Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?

Owen DeLong owen at
Mon Nov 23 22:12:01 UTC 2015

Except there’s no revenue share here. According to T-Mobile, the streaming partners
aren’t paying anything to T-Mo and T-Mo isn’t paying them. It’s kind of like zero-rating
in that the customers don’t pay bandwidth charges, but it’s different in that the service
provider isn’t being asked to subsidize the network provider (usual implementation of


> On Nov 23, 2015, at 10:42 , Christian Kuhtz <chkuhtz at> wrote:
> I don't know if this is NN or not, but the concept is ancient. Even back in the dark ages of mobile, zero rating and associated rev share were very common.
> Whether this is relevant to NN or not is for lawyers.
> Christian
>> On Nov 20, 2015, at 7:47 AM, Jay Ashworth <jra at> 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
>> -- 
>> Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra at
>> Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
>> Ashworth & Associates          2000 Land Rover DII
>> St Petersburg FL USA      BCP38: Ask For It By Name!           +1 727 647 1274

More information about the NANOG mailing list