If you were following along with me yesterday on Facebook or Instagram, then you might already know that I got the Photon 4G mobile hotspot from FreedomPop. Backed by one of the co-founders of Skype, FreedomPop pushes the notion that the Internet is a right and not a privilege.
You see, unlike all of the major wireless providers in the United States, FreedomPop is willing to provide you with wireless 4G service for free; you just have to put down a security deposit for the mobile hotspot device (they also have a USB dongle and an iPod touch sleeve).
Bringing the Cost to Zero
Yes, the free service is limited to just 500MB of data each month and coverage is a little spotty (they use the WiMAX network from Clear, but have signed a deal to use Sprint’s LTE next year), but it is free . This post isn’t really meant to be a review of FreedomPop–I’ll do that at a later time–but this kind of game-changing philosophy really got me thinking. Should Internet access be free? Is it really a basic human right, or is it still one of these first world luxuries and privileges, like network television and indoor plumbing?
You might remember during the earlier days of the Internet when we all paid for dial-up access, but there was a company called NetZero that gave you free home Internet. You just had to put up with ads. NetZero has since resurfaced and is offering a similar product as FreedomPop for mobile Internet access.
Offering Location Freedom
Yes, I know that you can go to the public library or certain government buildings and get free Internet access. You can go to a coffee shop or shopping mall for access too, but these are bound to physical locations. Mobile Internet frees you from that limitation (when it works). Remember that major wireless companies are charging $50 or more a month for that kind of access.
But is your ability to get online and post pictures of your sleepy cat really a right? I’m not so sure.
Expecting More Free Stuff?
And what about all the things that have become free on the Internet? Want a 10GB+ email inbox? You’ve got it. Want a free website? Tumblr and WordPress.com can do that. Want to make a voice or video call to someone halfway around the world? Skype has you covered. YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia… the list goes on. They may have some sort of premium model or upgrade, but there is something there for free. Going back to FreedomPop, that’s true too. They have bigger data buckets that you can pay for, but the basic 500MB plan is free. If all these websites started charging everybody, we’d be outraged.
I realize I could open a big can of ethical, philosophical and political worms, but we really have to think about what should and should not be a basic human right. Clean running water? A general sense of safety? Basic health care? Electricity? Affordable or even free and omnipresent access to the Internet?
What do you think? And do you think companies like NetZero and FreedomPop are really going to change the way we think about the wireless industry?
UPDATE: My review of the FreedomPop Photon 4G is up on Mobile Magazine. It’s a good idea in theory, but it needs help with coverage and execution.
The internet is becoming a utility.
I pay for electricity at home, but if I need electricity at an airport, hotel, or coffee shop, I’m free to grab a spare port.
The internet wants to be like that too – you’ll pay for high speed and convenience at home, but soon “the wild” will be awash with free internet.
That’s an interesting way to put it. Good analogy.
+1, mostly
I still see it as a telecommunications service to the home. It’s as important as telephone and TV service: if you use them, then they are valuable. The price should decrease as more and more people use the service, to the point that it’s a mere commodity. Free WiFi everywhere with hardpoints here and there for large transfers should be as common as a drinking fountain or bathroom.
However, it’s unessential. It’s vital for people to have electricity and such necessary for heat in the winter, and consumer protections are in place (in .us, and I assume in .ca, too) to ensure that peoples’ heating and cooling utilities aren’t cut off at a dangerous time.
It’s most certainly not a right – we must be very careful as to what we determine are rights, because if something unnatural is a right, then the right-granting entity must provide it. Unless the government wants to capitulate to my demand that I be provided with free Internet in the middle of the desert or tundra, it’d be best not to throw around the word “right” too much.
Just out of curiosity, would you say we have a right to education?
The thing is in Canada we already pay the telco and ISP for internet, we gave them money , tru subsidies on r&d and accessibility grants , so that internet is accessible everywhere for everyone , witch they absolutely do not provide btw , they also just take most of the money and turn back and charge us insane fee , and throttle or bandwidth for the sake of media corporation lobyism who also use our own money to scrap our right to have the best service , compared to the rest of the world , and deliver very basic offering and service.
Would I mind sharing my internet connection if it where unlimitted , as it used to be , and foot the bill for the small electricity needed to share it ? Absolutely not.
We used to pay for searching the net , google and other free search engine changed that , why not with internet itself ?
Would you mind if say Google gave you a mini flying drone robot to carry around with you on top of your car or shoulder or on your ears ( glasses ) to cover data and share internet for free and even pay you in some cases ?
It seems silly to refer to the internet as a necessity but honestly, if I didn’t have the internet tomorrow, I’m really not sure how I’d get anything done.
I’d be in favor of free basic access for all with an ad supported model but I don’t see internet access ever being free. I mean, water and electricity cost money…so does food. Seems like those should be free before the internet.
I honestly can’t wait until they’re on Sprint and their coverage is expanded. This would be *great* for my grandparents, who cannot afford even the $35/mo DSL plan which is the cheapest in their area.
As long as their usage is minimal… as I said, the “free” plan is only 500MB.
I’m not entirely sure I agree.
I think I can see an argument that it should be unlimited bandwidth, but at slow speeds.
I see advantages to both methods, and I’m not sure which is the “correct” one, necessarily. Perhaps the user could have the choice of either?
Isn’t there a price to pay for everything? Or should I say, “someone” pays the price for that free product or service. Whether it’s through ads or a pro version over and above the free version. There is a cost and someone does pays it. After all, it is the latest model for new age marketing and we all know that FREE is the radical new price.
I say use it and enjoy it. There is a revenue driving business model behind it so don’t feel over privileged, someone is picking up the tab.
Thank you “someone”!
You need to pay for the service of using someone’s infrastructure. It doesn’t just get put there, nor is the cost of maintaining it free. The provider has to pay employees or another contractor to maintain and support that bandwidth, so that cost needs to be offset, with payment to use it by the consumer.
A free hotspot isn’t really free because somewhere the cost is being offset by some sort of compensation, somewhere like the purchase of a cup of coffee, an airline ticket, etc. Some people will not pay anything, but all the others that do make up for them. It’s the “All you can eat” buffet principle, a majority of people will only eat a normal serving, which offsets the Stephen Fung’s of the world.
I think we’re on slightly different wavelengths. I meant free in that it is free to the end consumer in some form. Starbucks might pay for the infrastructure of a Wi-Fi hotspot, but it is free for the public to use. In that particular example, they used to require you to log into your Starbucks account (and fundamentally prove you’re a customer), but now you just have to accept the T&C splash page. And they don’t place a time limit on the connection anymore either. In effect, it’s “free” to the user.
Michael, you pay even for free. You think the costs of the infrastructure isn’t built into the cost of what you pay? It is….You are paying all the time for any convenience you get anywhere you go, you just don’t see it as a cost because it is built in.
Ray, that’s a really good point, but I’d like to raise a couple of exceptions (which don’t serve to disprove your point, but rather to show that it isn’t always true): if you use the free wifi of a restaurant or company without using their service: for example using MacDonald’s free wifi at an eatery, but you went to have KFC, or if you’re in a city with public wifi and you use that, when you don’t pay taxes in that area.
In the case of Freedompop, 500MB users are “free,” but their cost is being offset by people who are taking on the paid plans. That’s true, but it does mean that for the people on just the 500MB plan, *they* do get “free” Internet access.