Awesome response to the C&D, via spokesman Jonathan Friedland:<p><i>"This is about consumers not getting what they paid for from their broadband provider. We are trying to provide more transparency, just like we do with the ISP Speed Index, and Verizon is trying to shut down that discussion."</i>
This is a genius move. It's exactly what needs to happen to get consumers to realize that it's their ISP fucking them over, not Netflix.<p>The average joe isn't outraged enough about net neutrality. If only they'd start doing this to other known bad actors <i>coughcomcastcough</i>, that might just be what the doctor ordered.<p>I wonder why they ponied up the money to the protection rackets first, and only then started pointing fingers. Maybe the agreement gave them access to some better data? If not, this should have been done months ago!<p>By the way, don't bother with the comments on the article page unless you want to lose all faith in humanity :(
It's frustrating that Verizon and friends can make grandiose statements in their advertising about "unlimited bandwidth", "faster wifi" ,"stream 5 things at a time", etc, etc. Or lie to customers, My mother just called Comcast to downgrade her service and the CS Rep said "WiFi won't work with our Economy Plus internet plan"<p>Yet when another entity does something as simple as showing an error message that casts them in a negative light, they are willing and able to threaten legal action.<p>They stretch the truth as far as they can, yet give not an inch when confronted with truths they don't like.<p>Remove government so we can add customers! But we need government so we can slap Nextflix when they say something we don't like!<p>I don't have a good answer how to fix it, it's just very plain to see, and frustrating.
I feel like Verizon's treading VERY dangerous waters here. If they sue Netflix for libel over this, then they're going to have to go through discovery. Since the claims center around network congestion, that means it'd be fair game for Netflix to go after every scrap of paper they have about the state of their internal network, oversubscription strategies, data about advertised vs. actual customer performance, any history of traffic shaping, and they'd be able to depose employees about all of these things.<p>As much as I'd love to see all of that information come to light in a court battle, somehow, I don't think Verizon would...
Wow, what a stupid move on Verizon's part. I have to believe the Streisand effects will far and away outpace any remedial action they might try to achieve here. While I get that they are irritated by their customers calling them up knowing more about how broken their network is, than the tech answering the phone, but this is going to be the new reality. With Google, Netflix, and no doubt Amazon providing more information to their customers about exactly why their product is having issues.
Verizon fios customer here. There has been a noticeable drop in the quality of streams in the past couple of months. The picture went from excellent > barely functional(after the FCC ruling) > watchable(after the peering agreement) still not great. Kudos to Netflix.
In the cease and desist, the Verizon's lawyers allege that Netflix can't possibly know if the network slow-down is coming from Verizon's network or other parts of the internet. I actually chuckled when I read this -- because after reading Netflix Tech blog (here: <a href="http://techblog.netflix.com/" rel="nofollow">http://techblog.netflix.com/</a> ) and seeing Netflix's open source contributions (here: <a href="https://github.com/Netflix" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Netflix</a>) I have a feeling Netflix probably has a LOT of data to back up these assertions.
I love what Netflix is doing with this. Not so much because I am totally convinced that they are 100% right and the Cable companies are 100% wrong.<p>Mostly just because I 100% hate all the cable companies.
I believe that the solution is forcibly separate infrastructure from service. The same company that provides the infrastructure should not be the same company that provides the service to the customer.<p>There are several nations around the world where this is the case. It reduces the barriers to entry for ISPs, creating an environment where there are dozens of ISPs to choose from with differing levels of customer service and pricing plans.<p>The primary problem with Comcast and Verizon is that they can leverage their customer base as a negotiation tactic rather than solely on the state of the network.
Netflix is angry because Verizon isn't giving Netflix the bandwidth that Netflix paid for[0]. Netflix should ignore this C&D on free speech grounds, and tell Verizon to get lost, because corporations are people[0] and have free speech.<p>[0] I wish I was joking about that.
How do we get ISPs classified as common carriers?<p>Sue their pants off for the copyright infringement of their customers (and all the other illegal things customers can do). This why common carriers exist. They trade ultimate control over the transfer of content and treat it equally for the protections of being indemnified from the content itself. This is why the U.S. Postal Service can't be prosecuted for transporting a death threat letter. Make it about money and they'll jump on the common carrier bandwagon before you can blink.
