FCC’s Net Neutrality Proposal Has Built-In Loopholes

Phillip Dampier February 1, 2010 Editorial & Site News, Net Neutrality, Public Policy & Gov't Comments Off on FCC’s Net Neutrality Proposal Has Built-In Loopholes

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is not happy with the Federal Communications Commission’s proposed Net Neutrality rules because they come with built-in loopholes, the most egregious being a clause which allows providers to throttle, block or otherwise interfere with traffic that could consist of “the unlawful distribution of copyrighted works.”

The movie and recording industries have been attacking Net Neutrality for months, accusing it of providing a copyright-violating-free-for-all.  The FCC seems all-too-willing to adopt that meme, and write a convenient lobbyist-friendly loophole into Net Neutrality policies that would suggest provider interference with broadband networks is bad… except when this or that special interest redefines it as “good and lawful network management.”

For years, the entertainment industry has used that innocent-sounding phrase — “unlawful distribution of copyrighted works” — to pressure Internet service providers around the world to act as copyright cops — to surveil the Internet for supposed copyright violations, and then censor or punish the accused users.

From the beginning, a central goal of the Net Neutrality movement has been to prevent corporations from interfering with the Internet in this way — so why does the FCC’s version of Net Neutrality specifically allow them to do so?

The EFF is asking consumers to sign an online petition asking the FCC to yank that exception out of their proposed Net Neutrality rules, and let the industry use existing law enforcement methods to protect copyrighted works.  Of all the industries that seem to do just fine zealously efforting to protect its copyright interests, Hollywood and the music industry don’t need additional special protection clauses inserted into broadband policy law.

Law enforcement can use existing laws to chase crime, and most honest Internet Service Providers would tell you they don’t want to police their users.  Allowing this exception is a convenient backdoor to do what some have wanted all along — to throttle or block high volume network traffic like torrents and newsgroups, this time under the guise of taking a bite out of crime.

While directly appealing to the FCC might be more effective, signing the petition at least gives the EFF the ability to draw media and political attention to a worthy endeavor.

Let’s not repeat the same mistakes certain other major policy initiatives have endured this past year, where good intentions were steamrolled by lobbyists into a loophole-ridden, industry-protectionist horror show.

The best way to ensure an open and free Internet is to literally demand exactly that — no exceptions.

Bad Actor: Telecom New Zealand’s Repeated Mobile/Broadband Outages Plague Country

Phillip Dampier February 1, 2010 Competition, Telecom New Zealand, Video, Wireless Broadband Comments Off on Bad Actor: Telecom New Zealand’s Repeated Mobile/Broadband Outages Plague Country

New Zealand Telecom

Telecom New Zealand is under fire as consumer groups, business leaders, and customers condemn the company for a second major outage wiping out wireless mobile broadband and cell phone service for tens of thousands of customers on the South Island.  Dunedin, Invercargill, Timaru and Queenstown were among the areas worst affected for the service problems impacting the company’s much-touted “XT” WCDMA network.  Affected customers could not access mobile broadband, send or receive text messages or phone calls for several days.

Company officials believe a piece of hardware installed at multiple cell tower sites is responsible for the network outages.  It’s just the latest of a never-ending series of problems for New Zealand’s largest telecommunications provider.

In December, a botched software upgrade brought another major outage for the provider, which now risks being defined by customers as unreliable.

Telecommunications Users Association chief executive Ernie Newman said, “From here, it looks bizarre. Even third world countries don’t experience outages of that magnitude and length.  The first time before Christmas people were forgiving. This week has made people think. But they cannot afford a third time.”

The expensive promotional campaign launching the “XT” 3G UMTS network was itself highly controversial when the company decided to use British actors in its advertising campaign, annoying New Zealanders.  Although a company official touted the “world class advanced XT network” as capable of speeds better than 20Mbps, the company’s website notes average customers are more likely to find speeds somewhere in the 3Mbps/750kbps range.

“After marketing XT as a Rolls-Royce brand, Telecom will be looking at ways to rehabilitate it in consumers eyes,” telecommunications analyst Rosalie Nelson told the New Zealand Herald.

The damage control teams have moved into place, and Telecom today announced a $5 million (NZ Dollars) compensation package for customers south of Taupo who were impacted:

Customers whose service was degraded on Wednesday 27 January:

  • Prepaid consumer customers – $10 credit
  • Postpaid consumer customers – One week’s worth of plan charges, including Telecom Extras, such as texting or data packages
  • Telecom Retail SME customers and Gen-i corporate customers – Two weeks’ worth of plan charges, including Telecom Extras, such as texting or data packages

Customers whose service was severely impacted for up to three days between Wednesday 27 January and 10pm Friday 29 January:

  • Prepaid consumer customers – $20 credit
  • Postpaid consumer customers – Two weeks’ worth of plan charges, including Telecom Extras, such as texting or data packages
  • Telecom Retail SME customers and Gen-i corporate customers – Four weeks’ worth of plan charges, including Telecom Extras, such as texting or data packages

Telecom is also donating more than $250,000 to community projects across the lower South Island.

