problem Wheeler has with those qualifications is that none of them relate to the question of network congestion or ensuring a high quality of service for Verizon
customers. Instead, they selectively target a group of people who have refused to move to the much more expensive "Share Everything" plans that Verizon prefers for bilking
money out of its customers.
Wheeler's letter notes that while the FCC recognizes network management as a logical act for any telco,
Reasonable network management concerns the technical management of your network; it is not a loophole designed to enhance your revenue streams. It is
disturbing to me that Verizon Wireless would base its "network management" on distinctions among its customers' data plans, rather than on network architecture or
technology.
The letter then goes on to demand an explanation for the behavior, including a description of why heavy users on paid data plans won't be throttled, while heavy users on
unlimited data plans will be. Wheeler wants an explanation for why these limits apply only to consumers on 4G LTE when the 3G network is much less efficient, and why
Verizon feels it can justify these behaviors given that the terms of its 700MHz spectrum purchase forbid it from denying, limiting, or restricting the ability of end users to
download and utilize applications of their choice. This last may be dodged (Verizon will argue that it's not a restriction if it throttles a user's entire device, but it's the closest
we've seen Wheeler come to bringing down the hammer on bad practices.
In response, Verizon told Ars Technica that " The purpose is to ensure there is capacity for everyone in those limited circumstances, and that high users don't limit capacity for
others."
Except that's obviously not true. If the purpose of throttling was to ensure that capacity was available for all, then the throttling would be applied to every user equally. The
purpose of Verizon's plan is to shove people towards metered data regardless of whether or not such plans suit their needs.
