Provides relative to internet speed. (8/1/18)
The enactment of SB 409 significantly alters how internet providers operate within Louisiana, instituting standards that require fair billing practices. It positions consumer rights at the forefront by ensuring that customers only pay for the service they receive. Violations of this bill are classified under deceptive and unfair trade practices, thus subjecting providers to potential penalties under existing consumer protection laws. Such measures enhance consumer trust in internet services, aiming to create a more equitable market environment.
Senate Bill 409, proposed by Senator Riser, addresses internet service providers' obligations regarding consumer billing for internet speed. The bill mandates that all internet providers must charge customers based on the actual speed delivered rather than the speed plan purchased. If a provider fails to deliver the promised speed, they are required to credit the customer's account for the equivalent percentage of the undelivered speed within thirty days following the billing cycle. This legislation aims to protect consumers and promote transparency in internet service billing.
General sentiment around SB 409 appears to be positive, particularly among consumer advocacy groups who view it as a necessary safeguard against unfair billing practices in the internet service industry. Legislators supporting the bill have argued that it promotes fairness and accountability from internet providers and that it is a crucial step towards better consumer rights in an increasingly digital economy. However, skepticism exists among some business interests, concerned that stringent regulations could lead to increased operational costs for providers.
Notable points of contention concerning SB 409 focus on the potential implications for internet service costs and provider flexibility. Critics of the bill worry that the enforcement of strict billing practices may lead to higher prices for consumers as providers adjust to compliance and possible penalties for violations. There are concerns that these regulations might stifle competition in the market by imposing heavier operational burdens on smaller providers. Balancing consumer protection with the need for a competitive market remains a significant issue in the ongoing discussions surrounding this legislation.