Chicago (IL) – AT& is expanding its bandwidth throttling experiment with Beaumont, Texas being the second test market after Reno, Nevada. Time Warner Cable was the first to set caps in the region to a data transfer volume of up to 40 GB per month and other major ISPs are running similar tests across the country. The ISPs generally claim that the purpose of these "experiments" is to protect average subscribers from a minority that consumes most of the available bandwidth. At least that is the official explanation.

There may be metered Internet access in your future. Last month we reported that AT&T first started limited bandwidth as an experiment in Reno, Nevada. The company caps the available data transfer volume bandwidth for new and existing subscribers in the region to 150 GB and charges $1 for each extra GB sent, regardless of the connection plan.

Apparently, the first test has been a success and convinced AT&T to expand the test to new broadband subscribers in Beaumont, Texas. The terms are the same as those in Nevada region. The company will not charge extra for the first month of excess usage. Consider it as a get-out-of-jail-free card. Exceed your limit the second time and you will be paying extra from thereon. AT&T is offering a web-based tool that tracks the bandwidth usage in real time and the company will call 70% of the limit is reached. These calls may help to prevent some angry calls to customer service, but their purpose certainly is also to tell customers that they may be watching too many videos.

While Comcast is threatening that it may ditch consumers who are exceeding a bandwidth limit of 250 GB per month, AT&T said it will not be terminating service agreements because of heavy use. Not really a surprise, since those extra GB are extra money. In the end, that HD movie that is streamed when a user is over the bandwidth limit may bring another $5.

In fact, bandwidth capping may deter consumers from using HD video streaming services: A family that is sharing the Internet connection across multiple PCs and is streaming content to different screens may easily hit and exceed that 150 GB limit every single month.

Bandwidth throttling not only allows ISPs to squeeze every cent out of its aging infrastructure, but, in theory, creates a foundation to monetize their own IPTV services, creating a potentially unfair competitive advantage over rival HD video streaming services. It will be interesting to see how this scenario will develop.

When the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ordered Comcast to publicize its network management policies that involve bandwidth throttling, we learned that the company has been capping the bandwidth to 250 GB for some time now. Comcast said it would terminate the service to customers who exceed the 250 GB limit twice within six months. FairPoint Communications is considering caps as low as 5 GB per month.

Time Warner Cable was the first major ISP in the U.S. that implemented bandwidth caps. The company set the cap in the Beaumont region between 5 and 40 GB and is charging “new customers” between $1 and $1.50 per GB sent or received beyond the limit. The ISP even lured existing subscribers to upgrade to a "Price Lock" bundle which guarantees a low price for the combined cable, Internet and phone service for the next 12 months, but enrolls them into a 20 GB monthly cap with $1 per GB overcharge rule. Time Warner Cable may be particularly interested to set low limits to protect its cable TV service and deter customers from using HD video streaming services on the Internet.

Verizon recently said it does not plan to throttle bandwidth at this time.

This crap enrages me

Dec 05, 2008 04:20     

This kind of anti-consumer practice sucks, It's hard to believe ( guess not so hard actually) to believe that ISP's will do this. Just one more step against net neutrality. It's sad that ISP's want to penalize people who are moving forward with technology, and making use of the digital content thats out there. I hate every ISP I have had interactions with. GOD!
suavey report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +7

Feel our pain

Dec 05, 2008 04:35     

Here in South Africa we pay around US$60 for 5GB and about US$8 for every gig out of bundle, and for the average user that's not exactly cheap. . .
oppressed_987345 report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +3

For the $$

Dec 05, 2008 04:42     

Another step back for broadband coverage in the US. Comcast's 250GB cap is frankly the only reasonable one out there. Though a cap is a cap. The companies are only doing this for the $$. The reason around protecting us from "excessive users" is a flat out lie. If that is the case then single these people out and cut their service and leave everyone else alone. I don't see how companies are expecting to make $$ down the road off of digital downloads with these caps. There is an interest by consumers and a lot of these companies to scream very loudly about this and put the brakes on it. The lack of competition in broadband delivery does not help either

Tyrone report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +2

Implemented, or revealed?

