FCC Will Drop Biden Plan To Ban Bulk Broadband Billing For Tenants (reuters.com) 63
The Federal Communications Commission will abandon a proposal that would have banned mandatory internet service charges for apartment and condominium residents. FCC Chair Brendan Carr halted the Biden-era plan that sought to prevent landlords from requiring tenants to pay for specific broadband providers. Housing industry groups said they welcomed the decision, arguing bulk billing arrangements help secure discounted rates. They claim these agreements can reduce internet costs by up to 50%. However, public interest advocates, who backed the original proposal, contend that landlords don't always pass these savings to tenants.
The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:1, Insightful)
However, public interest advocates, who backed the original proposal, contend that landlords don't always pass these savings to tenants.
That's it? That's the complaint?
So without the rule, people living at an apartment complex may or may not get cheaper internet depending on how much of the savings is passed along to residents.
Meanwhile with the rule you GUARANTEE that all apartment dwellers have to pay full price for internet, all the time, no way to look around for apartments where they can find it chea
I know it's been a long time (Score:1)
Not that it matters for the next 4 years. Maybe longer depending on whether we have elections again or not.
Re:I know it's been a long time (Score:4, Informative)
I lived in an apartment that made mandatory internet. It was less than 10 years ago, had non-guaranteed dialup speeds, was $20 a month, and it turned out to be a scam that allowed the complex to have certain monitoring devices in your apartment. I don't know what they were, but I disconnected them.
Re:The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:4, Insightful)
He's not assuming anything of the sort. SuperKendall is a hyperpartisan, he only assumes that because of "Biden" it must be bad. SuperKendall is outraged at the suggestion that Biden would deny his freedom of choice to use Trump-approved COVID treatments, for instance, not that he believes any is needed, with his "natural immunity" that Fauci lied to us about.
Re: (Score:2)
So choice of medical insurance companies instead of single payer == good! But choice of internet providers instead of dealing with untrustworthy landords == bad! The common denominator here? Support whoever is making the most money.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You're assuming the landlords are passing the savings on
Personal anecdote: I lived in an apartment with Internet included in the monthly rent. The charge was $15/month for 200mbs, which was significantly cheaper than if I'd bought it on my own.
forcing the tenant to accept the landlord's terms.
It was in the rental contract. If the tenant doesn't like it, they can, you know, not sign the rental contract.
Why shouldn't the tenant be allowed to shop for a better deal?
They can. I looked at several other apartments.
Re: The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:1)
Re: The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:4, Insightful)
The landlord may have increased the rent by $200 to give you the impression that you are getting a good deal on the Internet.
If the landlord wanted to raise the rent, why wouldn't they just, you know, raise the rent?
Anyone with common sense will look at the total cost, including rent, Internet, utilities, and commute, and decide where to live based on that.
It doesn't matter whether the money is classified as "rent" or "Internet." What matters is the total.
Re: The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:2, Interesting)
"If the tenant doesn't like it, they can, you know, not sign the rental contract."
We make laws to protect people from abusive terms all the time. Just because it worked for you doesn't mean it works for everyone. There are lots of reasons from privacy to moral issues why people might not want to accept a bundled product. If the deal the complex is offering is good, they don't have to force anyone to use it. Why are you against competition? You just hate progress?
Re: (Score:1)
You're assuming the landlords are passing the savings on
Not at all. I'm saying that even if NO landlords passed savings on, it's no different for the residents...
However why would you think that when complexes could compete for residents by offering slightly cheaper overall rates because they passed at least some of the savings along?
It only takes one landlord to pass any savings along, and life is better for someone than it is with the rule in place.
Re: The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're assuming the landlords are passing the savings on, and the landlords could actually be gouging the tenants by virtue of the rule forcing the tenant to accept the landlord's terms. Why shouldn't the tenant be allowed to shop for a better deal?
Whether the landlord is passing on the savings is irrelevant. What matters is whether the tenant might be able to find a better deal if they could shop for it -- and also whether some tenants are required to pay for Internet service they don't actually want.
But I don't think that matters as long as the costs are all disclosed up front for potential tenants to evaluate when deciding whether to rent. If there aren't enough places for rent that landlords have to compete with one another on prices and servi
Re:The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:5, Informative)
In markets with multiple ISP providers, bulk billing would prevent you from choosing a different provider than the one the landlord selects w/o having to pay for both.
Re: (Score:2)
In markets with multiple ISP providers, bulk billing would prevent you from choosing a different provider than the one the landlord selects w/o having to pay for both.
these two concepts seem odd to me, living out here in the developed world.
1. That you can have a broadband market that does not have multiple providers.
2. That when living in a block of flats (apartment complex) that you have to accept the connection given to you buy the building owner.
