YouTube says T-Mobile is downgrading videos. Does that violate net neutrality?

T-Mobile's 'Binge On' program downgrades video quality for almost everyone, YouTube complained this week. That could violate net neutrality, which forbids Internet providers from throttling traffic except in special circumstances.

Richard Drew/AP/File
YouTube argues that T-Mobile is downgrading all streaming video, not just that of "Binge On" partners. Here, people are shown passing a T-Mobile store in New York on October 14, 2015.

When T-Mobile introduced its “Binge On” streaming program last month, the premise was simple: watch Netflix, Hulu, and other services at lower-than-HD quality on your phone, and that video won’t count against your monthly data allowance.

But on Tuesday, YouTube accused T-Mobile of lowering the quality of all video delivered to its subscribers, not just the video that’s part of the Binge On program. 

“Reducing data charges can be good for users, but it doesn’t justify throttling all video services, especially without explicit user consent,” a YouTube spokesman told The Wall Street Journal.

T-Mobile automatically enables Binge On for any customers who have a data plan of 3 GB or more per month, including those with unlimited data plans, although customers can choose to opt out of the program. And T-Mobile applies the lower-quality streaming, which it says in advertisements is at least “DVD quality,” to all video apps. In other words: customers can opt out of Binge On, but they might not know how – and if they don’t, they’ll find all their video, not just what’s delivered from Binge On partners, down-sampled to less than HD quality.

YouTube, owned by Alphabet (formerly Google), says this policy runs afoul of net neutrality rules put in place earlier this year by the Federal Communications Commission. Those rules say that Internet providers may not throttle traffic flowing across their networks, except for technical reasons, such as easing network congestion. By throttling video data, T-Mobile is unfairly discriminating against all video applications, YouTube says, and interfering with customers’ ability to access important services. T-Mobile didn’t directly respond to YouTube’s accusations, but chief executive officer John Legere tweeted on Tuesday that customers have “complete control to turn [Binge On] on/off at will.”

Binge On has already caught the attention of some net neutrality advocates who argue that it and other “zero rating” programs offer an unfair advantage to content providers who can afford to make deals with Internet providers. The FCC has said that it will examine zero-rating policies on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they violate net neutrality principles, but so far it hasn’t publicly voiced any concerns about such programs. At a meeting in November, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler described Binge On as “highly innovative and highly competitive.”

FCC officials sent letters earlier this month to Comcast, AT&T, and T-Mobile, asking the companies to explain the technical and policy details of their zero-rating programs. Company representatives will meet with the FCC early in 2016, according to The Washington Post.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.