The company’s problems got extensive media coverage, including daily reports on New Zealand’s national news.  Customers were outraged, many spending hours trying to reach Telecom by phone.  Many others argued their way out of service contracts, penalty-free, and switched to Vodafone, the country’s other major wireless provider.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/TV New Zealand Telecom Outage 1-27 1-29-10.flv[/flv]

TV New Zealand’s One News ran several days of reports on the service outage, all presented here in this compilation. (17 minutes)

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Telecom Parody 1.mp4[/flv]

Telecom New Zealand has been on the receiving end of parodies assaulting the company’s quality of service.  This one calls on residents to switch providers. (Strong Language Warning – 2 minutes)

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Telecom XT Parody.flv[/flv]

Another parody reworks one of the promotional advertisements Telecom ran to introduce its XT service to New Zealand. (2 minutes)

Rogers Wanted Competitors to Pay for Fleeing Customers’ Unpaid Bills, Then Said ‘Never Mind’

Phillip Dampier February 1, 2010 Canada, Competition, Rogers Comments Off on Rogers Wanted Competitors to Pay for Fleeing Customers’ Unpaid Bills, Then Said ‘Never Mind’

Rogers Wireless has withdrawn a proposal placed before Canadian regulators to force its competitors to pay up ex-customers’ unpaid cell phone bills.

In mid-January, Rogers filed a request with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) requesting the agency force other cell phone companies to make good on any past due balances left when customers switched providers.

When other providers didn’t get on board, the company withdrew the proposal.

Rogers’ proposal would have left a customer’s new cell phone provider on the hook for any past due charges left on that customer’s final bill.  With early termination fees running well over $100, that’s a big tab to drop on Canadian cell phone companies, particularly for new entrants in the marketplace.

Providers would have had to require verification of a “clean break” from a previous provider before taking on new customers, creating bureaucratic red tape, and a built-in incentive to hold customers in place.  But the company first advocated the proposal as a solution to the problem of past due balances.

“Customers porting out mid-contract with unpaid balances are costing Rogers, and most probably other wireless carriers as well, millions of dollars each year,” the company said. “The task of collecting these unpaid balances is made much more difficult once a customer ports their number to a new carrier as the relationship has been terminated.”

Rogers claims the problem of unpaid balances on canceled service became a problem after the advent of number portability in 2007.  Customers switching providers can keep their existing cell phone number.  With even greater competition in the Canadian wireless marketplace, customers are more willing than ever to take their business elsewhere, occasionally not paying their last bill.

Critics accused Rogers of trying to throw roadblocks up to make switching a hassle.

Michael Janigan, executive director at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, a consumer watchdog, told CBC News Rogers’ move is an attempt to slow down the loss of Rogers’ market share.  Rogers’ new competitors, including Wind Mobile, and better prices from Telus and Bell are prompting customers to switch.

“This is the clear downside of long-term contracts for a supplier and now they want regulation to solve a problem brought about by market forces,” he said.

The provision would have benefited Rogers in at least two ways:

  1. It would give Rogers advance warning a customer was prepared to switch, as soon as a new provider inquired as to that customer’s final balance.  That would allow Rogers to reach out to the customer with special incentives like retention deals, which could persuade a customer to stay;
  2. Competitors would have had to build in a delay before they agreed to finalize a provider change, so they didn’t expose themselves to past due penalties from the former provider.  That inconveniences customers who would have to wait for their old provider to send a balance verification.

When asked why Rogers simply didn’t turn over past due balances to collection agencies, the company claims that method is not particularly effective.

“Collections and risk management systems are in place to mitigate the impact, but … the effectiveness of these measures is limited, especially in cases where the unpaid balance is significant,” the company said.

Some other Canadian providers weren’t impressed with Rogers’ proposal.

“Telus couldn’t disagree more with Rogers on their proposal,” said spokesman Jim Johannsson. “It’s not consumer focused, it’s not transparent, doesn’t promote consumer choice and runs counter to everything we are striving for as an industry.”

The blowback from customers was far worse.  A sampling:

“Canada has diversified its wireless market from Robbers and Bhell to allow for companies like Wind to offer much better prices/services & “CUSTOMER SERVICE”. What exactly is Robbers going to do? Send Jack Bauer? Their sub-par overpriced service deserves this. As Canadians we need to start a revolution against these monopoly giants who just leech off vulnerable middle-class Canadians. Even after we wash our hands of them, they still reach for our wallets.”

“Burn your bridges Rogers, keep tickin’ off your customers, and have the gall to expect their competitors to help them. It’s a tough world when you are not a monopoly, eh?”

“Rogers, they’re leaving you high and dry after you sucked the life out of your customers.  You expect respect when none is given. How the tides have turned.”

A few days after comments like that, Rogers flip-flopped and caved:

“We decided to withdraw it as it just didn’t seem appropriate,” said Jan Innes, a Rogers spokesperson.

