Comments on: Breaking News: Alex Dudley From Time Warner Claims Earthlink Customers Will Be Capped

By: Phillip Dampier

Phillip Dampier — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 21:11:46 +0000

We have still never a heard a word about this from their corporate offices. The company can be emphatic about the answer “no” as long as TW stays backed off away from their tiering plan. I wonder if Earthlink is available in Beaumont, which is already capped. If so, it would be interesting to learn what the status of the service is there.

By: earthlink? - no bandwidth caps in austin

earthlink? - no bandwidth caps in austin — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 20:46:22 +0000

[...] Stop the Cap! · Breaking News: Alex Dudley From Time Warner Claims Earthlink Customers Will Be Capp… [...]

By: Ståle

Ståle — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 21:09:29 +0000

I switched to Earthlink today as well, and when asking flat out in the chat session if they will be introducing caps, the answer was ‘no’.

By: wickstopher

wickstopher — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:28:13 +0000

@mazakman

Just wondering, is that with their advertised 7mbps plan?

By: Dave D.

Dave D. — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 14:39:50 +0000

What the article doesn’t say is that in 2005 the Supreme Court of the United States overturned a federal court decision that would force cable companies to share their infrastructure with Internet service providers such as Brand X and EarthLink.

Then in 2006 EarthLink and Time Warner simply extended an agreement under which EarthLink sells its broadband Internet service over TW’s cable modem network.

Anyone who believes that the TW attorneys prepared a document that gave EL rights to determine bandwidth, caps etc. on their network is in denial.

By: Mazakman

Mazakman — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:31:20 +0000

Potential Earthlink cable customers here in Rochester…be informed that the speed is the same as RR.. 10/384 service. This has been confirmed by a local new EL customer who posted in my thread in the RR forum at DSLReports. Also a speedtest result was posted there by this person.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 23:49:09 +0000

I just did the internet chat with Earthlink and got pretty much the same reply as wickstopher.

A small copy/paste of the chat:

Ricky W.: This is a best effort technology with speeds up to 7.0mb on the download and up to 384kb on the upload.
Ricky W.: There is no charge for the standard professional installation, $29.95 per month for your first 6 months and then just $41.95 per month after that.
Ricky W.: The best part is that it does not have a contract therefore you will not be under any sort of obligation. There are no cancellation fees as well.
Rachel: So I am wondering- are you going to be doing the internet restriction caps in Rochester as well?
Ricky W.: NO,our service is with Unlimited access.
Rachel: excellent! That is what I needed to know

Now I know that things can change in an instant. He is probably just a rep or unaware of what was happening in Rochester. But I am hoping it is true.

By: Earl Cooley III

Earl Cooley III — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 22:14:10 +0000

That brings up a point: how will usage caps affect libraries and internet cafes? I can see cafes going out of business or being forced to jack up their prices over this, and, in general, kill free wifi in collateral damage. As for libraries, their funding is already traditionally precarious; they don’t need another big chunk torn out of them over caps.

By: Phillip Dampier

Phillip Dampier — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 19:38:10 +0000

This is an experiment to test whether consumers will revolt over usage caps. In my humble opinion, imposing ANY cap for users at a time when this company is increasing its broadband profits, and bandwidth delivery costs are declining, is unreasonable.

Caps are profit grabs and band-aids. Existing Acceptable Use Policies offer plenty of provisions to quietly and effectively deal with that small percentage of customers who are bumping up to the 1TB of usage a month… that’s 1000GB.

There are better ways to manage this than imposing punitive caps on residential customers. And asking for $150 for “virtually unlimited” service that is priced at $39 today is a rate hike even the oil companies wouldn’t try.

By: Dave Wright

Dave Wright — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 19:16:17 +0000

TWC will watch their customer base move to other sources because of this low cap on BW. 200GB cap is more reasonable for the $41.95 price. I will leave TWC if they leave the cap at 40GB.

Thanks,
Dave Wright