They need to stop being stupid here and just ban caps and stupid usage limits of a network.
The company can sell you a certain speed, but they should not be able to limit usage or charge by the byte since caps and charging by the byte make no sense at all as costs are not related to usage.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.

Because he always does.
I am going to guess on some civil rights grounds....
Any bets as to why he will object to this?

The link the the FCC pdf is also broken as of this writing

These companies are all subject to the government,.. hence the FCC. The best outcome for all involved is for them to meet on some practical level instead of bickering, suing over every thing (many times over),.. etc.

Some of these MSO's are becoming a bit too 'bold' in what they want to charge , collect/spy, meter, on goes the list. Yes, they are private companies so from one point of view -- you could say,.. they aren't subject to anyone or anything and thus can charge whatever they wish.. have any level of 'disservice' they wish.. cover who they want, leave out who they want and on and on. Basically do exactly what they want how they want.

The governments role I wish was not needed at this point in time -- but we have by majority no real competition in the private sector of broadband/internet. (There are small pockets of it, but for most you either pay whatever it costs for your option or you go without).

The FCC would much rather companies compete with one another everywhere and that inherently create competition which generally creates a better scenario for the "people" of this country. Lower prices, better service (on all levels), etc. They've (the gov/fcc) have allowed many billions of dollars in subsidies to encourage this but it's not worked. It's both the large ISP/MSO's fault and the gov's lack of oversight (along with the lobbying/suits/etc constantly going on).

The FCC with whatever backing they can get from other branches of government should really put the hammer down. Outline complete 'pro consumer' mandates and this time have precise punitive action if they are not followed that means something. The latter hasn't really existed to any great degree.

Though how much is the FCC in the pockets of these companies already to prevent this from really ever happening? I have no clue.. only speculation.

Though America has fallen behind in some very important infrastructure for very poor and preventable reasons. Money isn't the problem, an inability to accomplish these things are not the problem,..

For half the cost of a F-35B jet -- the entire US could be built out with Fiber to the premise service from scratch.

I think the FCC / Gov needs to get all the execs/heads of all the ISP's/MSO's in the country and sit down and slot each one out to their respective territories. Then mandate whatever the final territory/coverage on the map they will/are serving for each company be built in force starting Q1 2017 with an X capable pipeline (with the pro consumer regs) -- Add in 'incentive' based subsidies for stepped completion and operation of say Gbit capable service -- and punitive measures for , well, not doing it. -- They *could* pull out that it's already been subsidized and they must build out on their own dime and (insert some insane early date of completion) -- but seriously settling this coverage and capability of service by years end or so.

I never expect any of the above to happen .. but it would be the 'right' thing to do in general however it worked out.
--
Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced.