Cablevision is using contract workers that have subsequently been accused of sexual assault and theft during service calls.

Last week, a Stony Point, N.Y., subcontractor handling repairs on behalf of the cable company was charged with a misdemeanor sex crime, after allegedly kissing and touching a Cablevision customer without her consent.

Jonathan Malave, 29, of Belleville, N.J., was charged after Stony Point police investigated a complaint filed by a woman in her 20s who claimed Malave made sexual advances while she was home alone.

Malave

Lt. Keith Williams told The Journal News Malave was there to repair the woman’s cable modem, but instead allegedly made unwanted advances towards the woman, first kissing and then reaching down and touching her.

Malave quickly left the customer’s home after the incident without making the repairs and the woman called police.  Malave was picked up by Stony Point authorities within hours, charged with inappropriate touching, and is expected to appear and answer the charges in Town Court on May 15.

This is not Cablevision’s first problem with subcontractors.

In late January, a South Salem, N.Y. customer reported that nearly $100 in change was stolen from her home while a Cablevision technician was there to repair cable-TV wiring.

The customer said the only individual with access to the money, other than herself, was the Cablevision worker.  Lewisboro police later learned the employee hadn’t directly worked for Cablevision, but was in fact a subcontractor working on behalf of the company. Individuals who are also facing similar charges should hire a criminal defence lawyer to ensure their rights are protected. In cases of assault and battery, make sure to contact battery attorneys. You may consult the experts from criminal law Schaumburg for professional legal services. You should also learn how to remove mugshots online if you have a criminal record and mugshot you want to expunge from the internet.

Cable companies increasingly rely on subcontractors to perform basic installation and repair work, and some critics say lax hiring standards can present a risk to customers.

But Cablevision spokesman Jim Maiella told the newspaper, “We take the safety and security of our customers very seriously. We are investigating the matter fully and cooperating with authorities.”

The editor of Fierce Cable believes Cablevision should focus more on protecting subscribers than contractors:

Cablevision refuses to name the contractor that employs him. The company also declined to comment when asked if it performs background checks on employees who visit subscriber homes.

[…] Cablevision may resist detailing the names of its technology suppliers for competitive reasons, but there is no legitimate reason to refuse to share the names of companies it hires to visit subscriber homes. It’s also not unreasonable for Cablevision to share information about whether or not it investigates if an employee has a criminal record before he is allowed to enter the home of one of its subscribers.

[…] Cablevision could better protect its subscribers, and it could also perform a service for its fellow cable MSOs, if it were to disclose the name of the contractor.

Cogeco Cable is cracking down on customers who shop around for a better deal.

After dumping its money-losing Portuguese Cabovisao operation earlier this year, the company is looking to recoup its losses, and Canadian consumers are paying the price.

Chief Executive Louis Audet told investors Cogeco has tightened up promotions, giveaways, and credit standards to weed out bargain hunters and those who ultimately never pay their cable bill.

“If somebody else wants these undesirable customers, they’re theirs for the taking,” Audet said. “There’s too many promotion hoppers out there who are jumping from one supplier to the other.”

Audet

At least 9,000 customers left Cogeco during the second quarter, but that did nothing to hurt Cogeco’s bottom line.  Profits nearly quadrupled to $81.5 million according to Audet, but much of that is due to changes in accounting related to its sold-off Portuguese operation. Closer to home, Cogeco revenue inside Canada grew 12.4% from one year ago to $345.6 million.

Cogeco bought Televisao in 2006 for $465 million.  It sold it in February for just over $59 million.

Cogeco Cable, which serves subscribers in smaller cities and suburbs in Ontario and Quebec, is Canada’s fourth largest cable operator with more than 875,000 cable subscribers. Its biggest competitors are Bell (in Ontario and Quebec) and Telus, which has some landline operations on the Gaspé Peninsula in eastern Quebec.

Most of Cogeco’s promotions and retention offers appeal to customers threatening to take their business to the phone companies. But Audet signaled the promotional pricing had become so aggressive, some customers have learned to bounce back and forth between providers to maintain lower pricing indefinitely.

By tightening up customer promotions, Audet said, the company can achieve a “stable” customer base that pays regular Cogeco prices.

Hastings vents on his Facebook page.

As Stop the Cap! has warned Netflix for years, Internet Overcharging schemes like usage caps, usage-based billing, and speed throttles represent an end run around Net Neutrality. If a provider cannot openly discriminate against the competition, slapping usage limits on them (while exempting favored services from that cap) can eventually accomplish the same thing.