Here is the actual Cease & Desist:<p><a href="http://recode.net/2014/06/05/verizon-threatens-netflix-with-legal-action-over-congestion-message/" rel="nofollow">http://recode.net/2014/06/05/verizon-threatens-netflix-with-...</a>
It doesn't state it anywhere but I assume Netflix can be pretty sure of where the bottleneck is happening before transmitting that message correct? Given all the other factors that can contribute to a slow down.
Two ugly chickens are coming home to roost here.<p>1) ISP's insisted on selling home bandwidth as functionally unlimited. They did this primarily so they would only have to offer expensive plans. Grandma can't get the 300meg email plan for $8, only the $80 plan. And then everybody tried to use it like it really was unlimited.<p>2) DRM. Drm makes it so that the net can't cache. 90% of netfilx bandwidth is likely the same 10% of videos. They all have to make the full trip through the wires. A local cache at the ISP to improve efficiency is impossible.
Netflix is paying someone for their traffic. Verizon customers are paying for broadband which includes streaming movies.<p>The ISP need to quit whining. They need to quit trying to get laws passed in every state that keep competition out.<p>Verizon 2014 1st quarter.
$30.8 billion revenue
$7.2 billion operating income
<a href="http://www.verizon.com/investor/news_verizon_reports_fifth_consecutive_quarter_of_doubledigit_operating_income_and_earnings_growth_042420.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.verizon.com/investor/news_verizon_reports_fifth_c...</a><p>no sympathy
1) Why are ISPs not classified as Common Carriers? This needs to happen like <i>now</i>.<p>2) This makes me want to get a Netflix subscription just to support them, knowing I would never watch a single video from them. I'm signing up right now. Go Netflix!
Im sure most of the internet providers cap their bandwidth to services like this. I am confident that the main Swedish ISP provider Telia is capping as we speak.<p>I can see that ping times increases and it's always reoccurring around 9-10pm Fridays. Around 9:30 buffering speeds up, meaning most of the people giving up and switching to regular TV. One could argue that this is the time that Netflix/Youtube/Hbo/ViaPlay or any other service is used the most, but my suspicion is that capping occurs at those times, to validate the Fastlane/slowlane argument when the it arrives here in Sweden too.<p>I am currently collecting statistics to validate this. However, its insane that a ISP can cap and provide lesser service's on certain ports and argue that the fault is at the entertainment provider. Its also insane that when going from a "torrent way of life" to becoming a paying stream customer, I cant even watch my favourite show, when i want, on 100/100Mbit line.<p>ISP's are in the business of providing fast connections and high bandwidth, and that's what I'm paying for, however I want to use it. It shouldn't matter if I'm streaming from YouTube or downloaded illegal porn. Though it seems it looks like they want to sell me bad gasoline that doesn't take me anywhere, and say my engine is at fault.
Someone please clarify my doubts. When I run a server, I have to pay for bandwidth costs. For eg. My website hosted on linode gets me 20TB of data transfer limit. I expect end users to be able to view content worth 20 tb of up/down data transfer. Netflix runs its own servers but the ISP providing connectivity must be already charging Netflix for a certain bandwidth and data transfer limit. If the ISP is charging for data transfer already, I expect the ISP to provide the entire service. For eg. Let us assume that Verizon charges netflix 1 usd per tb of data transfer. And Netflix uses 20000tb of data in a month. Then Netflix owes Verizon 20000 usd a month. And Verizon has to serve the data according to the bandwidth agreed to.<p>Is Netflix not paying Verizon for the bandwidth and data transfer?<p>If Netflix is not paying Verizon then why does my hosting provider charge me for bandwidth and data transfer?