Sunday Funnies

Phillip Dampier January 31, 2010 Broadband Speed Comments Off on Sunday Funnies

Courtesy: LukeSurl.com and thanks to Stop the Cap! reader Nathan for passing it along....

Comcast’s March to Digital – The Case of the Missing Channels… Solved

Phillip Dampier January 27, 2010 Comcast/Xfinity, Video 21 Comments

City by city, Comcast is continuing its quest to make the switch to digital cable for an increasing portion of  its cable programming lineup.  Although the majority of subscribers will encounter letters from Comcast switching only a portion of the analog cable lineup, it’s a safe bet Comcast is looking to an all-digital future sooner or later.

Coming less than a year after the switch to digital broadcast television, the march to digital cable is causing confusion for subscribers who don’t understand the difference.

Analog cable television has been around for more than 20 years in most American cities.  It’s the kind of cable television that doesn’t usually need a converter box on top of the TV.  Just plug the cable line into the back of your television set, let the TV find and map available channels, and you can use your standard TV remote to enjoy basic or enhanced basic cable television.  Of course, if you subscribe to premium channels like HBO or Showtime, a box is required to descramble the encrypted signal.

Cable operators began launching “digital cable” in the 1990s, expanding the lineup of programming with hundreds of new channels that are compressed into a digital format, with a half dozen or more digital channels fitting in the same space used by just one analog channel.  Space on the cable line is getting increasingly crowded as cable systems launch new HD channels, support telephone service, and expand broadband service and speeds.

To make room, several of those old school analog channels have to go… digital.  If you already have a set top cable box — you probably won’t even notice the changeover.  But if you don’t have one of those boxes in your home, and your television doesn’t support CableCARD technology, Comcast has some bad news for you.  Sooner or later, you’ll either have to get a set top box or lose an increasing number of channels on your cable dial.

Comcast's digital adapter doesn't support HD channels

Comcast’s digital cable expansion is their solution to the traffic jam on their cable lines.  Some other cable companies take a different approach.  Knowing that many customers hate cable boxes, they’ve left analog channels alone, instead transmitting digital channels only to those homes actually watching them.  If nobody in your neighborhood is watching Current or Fox Business News, why waste the space to send those signals down the line to… nobody.  Time Warner Cable doesn’t for many of their digital channels.  If one lives in an eclectic viewing neighborhood, there are problems with this approach.  Potentially, if enough homes want to watch these lesser-viewed networks, and Time Warner runs out of the space it sets aside to carry a certain number of these channels, the subscriber will see a video busy signal — a message stating the channel is temporarily not available, at least until someone nearby changes channels, making room for the network you want to watch.

Comcast's digital solution is a problem for those who hate "the box" for weaving a rat's nest of cables behind one's television.

In most communities, Comcast will provide up to three digital adapter boxes at no charge, if you install them yourself on each television in your home.  Additional boxes are usually $1.99 per month.  That’s fine if you are still using an older television set and don’t care about HDTV programming — the digital adapters Comcast provides don’t support HD.  If you do want HD channels, you’ll need Comcast’s traditional converter box, which runs about $7 a month per television, or a CableCARD, if your television supports it.  Comcast also has elaborate instructions for customers with multiple TV inputs to support both standard and high definition signals, some through the digital adapter, others not, but it requires a lot of cables.

Customers who loathe boxes and don’t want to pay for them are upset by all of the changes, and either must cope with the new box, or gradually lose more and more analog channels as the conversion continues.  Broadcast basic customers getting only local channels from Comcast are unaffected by all of this, at least for now.  Owners of modern HD television sets aren’t impressed either — their sets, capable of receiving QAM digital cable channels without a box are no help because Comcast encrypts its digital cable lineup in many areas.

But the company still thinks of the project as a service upgrade for its customers, even dubbing it Project Cavalry on their company blog. When one customer wondered why the new equipment wasn’t available in his area yet, a company blogger responded, “We will not be “cherry picking” … all our systems will get the benefits. The Comcast Cavalry just hasn’t swept through your area yet, stay tuned.”

When asked why the devices don’t support HD channels, the response:

The DTA was designed as a low-end, basic device to do one thing and one thing only … convert digital signals back to analog for display on an analog TV. That’s all, no higher end outputs, no VOD, no HD, no interactive guide. Keeping the device simple as described is what kept the price down enough that we can provide so much free equipment to our customers. Also, the RF output makes it compatible with the absolute maximum number of TVs, which is critical to the program. As a digital device, however, it does offer dramatically-improved picture quality over analog even through the RF output.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Comcast DTA Tutorial.flv[/flv]

Watch Comcast’s tutorial on installing their Digital Adapter. (4 minutes)

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Comcast Digital Migration.flv[/flv]

Watch a coast-to-coast series of news reports detailing the Comcast transition to digital, starting with the message customers see on their now-missing favorite channels. (15 minutes)

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!