Dec 05, 2008 08:27     

Didn't I read somewhere that these caps have "always" existed, but more as an invisible line to be crossed?
Steve report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

This could hurt the gaming industry as well

Dec 05, 2008 08:36     

I would assume that this would get the attention of software distribution systems like Steam. I just recently purchased and downloaded a game from Steam which was almost 16 GB. If I was already close to my cap, this game may end up costing me more than just picking it up at a retail store.
Mike report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +4

self-destruction

Dec 05, 2008 09:09     

This might sound bizarre, but considering that the FCC just voted to open up the white spaces, our government wants broadband to reach all citizens, Google was the firm that did the most pushing for the deregulation of the white spaces, and there's reports / rumors that they're buying up dark fiber, I say let them keep putting on limits, imposing fees, and giving us horrible customer service! They're sealing their own fate. Of course, then they'll probably just go to the government and say "we're too big to fail" and get some ridiculous bailout that throws money at a failing business model...

damon report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +6

Excessive Users: The perfect excuse to charge more...

Dec 05, 2008 09:40     

It has been pretty obvious from the start that these companies just wanted to have more control and more way to squeeze money out of us. In order to successfully create a cap (without enraging clients) most of them will put out tools so users can monitor their usage. If they have the ability to create such a tool, how is it impossible for them to pin point the abusers and deal with them alone.
Magius report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +4

I'm one of those Beaumont Time Warner Cable custome...

Dec 05, 2008 10:23     

I'm one of those Beaumont Time Warner Cable customers. I was offered the so-called "Price Lock" deal. When I read the fine print I realized that it didn't offer a price lock at all. Instead it would change my billing from flat rate to a rate plus extra charges. I wonder how many people they suckered in with that one?
OldCrank report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +4

ISP Charge Consumers TWICE for the Same Bandwidth

Dec 05, 2008 10:38     

I've worked as a Core network engineer for one of the big ISP's mentioned in this article, and I can tell you from experience that many ISP drastically oversubscribe their network backbones compared to the number of customers. I think it's unfair for consumers who pay a monthly charge for a line-rate (768kbps, 2mbps, 6mbps, etc.) to then be charged a total byte cap. If ISP's can't handle their customers using the bandwidth they rightly pay for, they ought to invest in higher capacity backbones. The "protecting the majority of users" argument is a straw-man argument. If their networks had adequate capacity, there would never be a concern of how much of your bandwidth you use vs. another subscriber. Don't let the ISP's charge you TWICE just because they don't want to spend the capital money to upgrade. Tell your ISP's you'll cancel service if they implement bandwidth caps. PS: They can't charge you a termination fee on your contract if they change the terms and conditions on you. You have the right to opt out of any changes to your contract terms (including bandwidth caps) and cancel your service fee-free. Good on Verizon for once again sticking up for their consumers! (Too bad FiOS isn't available everywhere)

Fredo report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +3

Lame

Dec 05, 2008 10:58     

that's great that they are charging 1.50 a gig when they only have to pay cents for the updtream bandwidth. It;s a sad play to save thier cable TV biz. :(
John report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +1

Let the buck stop with someone else

Dec 05, 2008 14:01     

I switched to ATT a few months back because RCN wasn't even getting close to the speed I was paying for. I'm not paying a cap rate, let the buck stop with someone else.
Maiyeko report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +2

Why are they doing this

Dec 06, 2008 07:35     

The US is pretty low on the list of nations with the fastest internet connections and the internet service in the US is the highest priced in the world. Why are the ISPs in the US now claiming that they are providing unlimited internet then putting a limit on it. If you can go to another country like say Japan which has a very high cost of living and therefore you would expect to pay more for just about everything but the internet connections there would be at least twice as fast as you would find in the US for like half the price and it is really unlimited. the first question that americans need to ask ourselves is why are we paying so much for inferior connections? The second question is why is unlimited internet slowly being changed so that it is not actually unlimited? Is this not false advertising if they say that it is unlimited then they put a limit on it?

Jeff report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Dollars to doughnuts

Dec 19, 2008 20:26     

I've got money on wether or not these bandwidth caps have something to do with the current outages that Blizzard is experiencing. I think that the new hardware and software they've implmented have affected the service that blizzard is recieving.
Aaron Park report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Gay

Mar 05, 2009 07:11     

Fairpoint already overcharged with install and had to have the PSB intervene and make them pay it back if they so much as put a limit on ill see them in court!
Shawn report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0