California Bill Lets Renters Escape Exclusive Deals Between ISPs and Landlords (arstechnica.com)
- Reference: 0179192292
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/09/12/2030208/california-bill-lets-renters-escape-exclusive-deals-between-isps-and-landlords
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/09/california-snubs-cable-lobby-with-bill-to-boost-isp-competition-in-rental-housing/
> The [2]bill says that by January 1, a landlord must "allow the tenant to opt out of paying for any subscription from a third-party Internet service provider, such as through a bulk-billing arrangement, to provide service for wired Internet, cellular, or satellite service that is offered in connection with the tenancy." If a landlord fails to do so, the tenant "may deduct the cost of the subscription to the third-party Internet service provider from the rent," and the landlord would be prohibited from retaliating.
>
> The bill [3]passed the state Senate in a 30-7 vote on Wednesday but needs Gov. Gavin Newsom's signature to become law. It was approved by the state Assembly in a 75-0 vote in April. Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom, a Democratic lawmaker who authored the bill, told Ars today that lobby groups for Internet providers and real estate companies have been "working really hard" to defeat it. But she expects Newsom will approve. "I strongly believe that the governor is going to look at what this bill provides as far as protections for tenants and sign it into law," Ransom said in a phone interview.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/09/california-snubs-cable-lobby-with-bill-to-boost-isp-competition-in-rental-housing/
[2] https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1414/2025
[3] https://legiscan.com/CA/rollcall/AB1414/id/1601642
You just know.... (Score:3)
You just know that there is a good chance at any point in the future that California could REQUIRE landlords to provide access to internet services, either included with the rent, or at the cost of the landlord, and fine them for not providing such services. Why? Because, of course, it would be unfair to expect renters to procure internet access on their own, or endure the higher cost of individually billed service as compared to discounted whole-building access.
Re: (Score:2)
You've got a double whammy there though as the landlords don't want to do it as it would require more responsibility for them and the ISPs don't want it since they probably make more money from 300 individual customers than a bulk line.
Not that it isn't a good idea, I know housing developments that do it but it'll be lobbied against pretty hard as a law.
Re: (Score:1)
You have odd fantasies.
The landlords will find a way to block it (Score:2)
They could for example allow the renter to opt out of the preselected broadband deal but say no to any new installations by not allowing to dig/drill to install new cables, under the pretext of needlessly damaging the property.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
About that... [1]https://www.houstonchronicle.c... [houstonchronicle.com]
[1] https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/texas/article/texans-pay-more-in-taxes-than-california-data-show-17390051.php