High gain Wi-Fi antennas like this one allowed one Ontario couple to leave Canada's cable companies behind and sign up for Time Warner service in the United States.

Last week, Stop the Cap! compared prices from two Internet Service Providers — Rogers Communications on the western side of the Niagara River — in Ontario, and Time Warner Cable on the eastern side in Niagara Falls, N.Y.

The price disparity is no secret to one Canadian family who read our piece and let us know they import their broadband service, thanks to long distance Wi-Fi, from the United States.

The couple, Neil and Michelle (we’ve been asked not their reveal their real names) and their three boys have lived along the Niagara River, which divides the United States and Canada, for over a decade.  Jim has been fascinated with low power, long distance communications since his days in amateur radio.

“I’ve always been trying to see what stations I can pick up, especially low power ones,” Neil tells us.

That curiosity came with Neil to his interest in broadband wireless communications.  Living along the river, Neil was fascinated to see Wi-Fi signals make their way across the river from the United States’ side.

“Thanks to a clear shot across the river, and a lot of businesses located adjacent to the Robert Moses Parkway, it’s easy to pickup Wi-Fi signals from businesses on the American side,” says Neil.

Neil discovered many networks wide open for public use and began to consider the implications of “importing” his broadband service from the United States to escape Rogers’ high prices.

“For Canadians, the idea of escaping the country’s communications providers is not that unusual,” Neil says.  “Some already have ‘gray market’ satellite dish accounts with America’s DISH or DirecTV, and some even use American prepaid cell phones, which are much cheaper than our own services and get good local reception across Niagara Falls down to Fort Erie.”

“So I began wondering what would happen if we could install a decent Wi-Fi system high enough on the house to get a good signal from a partner on the other side of the river,” Neil pondered.  “We started by putting a test signal up and driving through some Niagara Falls neighborhoods on the American side and found some good prospects.”

A long-shot advertisement on a well-known “for-sale/trade” website paid off, when an American family responded, intrigued by the experiment.

“The fact we were willing to pay their cable bill as compensation didn’t hurt either,” Neil suggests.  “The chances appeared very good for success, because we can see some of their trees from our roof.”

Niagara Falls, Ontario (left) and Niagara Falls, N.Y. (right), divided by the Niagara River.

Neil guessed right because today, with the help of two raised directional, roof-mounted high-gain Wi-Fi antennas that can literally “see” one another, the Ontario family enjoys its cable-TV and broadband service from Time Warner Cable.

“The signal is rock solid and the only time we get some speed problems is if someone in one of the bed and breakfast places nearby ends up on our channel,” Neil says.  “We can even watch television with the help of a Slingbox we installed on the American side which works perfectly fine on a Wireless N connection.”

Since the rise of Canada’s exchange rate against America’s declining dollar, the savings are dramatic. A comparable cable-TV plan with Rogers runs $80 a month for standard service, equipment fees, and HD service charges.  Add another $50 for broadband service with the modem rental fee and Neil would pay Rogers $130 a month before taxes for the two services.

“And we would be limited to just 60GB of usage per month before the $2/GB overlimit fee started making the bill even higher,” Neil says.

Time Warner Cable currently charges Neil’s adopted family $87 a month for television and broadband on a promotion.

Today, Neil’s conscience (and savings) led him to decide “borrowing” another family’s account wasn’t fair, so now he pays for -two- accounts with Time Warner, one for the New York family, the other belonging to him.

“Time Warner thinks of us as apartment renters and bills a post office box,” Neil says.  “The other family doesn’t care about cable-TV anymore so we’re just paying for their broadband account.”

The neighbors are certainly amused.

“When they come over, they call us ‘the American Embassy in Niagara Falls’ because of all the ads for Time Warner they see across the cable channels we get and because American cable systems ignore virtually all Canadian TV networks.”

Why go through all this?

“Now that we’re paying for two accounts, it’s a matter of principle,” Neil says. “I will not do business with a company that slaps usage limits on broadband, and now I don’t have to.”

In fact, now that the family’s sons are getting close to teen years, their Internet use is growing.

“We almost don’t care about the cable-TV anymore ourselves — we’re watching shows online, on-demand in this household,” Neil says.  “For my kids, they are growing up with the concept of television being always on-demand and it works around their schedule, not the other way around.”

Besides, Americans have access to Hulu, and Canada does not.

“Hulu is very important, and Netflix was even before it was sold in Canada,” Neil says.  “Now we can watch what we want, as much as we want, and pay a fair price for unlimited broadband.”

Neil can’t complain about Time Warner Cable, except for the fact it provides him with a U.S. IP address, which locks him out of a lot of Canadian online video-on-demand services from the CBC and other networks’ websites.

“They do a much better job than Rogers ever did with consistent broadband speeds and fewer outages, and we can live without replays of 18 to Life and Little Mosque on the Prairie,” Neil says. “I’m just glad you folks at Stop the Cap! convinced Time Warner to abandon the kind of pricing that is ruining the hell out of Canada’s broadband.”

A snake in the grass?

You used 50 kilobytes of data visiting a web page on your iPhone, but AT&T claims the site actually consumed six times that — 300 kilobytes, for which the carrier overcharged you for access.

A major point of contention for consumers facing Internet Overcharging schemes is that the same company with a vested interest in maximizing revenue from such schemes also administers the meter that measures how much you used.  There is no oversight or independent verification.

In a lawsuit filed this week, AT&T Mobility faces accusations it is systematically overcharging iPad and iPhone users for data services many never used.

Patrick Hendricks claims AT&T’s Internet Overcharging “was discovered by an independent consulting firm retained by plaintiff’s counsel, which conducted a two-month study of AT&T’s billing practices for data usage, and found that AT&T systematically overstate web server traffic by 7 percent to 14 percent, and in some instances by over 300 percent.”

The lawsuit compares the company’s billing system to a gas pump that charges for a full gallon when it only dispenses nine-tenths into your tank.

Hendricks’ suit also claims the same independent testing firm confirmed AT&T charges for data usage even when phones and iPads were disabled for data sessions, push notifications, location services, and other data features.  After 10 days, the firm found AT&T had billed 35 data transactions totaling 2,292 kilobytes of usage, akin to being billed for gas when you never even pulled into the station.

The complaint admits the individual overcharges are relatively small for most consumers, but collectively they earn massive profits for AT&T.

“AT&T has 92.8 million customers. In the fourth quarter of 2010, AT&T reported its wireless data revenues increased $1.1 billion, or 27.4 percent, from the year-earlier quarter, to $4.9 billion,” the suit claims. “A significant portion of those data revenues were inflated by AT&T’s rigged billing system for data transactions.”

The lawsuit is seeking class action status and refunds of alleged overcharging for impacted customers.

The firm handling the case, Bursor & Fisher, has tangled with cell phone providers before, winning cases against Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile.  The firm is also exploring a lawsuit against Sprint on behalf of Evo owners who paid a $10 surcharge on top of an “unlimited” data plan.

NY City Council members are reviewing an application by Time Warner Cable and Cablevision to offer Wi-Fi services in 32 New York-area parks… for a fee that could bring the companies as much as $10 million dollars a year in new revenue.

The controversial proposal would frustrate efforts by the nonprofit group NYCWireless to find free Wi-Fi providers to deliver service in New York’s public parks.

In September, the city of New York renewed franchises for both Cablevision and Time Warner Cable that included a commitment to spend $10 million to install Wi-Fi service in area parks.  But nobody said the companies had to provide the service for free.

Instead, users will only get free samples — up to three ten-minute sessions per month.  Additional time on the network will cost 99 cents per day.  Cable customers will get unlimited access for free.

Dana Spiegel, executive director of the nonprofit NYCWireless, says handing over the wireless space in public parks to private fee-based providers is “absolutely unconscionable.”

City council members don’t have a final say over the deal — a state commission does — but intends to investigate the deal and its fairness to New York residents.

Verizon FiOS has a growing presence in New York City, and those customers would be locked out of free Wi-Fi access on the proposed park network.

NYCWireless offered the council several reasons why relying on cable companies to deliver public park Wi-Fi was not a great deal:

First, the plan does not establish any form of “Free Public Wi-Fi”, an amenity of New York City parks since NYCwireless began our work, and one replicated by the Parks Department and many other organizations around the City. Free Public Wi-Fi Hotspots were a very significant recommendation of the Diamond Consulting “Broadband Needs Assessment Study,” and the “Free” part of these public hotspots are exactly the part of these amenities that make them so valuable and essential for local residents.

Make no mistake: DoITT’s plan establishes a $1 per day fee for internet service in parks. There may be a few free 10-minute blocks per month, and there may be ways to hide the $1 per day charge in a resident’s cable service internet bill, but with DoITT’s plan, NYC won’t have Free Wi-Fi. We’ll have $1 per day Wi-Fi, delivered to public spaces that are maintained by our tax dollars, paid to a couple of huge private corporations.