These things are quite odd to me. When you buy or rent a flat, you're responsible for getting the internet connection yourself. Very, very rarely it's included in the rent (usually this is only when the dwelling is mul
Re:The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. Mandatory packages are to benefit the apartments, not the tenants. The service you receive is a service no one wants.
Re:The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:5, Insightful)
No, that's a news summary of the complaint.
The major issue here is a landlord picking an ISP for its tenants. ISPs vary not just by cost but by service provision. What's fine for your average smartphone user may not be suitable for WFH, and is even less likely to be suitable for a professional.
Additionally letting landlords pick ISPs means they're unlikely to pick anything outside of one or two big names. It's automatically bias against smaller ISPs who are finding it hard enough to deal with competition from companies that can just reuse infrastructure they already own built 50-100 years ago and paid for using cable TV subscriptions and/or long distance telephone calls.
Landlords should be required to give easy access to each dwelling to ISPs, and shouldn't be picking the ISPs themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Mandatory utility bills you cannot choose is not the way to find service "cheaper", moron. I wonder what Ayn Rand would say about forced choices? But what you know apartments anyway? Daddy bought you a house.
And just to be clear, you are asking "how does freedom of choice help anyone?" You're really asking that, Mr Libertarian Trumpist?
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what Ayn Rand would say about forced choices?
Most likely, she'd see it as bundling rather than forcing.
How is it different from water and garbage collection? Those are also usually bundled into an apartment rent.
If you don't like the deal offered, don't rent the apartment.
Re: The counter-argument makes no sense (Score:2)
"How is it different from water and garbage collection? Those are also usually bundled into an apartment rent."
What a stupid question. You seem to not know that people don't have choices when it comes to those utilities. Are you a bot? Everyone knows this.
Re: (Score:2)
Water is metered in many (most?) apartments.
Re: (Score:2)
Water is metered in many (most?) apartments.
I've lived in several apartments. None had water meters.
Google says that less than 50% of apartments are metered, but newer apartments are more likely to be metered.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay I guess not "most". However I have never been in an apartment where the gas, water, and electricity were not metered. Maybe I'm special but this includes cheap places shared with college roomates.
Re: (Score:3)
You get a choice. The choice may be cheaper than the bulk plan (if such exists), and it may have better service, etc. The primary thing though, is IT'S A CHOICE!
Re: (Score:2)
It's why the USA has a blanket ban on forced bundling of different services, which history proves, the FTC/FCC enforces unevenly.
Surely, the answer is, the tenant enters into a separate contract with the landlord: That is, the landlord sub-lets his internet service. Then, the tenant can compare that contract with the contract offered by other communication services.
Drill me a new one (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If your landlord doesn't have the wiring then they should be putting it in. These days it would be like not having the wiring for electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what world you live in but I live in a crap apartment from the 1980s and nobody had to drill anything. The wiring was long since there for both cable and DSL. If your landlord doesn't have the wiring then they should be putting it in. These days it would be like not having the wiring for electricity.
When the internet providers are deploying installers with rolls of coax and concrete drill bits, why would a landlord waste money on wiring? Your argument is more akin to wiring for landline phones in new construction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Is it such a problem to have conduit to the roof for a dish or antenna to a comm room, and conduit from there to the demarcation point? You don't need to run a line for each provider to each unit. Each unit can have a standard hookup and it can be connected to whomsoever you please in your comm room.
This is to artificially restrict consumer choice and any cost savings is unlikely to make it to a unit owner. Not only that, but it's mandatory! What if I don't want it?
Re: (Score:2)
What to you move out of your parent's basement. There's a whole world out there you don't know.
rules for landlords (Score:2)
Rent services should have to be itemized, and advertised to potential and current tenants.
But this is probably better done under state legislation than federal. (or maybe even city)
It's an antitrust violation (Score:5, Insightful)
Fun fact at the state level the right wing party here in America outspent the centrist party 8 to 1. If you're familiar with American politics you know we don't have a left-wing party just the extreme right and a centrist. And we really really don't like acknowledging that fact but what the hell I've got karma to burn.
Re: (Score:1)
This meme (Score:3)
Says it perfectly. https://imgflip.com/i/9i9wm4 [imgflip.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No need for the federal government to do it when state governments can do it [oklahoman.com] more quickly.
For the record, this is in the Project 2025 playbook. People can't say they weren't warned.
Re: (Score:3)
GOP/Project 2025 is demanding historical evidence of living in this country. The problem is, the Native Americans and Mexicans living in the current USA didn't hand-out immigration papers to the invading white people who stole their land. So all three of them can be kicked out of the country. Immigration became an issue in the late 1800s, so historical evidence is reliable only from that date, onward.