There is an easy and practical solution to this whole problem: If Verizon doesn't like the amount of bandwidth their customers use watching Netflix, they can always choose to block Netflix completely on their network, and inform their customers that they've done so. It would be honest, clean, fair, etc. Customers would be paying for exactly what they are getting, everyone could be happy with the arrangement.<p>Of course there would be a massive revolt of their customers if they did so. Because their customers WANT Netflix. So instead, Verizon will try very hard to make it "sorta" work and blame Netflix while trying to get money from them.
Text of the letter in question: <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/228334970/Letter-to-David-Hyman" rel="nofollow">http://www.scribd.com/doc/228334970/Letter-to-David-Hyman</a>
It's funny that Verizon thinks Netflix is damaging the Verizon brand. As if there's anything more they could do to lower people's opinions of Verizon.
What is the point of Verizon sending such a letter?<p>Do they think Netflix will comply? "Oh Jeez we hadn't thought this through but now with this letter and all, we understand! We'll just start blaming our own servers instead. Thanks."<p>Or is it simply a necessary step before they sue? But if they sue, isn't it likely they'll lose? (Sue over what anyway?)
I wonder why ATT didn't C & D Netflix as well? Netflix had that notice for ATT too, just like Verizon. AT & T screenshot from a few days ago: <a href="https://twitter.com/kunjanshah/status/473152026147557376" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/kunjanshah/status/473152026147557376</a>
Whatever happened to the right to free speech? There are of course restrictions to free speech, such as you cannot yell fire in a crowded building unless there really is a fire, but this is not one of those scenarios. The behavior of Verizon and the other ISPs are grossly offensive!
This seems very naive on VZW's part its extremely easy to show that there is congestion at the ingress of one of your peers. Even if VZW is not a direct peer its pretty easy for them to get metrics off their clients deployed at the last hop.
Netflix should also be including the phone numbers of city council members in the zip code of the account owner, and a link to example legislation for use of eminent domain seizure on last-mile cables.
> "So Netflix is throwing up a 'The AT&T network is crowded right now' message. Meanwhile, Youtube is playing 1080p no problem."<p>Netflix should try to explain that in the error messages too.
Netflix could also make their buffering settings more advanced. i want a bigger buffer if my internet is unstable, and it should be transparant how netflix buffers..
I support this in principle, but I would bet a good portion of the buffering that happens for Verizon customers is due to issues with their own wifi network.
I'm on CenturyLink DSL and they don't show that message for me when there are speed issues... they apparently only show it to Verizon customers?
Well I think we should introduce a tax on commuters because as it turns out they are the 90% of the highway traffic.If they want to get to work on time they can use the fast lane for a little extra and if they don't pay we just make them drive 10 miles per hour. I think this is fair. Ohh btw. if they complain about it, it is just them trying to influence policy that was set by good corporations so I don't understand why we should change it. :)<p>(please look up irony on wikipedia before downvote, thanks)
Is Verizon actively slowing the connection to Netflix.com itself or is the connection between Verizon and Netflix's provider (Cogent?) simply limited? In other words, are all Cogent customers suffering poor performance with Verizon customers?<p>Because the former is wrong and demanding more money from a single company hosted on a service provider you have specific peering agreements with is extortion.<p>The latter however, well, no one said there were unlimited pipes between every transit provider on the planet and if you're someone large like Netflix, sometimes you need to pay for transit on more than one provider to get the performance you need when your own provider can't or won't do so themselves. It has been like that for decades.
Netflix may be reaping what they have sown here. They agreed to buy paid peering from Verizon, so if they don't have enough capacity into Verizon the onus is on them to buy more. OTOH if there is some kind of problem inside Verizon then the error message is justified.
This is exactly why I dropped Netflix. I want a high-def movie, not their whining about someone else's network. I have no problems streaming from Amazon. I have a choice of streamers. Other streamers work better. I have less choice of wired ISPs and they're harder to switch. Netflix would rather whine and preserve its profit margins than pay up. OK, fine, but since their whining does not get me the movie I want, I cut it off.<p>Netflix will find that most other people also do not care to hear their whining. I can understand why Netflix does it though...it's $8 a month. Between production costs, licensing costs, marketing, and profits, all $8 a month leaves room for is crappy movies, poor investment, and a continuous drive to shift costs to ISPs and whine about it.