Hank Hultquist, AT&T’s federal regulatory vice president, is taking questions on broadband Internet policy in an upcoming Washington Post piece.
Here is your chance to question AT&T about broadband issues ranging from Internet Overcharging schemes like usage caps and rationing experiments, Net Neutrality, U-verse and DSL broadband expansion, and AT&T’s involvement in the public policy arena.
AT&T is currently seeking major changes to the $8 billion Universal Service Fund that helps subsidize phone service for rural Americans. AT&T wants to see that fund expanded to subsidize broadband improvements, which will directly benefit AT&T as it is among the top recipients of USF funds. With 16 million current broadband customers and a service area that extends into the often-rural midwest and southern parts of the country, AT&T could receive a windfall in federal funds to pay for broadband service it doesn’t provide many areas today.
But what kind of broadband service will AT&T offer? The company recently concluded a trial limiting use of its AT&T DSL service to customers in Beaumont, Tex., and Reno, Nev. AT&T claims it is currently analyzing the results of that trial, and could bring usage limits on all of its customers. Feel free to pose your own questions in the comments section of the Washington Post article (reg required) or sending an e-mail to Cecilia Kang ([email protected]) no later than Friday morning.
Scott Cleland, who runs the dollar-a-holler, broadband-industry funded astroturf group Net Competition already has his question in:
Shouldn’t those broadband Internet users (consumers or big businesses), who use the most bandwidth and benefit the most from faster more ubiquitous broadband, contribute relatively more to the Universal Service fund than those consumers and businesses that use much less bandwidth? Isn’t that the basic fairness principle that has long undergirded the current Universal Service fund, which is based on long distance usage/minutes?
Scott Cleland
Chairman, NetCompetition.org an eforum supported by broadband interests
Do you want to pay the higher broadband bills that Cleland advocates?
Kang promises to include as many of your questions as possible and post the Q&A early next week.
Tim Conway's "Old Man" character from the Carol Burnett Show would be right at home using the Internet in these areas.
Nick Saint at the Business Insider has been sifting through some of the raw data released last week by the Federal Communications Commission regarding broadband service in the United States. He’s managed to identify the 10 worst counties in America for broadband service based on statistics from 2008. But two of those probably should have never been on the list. More on that later.
Harrison County, Mississippi — A single pond in Harrison County is the only known habitat of the critically endangered dusky gopher frog. It doesn’t have broadband, and neither do most of the residents of this beleaguered part of southern Mississippi. The cities of Gulfport and Biloxi are in Harrison County, an area torn up by hurricanes from Camille to Katrina. Now, the beaches are coated in BP oil. Harrison County can’t get a break. Cable One and AT&T are the primary providers. Cable One’s dreadful service only reaches well-populated areas and AT&T has taken its sweet time expanding DSL service in the area.
Imperial County, California — The nation’s lettuce basket, Imperial County communities live on a very low fiber-optic diet. While the soil is rich for crops, the people who plant and harvest them are not. El Centro, the biggest city, has some broadband available, but with the city having the nation’s highest unemployment rate (27.3 percent), many can’t afford it. Once in farm country, cable doesn’t offer service and DSL is hard to come by.
Corson County, South Dakota — Representative of the pervasive problem of broadband unavailability on Native American lands, a large part of Corson County includes the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. Saint notes the FCC found just 12.5 percent of Native Americans subscribe to broadband service, compared to 56 percent of the rest of us.
Ector County, Texas — Odessa’s hometown America-charm was put on display for all to see on NBC’s Friday Night Lights, which celebrated small town high school football. The reality is less exciting. Like Harrison County, Ector residents are stuck with Cable One, which loves Internet Overcharging schemes and spied on its Alabama broadband customers. Good ole AT&T grudgingly provided DSL, if you could get it, until mid-2009 when U-verse finally started to show up. Now large parts of the county outside of Odessa can’t get that either.
