Canada may be getting its first peak at truly unlimited home Internet with Shaw's new unlimited plan, but in the US we are seeing the opposite trend.

One by one, telecom companies are eliminating all-you-can-eat data plans, even as Internet firms roll out compelling new products that all but demand unlimited downloads.

 After AT&T's announcement of usage based billing last month, it seems that many other ISPs are going to follow suit.

We have not yet seen a significant public outcry, but some are fighting back:

"While broadband caps are not inherently problematic, they carry the omnipresent temptation to act in anticompetitive and monopolistic ways," the consumer groups Public Knowledge and New America Foundation warned in a letter to the Federal Communications Commission last month, raising concerns about AT&T's new limits.: 

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/31/BUBP1JNKF6.DTL#ixzz1OCokfbIm

Follow-up to Post on New Shaw Unlimited Data Plan and UBB Policy

Shaw's announcement of instituting 'reasonable' data caps, without direct overage billing has been somewhat controversial. On the one hand, we are seeing a more rational form of data based billing. On the other we are seeing likely inflated costs for bandwidth being pushed on customers.

Personally, I do not oppose reasonable data usage based billing, but I do oppose significant markups on bandwidth. The existence of a plan that can be truly called 'Shaw Unlimited Internet', is what makes me support the plan.

Its a mixed bag, certainly, but the first chance for truly unlimited broadband internet for home users in Canada is a positive development.

EDITORIAL: Net neutrality for libertarians.

Libertarians, for obvious reasons, often oppose the government regulation generally associated with net neutrality. Government regulation, however, is not the only form of net neutrality.

I personally believe, that like neutral roads, neutral networks increase competition, and contribute to freedom. Because I personally believe this, I will make choices in the market that support net neutral companies. While government regulation seems like the correct way to go about instituting net neutrality for liberals or democratic socialists, it is not the only way.

I believe the debate of how to institute net neutrality is very different from the debate of if neutral networks are desire-able.

Net neutral telecoms will exist, through market forces, if net neutrality is demanded by the consumer.

Shaw to double caps, offer unlimited plan

More good news, today. Shaw is pledging to avoid 'per gigabyte' billing and, for the first time, will offer a truly unlimited package:

From http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/Shaw+expanding+digital+push/4840610/story.html:

The immediate result is that the download limits on existing plans will at least double, so that high speed jumps to 125 gigabytes from 60 and Extreme to 250 gigabytes from 100 at the current price.
The company will also offer a number of new plans that provide choice in download and upload speeds, as well as increased data limits, including two unlimited options.

The company will also offer a number of new plans that provide choice in download and upload speeds, as well as increased data limits, including two unlimited options.

... 

The eventual options will range from a low of 30 gigabytes a month for lite speed up through 125, 250, 400, 500 and 750 gigabytes, one terabyte and unlimited.

 Shaw will likely 'require' users to upgrade their data class if they significantly pass their limit, but will not charge the per gigabyte overages that plague mobile internet.

Comcast will NOT institute UBB (for now)

A small but important victory today:

Speaking at a Barclays Capital conference this morning, Comcast CFO Mike Angelakis was adamant that UBB models just aren't in the cards at the moment, and that the MSO is content with its current Internet usage policy, which keeps "excessive use" in check via a monthly 250-gigabyte cap. (See Comcast Draws the Line at 250GB.)

Full Story

Perhaps this is a temporary PR move, or perhaps its a signal that the winds of change are blowing for the telecoms.

Editorial: The clash of the internet giants

As we approach the middle of the year 2011, it is clear that their are two incompatible pushes to influence the future of the internet. I am talking about the conflict between those trying to influence the user by controlling their pipe, and those trying to influence the user by controlling the end content.

One movement seeks to use the power granted to them by subsidies, profits from old, dieing technologies and the inherited physical telecommunication lines to influence consumer choice. The other seeks, simply, to influence consumer choice by producing a superior product.

Internet caps, with the possible exception of the most 'generous', are a means to this end.  What sane consumer, today, would choose to pay something like 40 dollars for an outdated 'cable television' service, if the restrictions imposed, often by cable internet companies, on the distribution of media and bandwidth.

In the USA, where the bandwidth caps have historically been high, and media rights have begun to be licensed more rationally, we have seen the rise of Netflix's online media distribution.

When Netflix announced its move to Canada, Bell Canada, a media distributer, and one of the major  Internet providers in Canada, imposed major bandwidth limitations on its customers and downstream providers. It was only through mass grassroots action that this was blocked. This is the conflict, between new and old media, between net neutrality, and net blockades.

During this time, Netflix did not try to fight legal battles or lobby for a solution, they simply improved their product by adding a lower bandwidth option for their consumers.

I think it is clear where the consumer should stand, when the choice is between suppression tactics and superior services.

by Internet Cap Gate.

AT&T to bring mobile internet prices to your desktop PC

Trends Reports. Summary:

AT&T's terrestrial data plans have followed in the footsteps of its mobile plans by doing away with unlimited data and adopting monthly limits.

Today marks the beginning of AT&T’s limited monthly data allotments for subscribers to its DSL and U-Verse broadband Internet services. Subscribers to AT&T’s DSL service will now face a 150 GB monthly limit and AT&T’s U-Verse customers will be capped at 250 GB per month. When AT&T tested data caps in parts of Texas and Nevada, it experimented with caps as low as 20 GB. AT&T decided to abandon low caps after Time Warner was lambasted for imposing similarly low limits.