Comcast and other ISPs objected to a requirement that ISPs “list all recurring monthly fees” including “all charges that providers impose at their discretion, i.e., charges not mandated by a government.” They complained that the rule will force them “to display the pass-through of fees imposed by federal, state, or local government agencies on the consumer broadband label.”

As we’ve previously written, ISPs could simplify billing and comply with the new broadband-labeling rules by including all costs in their advertised rates. That would give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they have to pay each month and save ISPs the trouble of listing every charge that they currently choose to break out separately.

Rejecting the broadband industry’s request, the FCC order yesterday said:

[W]e affirm our requirement that providers display all monthly fees with respect to broadband service on the label to provide consumers with clear and accurate information about the cost of their broadband service. We thus decline providers’ request that they not disclose those fees or that they instead display an “up to” price for certain fees they choose to pass through to consumers.

Specifically, “providers must itemize the fees they add to base monthly prices, including fees related to government programs they choose to ‘pass through’ to consumers, such as fees related to universal service or regulatory fees,” the FCC said.

The FCC was ordered by Congress to implement broadband-label rules. The FCC is requiring ISPs to display the labels to consumers at the point of sale and include information such as the monthly price, additional fees, introductory rates, data caps, charges for data overages, and performance metrics. The FCC rules aren’t in force yet because they are subject to a federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the US Paperwork Reduction Act.

    • lib1 [she/her]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Imagine the size of their codebases. Imagine the amount of things that can be added automatically following a flag set by a manual human review or audit. Imagine the canary branches and the internationalization and the regional offers and the legacy contracts. They may be looking at months just to be able to definitively list all the possible ways they may in theory fuck over their customers

      The FCC may as well start fining them now party-sicko

      • quarrk [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        610 months ago

        Until recently I was a Verizon Wireless customer. Their website is a complete mess. Typos everywhere and I would encounter exceptions every visit. Many times I would encounter loops in their flows and never be able to complete a task. I very frequently had to call in so that a supervisor could just force through what I needed.

        And that’s just the front end.

        I completely agree with you, the back-end billing and other processing is probably a nightmare. From professional experience I can say it can either be quite manageable, or nigh impossible, to make small changes like this depending on how shitty the foundation is.

        I think the ISPs are overdue for a complete overhaul but they can’t/won’t because there is no market or regulatory pressure to spend the money. They literally don’t care how shitty their services are.

        • @Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          They know exactly how shitty their services are, they pay people to use them to make sure that they’re still shitty enough

        • lib1 [she/her]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          210 months ago

          I’ve found that building rules systems that are accessible by middle managers of various departments to be good at keeping the inevitable complexity of business logic away from the codebase itself, as well as in one place.

          Before:

          FooBarMeeting’s integration team has started their testing with our API and the registration endpoint is broken. Looking back through my notes, I was under the impression we’d sorted out their registration requirements six months ago for their last event. We would really appreciate a notice prior to any large changes to these systems so we can prepare. Can I can get an update on this ASAP? Their next event is in three weeks and they’re kind of freaking out!

          After:

          Hey! Just wanted to put something on your radar. FooBarMeeting’s next event is about two months out, so I was going through my prep checklist and spot checking their registration rules. For their last event, we added a new rule that would stop users from registering if they hadn’t completed the disclaimer form (reference ID is 52d7517d-d6a9-4a3c-b28d-68bfd9b2a643). I saw you left a note on it that it would break once they launch their v3 Compliance API, which they say is happening in a couple weeks. I have a follow up with them on Tuesday, so I’ve for details on what breaking changes they expect. I’ll get you the info when I have it. Are you good to get me an estimate for the next sprint once they do?

  • lib1 [she/her]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1210 months ago

    providers must itemize the fees they add to base monthly prices, including fees related to government programs they choose to ‘pass through’ to consumers, such as fees related to universal service or regulatory fees

    The amount of times ISPs falsely blame price hikes on regulation and falsely attribute good deals to their own generosity instead of regulatory windwall is wild.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    610 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The Federal Communications Commission yesterday rejected requests to eliminate an upcoming requirement that Internet service providers list all of their monthly fees.

    In June, Comcast told the FCC that the listing-every-fee rule “impose[s] significant administrative burdens and unnecessary complexity in complying with the broadband label requirements.”

    The five trade groups kept up the pressure earlier this month in a meeting with FCC officials and in a filing that complained that listing every fee is too hard.

    They complained that the rule will force them “to display the pass-through of fees imposed by federal, state, or local government agencies on the consumer broadband label.”

    That would give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they have to pay each month and save ISPs the trouble of listing every charge that they currently choose to break out separately.

    The FCC rules aren’t in force yet because they are subject to a federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the US Paperwork Reduction Act.


    The original article contains 503 words, the summary contains 164 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • HubertManne
    link
    fedilink
    310 months ago

    oh come on. We have so many of them and so many plans for more.

    • JesseoftheNorth
      link
      fedilink
      22
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The FCC is a governmental regulatory body whose leaders are appointed by politicians. Plenty relevance to politics.

    • spaceghotiOP
      link
      English
      1910 months ago

      I’m sure they did, but I don’t know that it’s necessary. Corporations pushing back on government regulation and oversight relating to consumer protection isn’t inherently political?