San Juan, Puerto Rico — Usually considered an afterthought by American telecommunications companies, Puerto Rico has long suffered with low quality service. Caribbean Net News: “Puerto Rico’s broadband penetration rate is unacceptable, with less than 40% of households subscribing to broadband services”, said Carlo Marazzi, President of Critical Hub Networks. “While there are many factors at play, broadband in Puerto Rico is simply too expensive and too slow, when compared to the rest of the nation. Broadband Internet service in Puerto Rico is 60% more expensive and 78% slower than the United States national median. In a report published this year by the Communication Workers of America (CWA) which ranked broadband speeds in the 50 states, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico was ranked in last place (52nd place).
Jasper County, Missouri — Saint noted 18 percent of Jasper County lives below the poverty line, which is not exactly attractive to broadband investment. Jasper County’s broadband needs are barely met by a cable provider, AT&T, and for some, an electric utility operating a Wireless ISP, providing service where cable and DSL don’t go. For Jasper County residents, the challenge can be cost as much as access.
Appomattox County, Virginia — Every student known Appomattox was the last stand of Confederate leader Robert E. Lee during the Civil War. Today, residents there are worked to their last nerve because they can’t easily obtain high speed Internet. There is no DSL service from the phone company and only limited cable service. But at least the county is trying. Let’s let John Spencer, assistant county administrator, tell you in his own words what Appomattox County is doing to deliver broadband for its 14,000 residents:
Bristol Bay Borough, Alaska — The epitome of rural America, large swaths of Alaska are dependent on subsidies paid from the Universal Service Fund for basic telephone service. Outside of large cities, cable television is a theory. Telephone company DSL service and wireless are the predominate broadband technologies in rural, expansive Alaska. For many areas, both are awful. Bristol Bay Borough is known as the “Red Salmon Capital of the World,” if only because there are far more salmon than there are fishermen to catch them. Internet access for many of the area’s 953 residents means a trip to the Martin Monsen Library, which offers free Wi-Fi for limited access. If you want Internet at home, it will cost you plenty:
Wireless Internet Access – Bristol Bay Internet/GCI
$26/month
Up to 56K up/down
1 e-mail address
5 MB e-mail storage
1 GB data throughput
Limit 1 computer
$51/month
Up to 56K up / 256K down
2 e-mail addresses
5 MB storage per address
5 MB of web space
2 GB data throughput
Limit 1 computer
$101/month
Up to 56K up / 256K down
4 e-mail address
5 MB storage per address
10 MB of web space
3 GB data throughput
Limit 3 computers
That is the most expensive and slow “broadband” we’ve ever encountered, and with a usage limit of just 3GB per month, it’s for web browsing and e-mail only.
Saint’s report also noted two other counties that were, at least according to the FCC’s data, among the ten worst in the country — Wake and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. That includes the cities of Charlotte and Raleigh, which clearly have had access to at least 4Mbps service for several years now. Even Saint is skeptical, suspecting incomplete data is perhaps responsible for the two North Carolina counties ending up on the list.
AT&T’s idea of “unlimited service” has its limits. Five gigabytes to be exact, as some customers are now learning.
Weeks after promising AT&T customers enrolled in unlimited smartphone data plans that they could keep them, AT&T is now calling some subscribers of an earlier unlimited plan, telling them they need to limit their use of the “unlimited service.”
AT&T’s Data Connect Unlimited plan was discontinued by AT&T back in 2008, but the company promised current customers they could keep their unlimited plan. But now, the company has started calling customers when they exceed 5GB of usage during a month.
The Washington Postreports AT&T has been sending mixed messages to customers, and is cracking down on those customers exceeding the company’s arbitrary limits.
“We’ve had a small group of customers on a DataConnect 5GB plan who were not being charged for overage when they went beyond that limit,” she wrote. “We’re now working to bring their accounts in line with the policy for the other DataConnect 5GB plan subscribers.”
