Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?

Steve Mikulasik Steve.Mikulasik at
Fri Nov 20 16:37:20 UTC 2015

What are these technical requirements? I feel like these would punish small upstarts well helping protect large incumbent services from competition. 

Even if you don't demand payment, you can still hurt the fairness of the internet this way. 

-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at] On Behalf Of Shane Ronan
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 9:25 AM
To: nanog at
Subject: Re: Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?

T-Mobile claims they are not accepting any payment from these content providers for inclusion in Binge On.

"Onstage today, Legere said any company can apply to join the Binge On program. "Anyone who can meet our technical requirement, we’ll include," 
he said. "This is not a net neutrality problem." Legere pointed to the fact that Binge On doesn't charge providers for inclusion and customers don't pay to access it."

On 11/20/15 10:45 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> According to:
> Chairman Wheeler thinks that T-mob's new "customers can get uncapped 
> media stream data, but only from the people we like" service called 
> Binge On is pro-competition.
> My take on this is that the service is *precisely* what Net Neutrality 
> was supposed to prevent -- carriers offering paid fast-lanes to 
> content providers -- and that this is anti-competitive to the sort of 
> "upstart YouTube" entities that NN was supposed to protect...
> and that *that* is the competition that NN was supposed to protect.
> And I just said the same thing two different ways.
> Cause does anyone here think that T-mob is giving those *carriers* 
> pride of place *for free*?
> Corporations don't - in my experience - give away lots of money out of 
> the goodness of their hearts.
> Cheers,
> -- jr 'whacky weekend' a

More information about the NANOG mailing list