Netflix founder Reed Hastings is finally getting the message after a frustrating weekend watching his Comcast usage allowance bleed away while streaming video.  He shared his views on his Facebook page:

Comcast [is] no longer following net neutrality principles.

Comcast should apply caps equally, or not at all.

I spent the weekend enjoying four good internet video apps on my Xbox: Netflix, HBO GO, Xfinity, and Hulu.

When I watch video on my Xbox from three of these four apps, it counts against my Comcast internet cap. When I watch through Comcast’s Xfinity app, however, it does not count against my Comcast internet cap.

For example, if I watch last night’s SNL episode on my Xbox through the Hulu app, it eats up about one gigabyte of my cap, but if I watch that same episode through the Xfinity Xbox app, it doesn’t use up my cap at all.

The same device, the same IP address, the same wifi, the same internet connection, but totally different cap treatment.

In what way is this neutral?

Comcast says it is “neutral” by framing its own Xbox-streamed video as a “set top box replacement,” even though the video that flows to the Xbox console travels down the same last-mile network Comcast says it needs to “protect” with its 250GB monthly usage cap.

Comcast doesn’t actually need a 250GB usage cap, particularly after the company upgraded its broadband facilities to DOCSIS 3 technology.  That vast improvement in capacity at a comparatively low cost (easily recouped by the company’s latest round of rate increases) should be shared with customers.  Instead of “applying caps equally,” Comcast should abandon them altogether.

[Thanks to Earl, one of our regular readers, for sharing the story.]

Downtown Leverett (Courtesy: Town of Leverett)

Life in Leverett, Mass. could get a lot faster as the community considers entering the 21st century by bringing high speed gigabit broadband to town.

For years, residents have had three relatively slow choices for Internet access: dial-up, wireless or satellite-delivered service.  Verizon and cable companies like Comcast and Time Warner Cable, which have systems in western Massachusetts, have largely ignored Leverett’s need for speed.

Now the town is considering building its own fiber-to-the-home network to reach every home in Leverett starting in 2014.  The proposed $3.6 million network will also offer residents cable television and phone service — helpful upgrades in the western half of Massachusetts where Verizon has allowed their landline network to degrade to conditions declared intolerable by the state Department of Telecommunications.  Last year, the state agency ordered Verizon to assess and repair its landline network in almost 100 communities in the western half of the state.

Town officials will introduce their plans for the new municipal broadband network at a public meeting April 28.  The community would borrow the money to construct the network, paying it off over 20 years and outsourcing its construction and maintenance to outside companies.

The town originally planned a fiber-to-the-neighborhood network similar to AT&T U-verse, but quickly decided the benefits of a true fiber-to-the-home network were worth the extra investment.

Unlike some other community-owned networks, Leverett will raise taxes on local residents to cover the cost of the service, but Selectman Peter d’Errico says it will save most residents money if they currently pay a satellite provider for broadband service. Research shows the largest majority of Leverett residents get broadband from satellite providers.

“It will be a little more on their tax bill and a lot less on their Internet bill, so overall they will pay less,” d’Errico told the Daily Hampshire Gazette.

d’Errico added the local community is done waiting for private companies to deliver modern telecommunications services in Leverett.  Those companies have repeatedly told town officials there isn’t enough profit or return on investment to justify expanding broadband in rural communities.

Leverett hopes to serve as a template to more than 40 other western Massachusetts communities who belong to WiredWest, a consortium of similarly-situated towns working together to build a regional broadband network.  Leverett’s network would leverage the Massachusetts Broadband Institute’s 1,300 “middle mile” fiber backbone network that is working its way through 123 western and central Massachusetts towns.

[flv width=”480″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WGGB Springfield Internet Connection in Leverett 4-11-12.mp4[/flv]

WGGB in Springfield previews Leverett’s efforts for better broadband. Big commercial providers ignore the community so now they want to provide service themselves.  (2 minutes)

Time Warner Cable and Verizon Communications have teamed up to sell both companies’ products to their respective customers, sweetened with a $200 rebate card offer.

The collaboration comes well before the federal government approves a wireless spectrum transfer between the cable operator and Verizon Wireless.  Both companies are under scrutiny in Washington for potentially anti-competitive behavior associated with the joint marketing agreement.

Today Time Warner Cable launched the new promotion in Raleigh, N.C., Kansas City, and three cities in Ohio — Cincinnati, Columbus, and Toledo.  Time Warner expects to expand the offer to other cities later this year.

To qualify for the gift card, customers must activate a new two year contract with a Verizon smartphone or tablet (with data service) and choose either a qualifying new service or upgrade to your Time Warner Cable account.  You must agree to keep the service active for at least 90 days.