Clark added that users who had signed up for AT&T’s earlier Data Connect Unlimited plans (which it stopped selling in 2008) could keep using them, but if they made “certain changes to their account” — for instance, transferring it to a new line — they would have to sign up for a new $60 plan with a 5-gigabyte usage cap.
That comes as news to several AT&T customers who have been in touch with the Post, who were switched, without permission, to limited service plans when they made minor changes to their account or were told AT&T was going to end unlimited service for all AT&T customers.
Rob Pegoraro, who writes the Fast Forward column for the Post, notes AT&T’s customer-care staff seems a little confused about these matters. He advises users with old, unlimited-data plans should be prepared for lengthy calls to customer service — and keep careful records of their interactions with the company.
Phillip DampierJuly 21, 2010Data Caps, Verizon, Wireless BroadbandComments Off on Engadget Hints the ‘All You Can Eat’-Data Party Ends for Verizon Smartphone Owners July 29th
Verizon hopes to herd its smartphone owners onto limited use data plans
We’re hearing that Big Red intends to move to some sort of tiered bucket strategy on July 29. We don’t have details on whether the pricing will be identical to AT&T’s ($25 for 2GB, $15 for 200MB), but we imagine it’ll be within shouting distance if not. Of course, Verizon has been sending this message for a long time — even before AT&T was — so it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that this is going down. You might say that Droid Does Caps, eh?
Verizon and AT&T have followed each others’ relentless price increases, tricks and traps for the last few years — forcing customers to accept mandatory service “add-ons” when buying the latest phones, paying higher costs to terminate contracts early, and driving customers onto higher priced service plans bundling services and features many customers do not want.
It therefore comes as no surprise Verizon would follow AT&T’s lead on severely restricting customers’ data use, even though Verizon does not suffer from the level of congestion AT&T has.
We expect Verizon will announce data pricing identical to that offered by AT&T.
However, existing customers can be grandfathered into today’s unlimited plans, so if you think you’ll need unlimited data on Verizon’s network, you have until the end of the month to sign up for a plan should Engadget’s report turn out to be true.
Phillip DampierJuly 20, 2010Competition, Data Caps, Wireless BroadbandComments Off on Time Warner Cable Now Pushing One Road Runner Mobile Plan: National Elite’s Unlimited 3G/4G Service
"Without limits" is ironic from Time Warner Cable, whose CEO still believes in Internet Overcharging schemes, even if customers don't.
Time Warner Cable has stopped promoting three different service plans for its Road Runner Mobile wireless broadband service. The company’s new promotional literature and website now promotes just one mobile plan — National Elite, with three different prices depending on what kind of business you do with the cable company. It also does away with Internet Overcharging schemes, promoting an “unlimited data allowance” regardless of whether you access the service over 3G or 4G networks. That’s ironic, because Time Warner Cable’s CEO Glenn Britt is still a big believer in consumption billing schemes and usage limits. Should Time Warner Cable ever return with new overcharging schemes, we’ll be sure to remind them about the implications of providing unlimited wireless service while trying to restrict the much larger wired pipeline Road Runner’s cable-based network provides.
As we reported last year, when Time Warner Cable introduced Road Runner Mobile last winter in North Carolina, the company offered three different service plans for customers considering signing up:
National Elite: Unlimited access to Clear WiMax and Sprint’s 3G EVDO Rev. A network for $79.95 per month to customers who also take the Road Runner Standard or Turbo cable modem service. Time Warner promises further discounts if customers subscribe to the cable provider’s double or triple-play cable service bundle which includes cable internet access and digital phone service.
Mobile Elite: Unlimited access to mobile WiMax for $49.95 per month and pricing also applies when bundled with the Standard or Turbo cable modem service with an additional bundle discount available.
Mobile 4G Choice: Caps mobile WiMax use at 2 gigabytes per month and will sell for $39.95 per month if customers add at least one other Time Warner cable service.
Now, as the company introduces the service in upstate New York, customers are getting promotions online and off for only one plan — National Elite.
