Indeed, to keep a monopoly on services, there are large tech companies that could benefit
as long as the ISPs don't get overly greedy where large companies will pay their way to better access to consumers. Zero rating is effectively the easiest way to have a company do this. T-Mobile semi-popularized the concept as being a 'pro for consumers' (great marketing spin, John Legere). While, I will admit freely, that T-Mobiles implementation of zero rating is not the most aggressive form, and
so far t-mobile's been transparent for how any company can become part of it, at least that is my understanding talking to those in the industry (its just an email: Bingeon@t-mobile.com, and they are willing to work with you on it is my understanding). In the long run, this kind of thing becoming acceptable opens the doors to less than savory practices. Will t-mobile eventually turn this into a screw they can turn to get more money out of content providers? Who knows. Its not regulated, transparent, or an open process. IE. If you argument is using this to manage the network (by only allowing 720p video streams, for instance, when watching videos online), why would fair, transparent, open, and a reasonably determined cost not be part of that?
Zero rating as it gets implemented by comcast, for instance, is much more sinister.
Either way, they get to take us for a ride.
One thing I also find interesting:
The new FCC chairman is all about de-regulating. Yet, the one thing he is not advocating is de-regulating open access rules to public utility infrastructure, IE, as this wired article explains: https://www.wired.com/2013/07/we-need-to-stop-focusing-on-ju...
"The ‘open access’ term gets thrown around a lot as code for creating artificial competition among resellers of a monopoly service at government-controlled rates. There’s no better way to kill incentives for building out or upgrading new networks.
But ‘open access’ really means promoting easy, inexpensive and open access to publicly owned rights-of-way"
The FCC has the power to petition congress for the authority (and there are some legal experts who think the FCC already has the power to dictate this see here: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-50A1.pd... also see the Telecommunications Act of 1996).
I have seen NO movement toward increasing competition by stripping away unreasonable local regulations on rights of way access by Ajit Pai. He not once ever proposed this, and nor since taking FCC chain, made it an agenda item to do just this. This would increase competition astronomically if the right of way access situation was to be sorted out and streamlined, for open access and implementing firm open access rules (like 30 day auto approvals for projects if the objecting party does not respond before that).
Though one might say, upon reading the telecom act of 1996 and say "Hey! it was suppose to give the authority!" well, it had one important caveat
However, the 1996 Act permits utilities
to deny access where there is insufficient capacity and for reasons of safety, reliability or generally
applicable engineering purposes
This gets abused, frankly, and the appeals process is rather non-existant and fighting it is very drawn out (companies sue each other over this clause all the time).
If he wants real competition, this would go a long way in doing the right thing.