In fact, Cablevision and Time Warner Cable stand to make tens of millions of dollars per year providing this service. Central Park gets about 25m visitors per year, and if we ignore all other parks, and figure that fewer than half of those visitors buy one day of internet service per year, Time Warner Cable and Cablevision get paid $0.99 x 10 million visitors = $10,000,000.

Second, the industry standard for gaining access to such types of subscription service as are contemplated by DoITT and the cable companies requires that a prospective user of a fee-based Parks Hotspot will need to create an account and enter their billing information. This requires the submission of identity, address, and credit card information into a web form prior to gaining access to the hotspot. Essentially, by promoting this solution, DoITT is pushing NYC citizens and visitors to hand over deeply personal and secure information to a private organization over which neither the user nor DoITT has any control.

Contrast this to the way that NYCwireless offers free Wi-Fi to citizens: we do require registration of a user account so that we can track agreement to our Acceptable Usage Policy. However we require only a valid email address. No billing address, no credit card, no other identity information.

Personally, I am fearful of handing over such information to such private organizations, though I have in the past. But I am more fearful for the harm that will be done to those that depend more significantly upon Park Hotspots. How many city residents don’t have a credit card? How many children in playgrounds who couldn’t get a credit card even if they wanted to? Adults? How many city residents live in neighborhoods that are otherwise safe, but in which they would prefer not pulling out their wallet and a credit card just to get what should be Free Internet Access? How many city residents depend upon Free Wi-Fi because they live below the poverty line, and because they can’t afford or don’t want cable internet, cannot afford the $5 it would cost them to get internet access in a city park during the week?

Lastly, because of DoITT’s “whole package solution”, most NYC residents and visitors won’t see any Wi-Fi, for free or for fee, for years, since local organizations that would otherwise have sponsored the creation of a Free Public Wi-Fi Hotspot say “oh, well, the city is going to do this someday, so we won’t bother doing this now for our community.” If past experience is any predictor of future performance, it will be years before the first Paid Wi-Fi Hotspot is opened, and many more before many others are opened, if at all. Meanwhile, DoITT’s actions will have stopped in its tracks any plans for more hotspots that local organizations may be contemplating.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/NY 1 Time Warner Cable Offers Free WiFi Hotspots For City Customers 3-26-10.flv[/flv]

NY1 reported on Time Warner Cable’s expanded Wi-Fi hotspots in New York in this story from last March.  (1 minute)

Rogers, one of Canada’s largest telecom companies, will do anything to sell you their 3G wireless broadband Rocket Stick, even if it means scaring you away from using their own Wi-Fi hotspots.

Michael Geist, a popular columnist in Toronto, called Rogers about another matter, but the customer service agent soon began asking if Geist’s family used a laptop to access public Wi-Fi networks.

When I said that I did, he asked if I knew the dangers of using public Wi-Fi, which I was told included the possibility of hackers accessing my data or inserting viruses onto my computer.  Given the risks, the agent continued, might I be interested in the Rogers’ Rocket Stick?

Geist was completely unimpressed with Rogers’ attempts at upselling through scare tactics.

“Mobile internet services are good products that can and should be sold on the basis of the convenience they provide, not by scaring consumers into thinking that alternative access services are unsafe,” Geist wrote.

More importantly, the irony of Rogers’ statements can’t be missed, as Geist notes:

• Rogers operates hundreds of public wifi hotspots across the country. When promoting its hotspots, it describes them as providing “high-speed, secure access to the Internet.”
• Rogers permits Internet tethering from many smartphones. Many users may find that tethering provides a more cost effective solution than purchasing yet another mobile Internet device.  The agent did not mention this alternative.
• There are risks with public wifi, but those can be mitigated through a variety of steps on users’ computers. Advice on what do include Microsoft’s advice on public wifi networks, Lifehacker on how to stay safe on public wifi networks, and Ars Technica on staying safe at public hotspots.

Stories about the risks of Wi-Fi are not limited to Rogers.  Several media outlets have been running stories ranging from the plausible:
[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CTV British Columbia – How to secure your Wi-Fi surfing 10-7-10.flv[/flv]

CTV in Southwest Ontario reports some area residents believe Wi-Fi causes diabetes and other ailments and wants Wi-Fi pulled from schools.  (7 minutes)

Also not to be missed are Rogers’ impenetrable “Flex Rate Plans.”  Would it not be easier to just say customers will be charged the amount of the rate plan that corresponds with their actual usage?