Pricing appears to be standardized in most regions of the country, depending on what kinds of services you already receive from Time Warner Cable:
Current Road Runner subscribers will pay $54.99 per month for National Elite;
Current Time Warner Cable subscribers and those without cable or broadband service will pay up to $69.99 per month.
(Several cities in Texas can obtain special pricing promotions reducing the cost to $49.99 per month for 12 months. Ask about special promotional pricing if you intend to sign up.)
Customers can select a plan that includes a two year service agreement with a $175 early termination fee (reduced by $7.50 for each month you remain a customer) and receive a substantial discount on a wireless modem and get the $35 activation charge waived. Non-contract customers will have to buy their equipment at full price and pay the activation fee. 4G network speeds are up to 6 Mbps for downloads, and up to 1 Mbps for uploads. 3G network speeds are up to 1400 Kbps for downloads, and up to 500 Kbps for uploads, according to the Time Warner Cable website.
Plans directly available from Clear, which actually provides the Road Runner Mobile service are different:
Clear On-the-Go provides 4G-only service for $40 a month. No 3G service.
Clear On-the-Go 3G Upgrade includes unlimited 4G service and up to 5GB of 3G usage for $55 a month.
Get Two: Home + On-the-Go includes service for one home computer and one portable computer, with no 6Mbps download speed cap, for $55 a month (add $15 for 3G service)
Get Two: On-the-Go includes service for two portable computers, with no download speed cap, for $65 a month (add $15 for 3G service for one computer, $30 for two)
A $35 activation fee applies to non-contract customers. If you agree to a two-year contract, you can lease your equipment from Clear starting at around $5 per month and have the activation fee waived.
Now the fine print.
Although Clear markets its 4G service as “unlimited,” the fine print suggests they can make life difficult for customers they consider “disrupting or degrading” the service for others (underlining ours):
Excessive Utilization of Network Resources. Wireless networks have capacity limits and all customers can suffer from degraded or denied service when one or a small group of users consumes disproportionate amounts of a wireless network’s resources. Clearwire, therefore, will monitor both overall network performance and individual resource consumption to determine if any user is consuming a disproportionate amount of available resources and creating the potential to disrupt or degrade the Clearwire network or network usage by others. This process of monitoring both overall network performance and individual resource consumption is consistent with the description of the nature of the Service previously described in this AUP. Clearwire reserves the right to engage in reasonable network management to protect the overall network, including analyzing traffic patterns and preventing the distribution of viruses or other malicious code.
During periods of congestion, Clearwire uses various techniques such as reducing the data rate of individual bandwidth intensive users whose use is negatively impacting other users. This temporarily limits the amount of bandwidth available to the bandwidth intensive users until the congestion has diminished, at which point Clearwire will endeavor to lift any limits it may have imposed on bandwidth intensive users during the period of congestion. Clearwire may also consider historical usage patterns when temporarily reducing the data rate of bandwidth intensive users during periods of congestion. When feasible, upon observation of an excessive use pattern, Clearwire will attempt to contact you by telephone at the telephone number you gave to us or otherwise to alert you to your excessive use of bandwidth and to help you determine the cause. Clearwire representatives also are available to explain this AUP and to help you avoid excessive use incidents. If you are unavailable or do not respond to Clearwire’s attempt to contact you regarding excessive use, or if excessive use is ongoing or recurring and repeatedly having negative effects on other subscribers of the Service, Clearwire reserves the right to immediately restrict, suspend or terminate your Service without further notice in order to protect the network and minimize congestion caused by the excessive use. While the determination of what constitutes excessive use depends on the specific state of the network at any given time, excessive use is determined by resource consumption relative to that of a typical individual user of the Service and not by the use of any particular application.
