250Mbps up and down at $45 total, fees included. While a lot of rural area's may not see fiber for awhile it's definitely spreading. Heck my tablet and phone can't even take advantage of a 250 line. Usually topping out at around 100Mbps. S6 edge and some random tablet. Could be my router which is not the best but not junk either. Point being companies will have to be competitive to keep customers. If companies start doing stuff that people don't like they'll switch companies. If they all start doing it upsetting enough people I'm sure at that point something will be done. All the end of days stuff is way over the top.

FlyByKnight

Quizzical said:

k61977 said:

There are really only a handful of providers most of the country already.  Comcast and Timewarner pretty much have 2/3 of the country on lockdown.  They bought up most of the competition let them keep there name but all the money goes to them.  Just try going into an area that either of those as the major provider for landline internet and get someone else if you don't live in a major city.  So yeah there is already a huge monopoly in this country for this service.

I'd submit that one of the most important considerations in any proposed regulations is what will it do to competition.  If you've got multiple good ISP options where you live, then your ability to switch to a competitor will do more to push them to offer you better service than any regulations ever could.

Let's also not forget that lighter regulations doesn't mean no regulations.  Ajit Pai has said that the main thrust will be informing customers of what you're doing.  It will remain very illegal for an ISP to throttle sites or block sites while claiming that they aren't.  On another net neutrality thread, someone linked to a list of bad things that various ISPs did that they were fined or otherwise sanctioned for and forced to stop before the Title II regulations were implemented in the first place.

You're an intelligent person so I'll assume you're being daft purposefully. Ajit Pai was not specific in terms of customer "informing" which can be small print buried in terms of service. Telling someone you're going to behave nefariously does not absolve the incoming act. This was a total deregulation because things that were explicitly stated are now implicit.

This whole ordeal boils down to a Verizon shill being appointed to head of FCC to do an intrepid favor to ISPs. After Ajit Pai is done f#$%ing the information super highway, he will return to the private sector to a kushy job at one of the ISPs.

Asking billion dollar corporations to "self-police" themselves is just as corrupt and idiotic as asking Pablo Escobar to "self-jail" himself. Shareholders have a fiduciary responsibility to make decisions in favor of their corporations pockets. They have teams of lawyers to  push and bend what "within the law" means.

FlyByKnight

Hulluck said:

Meh, Reddit got people riled up. Competition will keep balance for the most part in the U.S. people seem to ignore that. Example: In the past few years it's gone from Google going on about bringing their 1000Mbps lines to major cities then now various companies offering those lines. I don't live in some major city. There's 2 companies atm in my neighborhood that offer 1000Mbps lines. The kicker is At&t (wow) is the cheapest at ($80) beating the other company by $10. I don't really have a need for a line like that personally. I'm happy at 250Mbps up and down at $45 total, fees included. While a lot of rural area's may not see fiber for awhile it's definitely spreading. Heck my tablet and phone can't even take advantage of a 250 line. Usually topping out at around 100Mbps. S6 edge and some random tablet. Could be my router which is not the best but not junk either. Point being companies will have to be competitive to keep customers. If companies start doing stuff that people don't like they'll switch companies. If they all start doing it upsetting enough people I'm sure at that point something will be done. All the end of days stuff is way over the top.

Keep making pretend competition is rampant and that the big 3 ISPs don't make backroom deals with each other on territory lines and available packages.

Albatroes

Hulluck said:

Meh, Reddit got people riled up. Competition will keep balance for the most part in the U.S. people seem to ignore that. Example: In the past few years it's gone from Google going on about bringing their 1000Mbps lines to major cities then now various companies offering those lines. I don't live in some major city. There's 2 companies atm in my neighborhood that offer 1000Mbps lines. The kicker is At&t (wow) is the cheapest at ($80) beating the other company by $10. I don't really have a need for a line like that personally. I'm happy at 250Mbps up and down at $45 total, fees included. While a lot of rural area's may not see fiber for awhile it's definitely spreading. Heck my tablet and phone can't even take advantage of a 250 line. Usually topping out at around 100Mbps. S6 edge and some random tablet. Could be my router which is not the best but not junk either. Point being companies will have to be competitive to keep customers. If companies start doing stuff that people don't like they'll switch companies. If they all start doing it upsetting enough people I'm sure at that point something will be done. All the end of days stuff is way over the top.

Sounds like a response from one of the millions of fake accounts the news has been reporting that were submitted to the FCC because this decision had to be made public and accept open feedback before it was concluded.