Flex Rate Plans
Rogers unique Flex Rate service automatically adjusts the monthly fee based on your actual monthly usage. As you use more or less data, Rogers Flex Rate Data Plan will automatically roll up or down to the next best rate available. This guarantees you the best rate based on actual usage.
Tier	Monthly Fee	Data Included**	How Rogers Flex Rate Works
1	$35	500MB	You will start each month at Tier 1. If your monthly usage exceeds 500MB, then you move up automatically to Tier 2 and will be charged $40.
2	$40	1GB	If your monthly usage exceeds 1GB, then you move up automatically to Tier 3 and will be charged $55.
3	$55	2GB	If your monthly usage exceeds 2GB, then you move up automatically to Tier 4 and will be charged $70.
4	$70	5GB	If your monthly usage exceeds 5GB, $0.05 per additional MB will be charged.

Monthly prices above do not include the Government Regulatory Recovery Fee*

The Associated Press reports, and Stop the Cap! can confirm AT&T is allowing some of their long-standing customers to switch back to unlimited data plans, even if they gave them up after the company introduced cheaper, limited data plan options.

After our regular reader “PreventCAPS” sent word AT&T was relenting on some requests for unlimited data plans, we spent some time late this afternoon with Jim Scott, an AT&T customer from New Rochelle, N.Y. as he navigated his way through AT&T customer service trying to get back to an unlimited data plan.

“When AT&T offered customers new, cheaper data plans, I never knew those replaced the unlimited option and I thought I could save some money downgrading to a cheaper data option,” Scott told us.

But Scott discovered the plan allowances he got didn’t save him money at all, because he exceeded them.

“I am a contractor and I spend all day on my phone moving large image files and even video of work being done on the properties I manage,” Scott says.  “Two gigabytes didn’t cut it.”

Scott tried to switch back to his unlimited plan this summer, but was told he could not, as it was no longer offered.

Enter Verizon Wireless, which is keeping its unlimited service plan at least temporarily as it introduces the Verizon iPhone.  Verizon’s imminent iPhone has become leverage for customers who want to turn the tables on AT&T.

“Thanks to AT&T’s greed, I had already made the decision to dump them for Verizon when my contract ends in February,” Scott says. “AT&T works fine in this part of New York, and the only reason I am leaving is because they don’t have a wireless data plan that met my needs.”

We worked with Scott and suggested he threaten to cancel his AT&T service and walk his future business to Verizon Wireless.  We asked him to make sure to tell AT&T the reason he was planning to cancel his service was because of the end of unlimited data option.

On a three-way call with AT&T customer service, AT&T promptly offered to restore Scott’s access to its discontinued unlimited data plan.

“All I had to say was ‘Verizon’ and ‘iPhone’ and the customer service representative immediately starting clacking away on her keyboard, and I had my unlimited data plan restored in less than five minutes,” Scott said.

The AP reports the key to success is having been a previous subscriber to AT&T’s unlimited data option.  New customers who signed up after June 2010 never had that option, and AT&T has refused to offer unlimited data to these customers.

Because newer customers are under relatively new contracts, actually following through on a threat to drop AT&T is an expensive proposition with early termination fees still well into the hundreds of dollars.  For those closer to a penalty-free exit, AT&T recognizes many of these customers already have one foot out the door.

Jose Argumedo, of Brentwood, N.Y., told the AP he and a friend were switched to an unlimited plan recently after they called AT&T’s customer service. Both have iPhone 4s, and previously had earlier iPhone models.

AT&T spokesman Mark Siegel wouldn’t confirm the option to return to an unlimited plan.

“We handle customers and their situations individually, and we’re not going to discuss specifics,” he said.

Scott says he is comfortable with his iPhone, but getting back an unlimited data plan was more important than the handset.

“If I can use the iPhone as leverage against these guys, why not?” Scott says.  “They’ve had me under their thumb for more than six months now with overlimit fees — now the table is turned.”

Stop the Cap! advises customers who want to follow in Scott’s footsteps get organized before calling:

1. Be sure to note the number of years you have been an AT&T customer;
2. Explain you used to have unlimited data and now want that plan back;
3. Tell them you are prepared to drop AT&T, even at the risk of a cancellation fee, if they don’t restore your access to the unlimited data plan.

If a representative is unable to make the switch, or doesn’t have information about how to switch you back, ask for a supervisor or hang up and call back.