Unlimited Use Plans.If you subscribe to a service plan that does not impose limits on the amount of data you may download or upload during a month, you should be aware that such “unlimited” plans are nevertheless subject to the provisions of this AUP. What this means is that all of the provisions described in this AUP, including those that describe how Clearwire may perform reasonable network management such as reducing the data rate of bandwidth intensive users during periods of congestion, will apply to your use of the Service. The term “unlimited” means that we will not place a limit on how much data you upload or download during a month or other particular period, however, it does not mean that we will not take steps to reduce your data rate during periods of congestion or take other actions described in this AUP when your usage is negatively impacting other subscribers to our Service.
Be Sure to Read Part One: Astroturf Overload — Broadband for America = One Giant Industry Front Group for an important introduction to what this super-sized industry front group is all about. Members of Broadband for America Red: A company or group actively engaging in anti-consumer lobbying, opposes Net Neutrality, supports Internet Overcharging, belongs to […]
Astroturf: One of the underhanded tactics increasingly being used by telecom companies is “Astroturf lobbying” – creating front groups that try to mimic true grassroots, but that are all about corporate money, not citizen power. Astroturf lobbying is hardly a new approach. Senator Lloyd Bentsen is credited with coining the term in the 1980s to […]
Hong Kong remains bullish on broadband. Despite the economic downturn, City Telecom continues to invest millions in constructing one of Hong Kong’s largest fiber optic broadband networks, providing fiber to the home connections to residents. City Telecom’s HK Broadband service relies on an all-fiber optic network, and has been dubbed “the Verizon FiOS of Hong […]
BendBroadband, a small provider serving central Oregon, breathlessly announced the imminent launch of new higher speed broadband service for its customers after completing an upgrade to DOCSIS 3. Along with the launch announcement came a new logo of a sprinting dog the company attaches its new tagline to: “We’re the local dog. We better be […]
Stop the Cap! reader Rick has been educating me about some of the new-found aggression by Shaw Communications, one of western Canada’s largest telecommunications companies, in expanding its business reach across Canada. Woe to those who get in the way. Novus Entertainment is already familiar with this story. As Stop the Cap! reported previously, Shaw […]
The Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission, the Canadian equivalent of the Federal Communications Commission in Washington, may be forced to consider American broadband policy before defining Net Neutrality and its role in Canadian broadband, according to an article published today in The Globe & Mail. [FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s] proposal – to codify and enforce some […]
In March 2000, two cable magnates sat down for the cable industry equivalent of My Dinner With Andre. Fine wine, beautiful table linens, an exquisite meal, and a Monopoly board with pieces swapped back and forth representing hundreds of thousands of Canadian consumers. Ted Rogers and Jim Shaw drew a line on the western Ontario […]
Just like FairPoint Communications, the Towering Inferno of phone companies haunting New England, Frontier Communications is making a whole lot of promises to state regulators and consumers, if they’ll only support the deal to transfer ownership of phone service from Verizon to them. This time, Frontier is issuing a self-serving press release touting their investment […]
I see it took all of five minutes for George Ou and his friends at Digital Society to be swayed by the tunnel vision myopia of last week’s latest effort to justify Internet Overcharging schemes. Until recently, I’ve always rationalized my distain for smaller usage caps by ignoring the fact that I’m being subsidized by […]
In 2007, we took our first major trip away from western New York in 20 years and spent two weeks an hour away from Calgary, Alberta. After two weeks in Kananaskis Country, Banff, Calgary, and other spots all over southern Alberta, we came away with the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Good Alberta […]
A federal appeals court in Washington has struck down, for a second time, a rulemaking by the Federal Communications Commission to limit the size of the nation’s largest cable operators to 30% of the nation’s pay television marketplace, calling the rule “arbitrary and capricious.” The 30% rule, designed to keep no single company from controlling […]
Less than half of Americans surveyed by PC Magazine report they are very satisfied with the broadband speed delivered by their Internet service provider. PC Magazine released a comprehensive study this month on speed, provider satisfaction, and consumer opinions about the state of broadband in their community. The publisher sampled more than 17,000 participants, checking […]