The evidence suggests that Trump's grandmother was an illegal immigrant, making Trump a non-citizen und
Re: (Score:2)
Oklahoma (which just demanded Christian prayer and KJV bibles in schools) is mixing religion and government much worse than Texas (Christian 10 commandments in schools, death-penalty for abortion procedure). Most of this is piggy-backing on the 'Stop kiddie-porn'/age-verification laws flooding the country, where one or two zealots are claiming everything is a trigger for kiddie-porn. This is one of 8 bills that Sen. Dusty Deevers, (R) has proposed to "restore moral sanity", an obvious euphemism for 'censo
Re: (Score:2)
The religious right and the taliban are two sides of the same coin.
Re: (Score:1)
"and shield children from explicit material that can warp their innocent minds"
Guess the Bible is also getting the ban hammer.
Serving up another nothing-burger, with cheese! (Score:2)
The FCC *should* drop this, simply because it's a dumb idea that just involves government in one more thing they have no business being involved in.
When you rent an apartment, you get what the landlord gives you. You don't get to say, "I want blue carpeting instead of green!" or "I don't like the way you painted all the walls white. I want something trendy like a light grey." You also may not get choices for your favorite broadband provider.
Honestly? If you went with Starlink, I'm not even sure the landlord
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The FCC *should* drop this, simply because it's a dumb idea that just involves government in one more thing they have no business being involved in.
Not really. It falls well within the jurisdiction of multiple government agencies.
When you rent an apartment, you get what the landlord gives you. You don't get to say, "I want blue carpeting instead of green!" or "I don't like the way you painted all the walls white. I want something trendy like a light grey." You also may not get choices for your favorite broadband provider.
Why would anyone think that this is okay? It's one thing to not change the apartment. It's quite another for the landlord to decide who you can buy Internet service from. Among other things, this arguably violates antitrust law by creating an illegal (albeit local) monopoly.
Honestly? If you went with Starlink, I'm not even sure the landlord could stop you from doing that, because they already fought for tenant rights to put up satellite dishes back when everyone wanted Dish Network or DirecTV instead of only the cable company.
Legally, they cannot stop you from doing that, because FCC regulations specifically require landlords to allow such installations, and have done so for
Re: (Score:2)
"...because they already fought for tenant rights to put up satellite dishes back when everyone wanted Dish Network or DirecTV instead of only the cable company."
LOL were you even born then? And who is this "they" you speak of? Apartments don't let you install satellite dishes.
"When you rent an apartment, you get what the landlord gives you."
Sure, and when you look for an apartment, don't expect a choice of landlords either. Where I live, a city of 2 million, two thirds of all apartments are managed by t
Re: (Score:2)
Make the argument correctly.
The exception for OTA and satellite antennas to receive broadcast programming applies to Internet service, from a cursory reading of the law(47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000), including:
'fixed wireless services that are not classified as telecommunications services.'
and
'"Fixed wireless signals" are any commercial non-broadcast communications signals transmitted via wireless technology to and/or from a fixed customer location. Examples include wireless signals used to provide telephone s
Re:Serving up another nothing-burger, with cheese! (Score:5, Insightful)
OK, so then hypothetically, you'd be OK with your landlord telling you which grocery store to shop at (because building residents get a deal there.) Which car repair place to use? Which hairdresser or barbershop to go to? Where to buy clothes? Remember, you're getting bulk deals...
Re: (Score:2)
Irrelevant. If your landlord gets a bulk deal on anything, then why shouldn't you be forced to take it?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm growing convinced the one thing libertarians and conservatives hate the most is people haviing freedom of choice, ironically considering the rhetoric. As long as its not a government making that choice, it seems having OTHER people take your freedom away is just fine.
How about instead we just .... have a choice?
re: landlord telling you where to shop? (Score:2)
I'm just blown away that your comment was modded +5 Insightful, to be honest. The moderation system around here clearly has a lot of issues.
Your argument makes ZERO sense! Why would a landlord conceivably be able to dictate where tenants spent their money when they left the apartment and decided to go shopping (such as to buy groceries)? They could already make arrangements where tenants got some sort of discount for shopping at a particular place or for getting their car repaired at a certain shop, or ??
can they force TV / PHONE? Force stuff like ESPN+? (Score:2)
can they force TV / PHONE? Force stuff like ESPN+?
Lock in (Score:2)
Expect their support to give you the respect that matches your power to switch providers. And expect your landlord to help themselves to any pricing differential. (I have had decent landlords, they exist. That's just not the way to bet.)
Odd that so many folks here seem to be cool with their landlord picking their I
Thereâ(TM)s a simple solution (Score:1)
If you must rent (Score:2)
Stick with the small complexes run by mom and pop landlords. They probably don't want to insert themselves into the choice of your broadband provider.
Of course, there's really no competition in the USA anyway because we don't require ISP's to lease last mile connectivity like other countries.
Generosity and Landlords (Score:1)