'Throttling' Broadband Provider Sued In Australia 130
destinyland writes "Optus has been severely throttling users who exceed a download quota, according to ZDNet — down from 100Mbps to 64Kbps — and it's drawn attention from federal regulators. Optus's ad campaign promises 'supersonic' speeds, and one technology blog notes that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission 'isn't happy about Optus' sensationalist claims, which it's sure breaches the Trade Practices Act.' Australia's trade commission called the practice 'misleading or deceptive,' and the broadband provider now has a date in court next month, the second one since a June hearing over 'unlimited' voice and data plans that actually had usage caps."
Title? (Score:3, Interesting)
shouldn't it be "provider" and not "provided?" the difference is subtle, yet profound...
Re:Title? (Score:5, Funny)
It's only a centimeter if we're talking physical distance between the keys it takes to press each of the letters, so really, it depends on your metric.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
They have 100Mbps broadband here? (Score:4, Funny)
Damn, where do I have to live to get that?
Re:They have 100Mbps broadband here? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh right, I see, any city that's not Perth. Got it!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm having trouble finding any reference to a 100mb/s plan on either Optus' site or whirlpool.net
As for throttling once you've used a set amount of data, that's pretty much standard practice... it's not like they hide it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
As for throttling once you've used a set amount of data, that's pretty much standard practice... it's not like they hide it.
That doesn't make it any less illegal, though.
If I were to post an ad that said "I'm selling chocolate for 1 dollar per kilogram!", people would come and then I would only sell first 100g per customer for that price and ramp the prices up for amount exceeding that... Yeah, it would become obvious to people who showed up and wanted to buy more than 100g but it would still have been false advertising in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As for throttling once you've used a set amount of data, that's pretty much standard practice... it's not like they hide it.
I don't mind caps and/or throttling , but only when it is clearly advertised as such. E.g. in my case there is a 50Gb cap, and it is very clearly present in the description of my plan when I signed up for this. Nor was it advertised to me as "unlimited" at any point before or during purchase.
IMO, any use of the word "unlimited" in conjunction with that is blatant fraud, and should be prosecuted as such.
Re: (Score:2)
It used to be, back in the 90s, you were only given 100 hours (approximately) per month.
Even today some providers like Netzero only give you 10 hours. So "unlimited" advertising in the 90s meant unlimited HOURS not data. In this case they TELL you exactly 200 GB, so you can't claim ignorance of the data cap
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
My understanding of the complaint was not that OptArse was throttling but the way optus had advertised the service.
Throttling is standard practice, nothing you can sue about there but they have to be honest about it as you can sue for misleading advertising, which as I understand it is what the complaint is about.
Re: (Score:2)
>>>As for throttling once you've used a set amount of data, that's pretty much standard practice... it's not like they hide it.
Precisely. If you paid for 200 GB ( and you hit that limit, I think the companies have every right to cut your off completely, just the same as my calling card or cellphone "cut me off" when I run out of minutes. The fact you still have Dialup speed is actually quite generous of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Alright I looked it up.
"Unlimited downloads during peak hours" is what the fine print says. The other plans only let you download 50GB during primetime. I guess it's similar to how cellphones only let you have XX minutes during primetime, unless you specifically buy an "unlimited minutes" plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, where do I have to live to get that?
In the NOC?
Re:They have 100Mbps broadband here? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Anywhere with an Amcom fibre connection. Of course for 10 Mbit/s uncapped you're paying $1,500. I'd hate to think what 100 MB/s costs.
Someone tell me why the NBN is not a good thing again and how Australian broadband is good enough because it's not getting through my 2 Mbit DSL at home.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, where do I have to live to get that?
Well, yeah you can get it, just don't you dare use it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
really TN? might as well tell him to move out to the bush and install a microwave transmitter...
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
really TN? might as well tell him to move out to the bush and install a microwave transmitter...
No, the bush has fewer meth labs and marijuana gardens.
Supersonic speed (Score:5, Funny)
From the summary:
Optus's ad campaign promises 'supersonic' speeds
Well, I'd expect that. I wouldn't like a ping time of 6 seconds per kilometer distance!
Re: (Score:2)
Optus's ad campaign promises 'supersonic' speeds Well, I'd expect that. I wouldn't like a ping time of 6 seconds per kilometer distance!
Nobody expects a sonic transmission!
Re: (Score:2)
Title (Score:2, Informative)
Throttling to 28.8 Kb/s. (Score:5, Informative)
If you don't subscribe to Optus's "premium" tiers, your service can be throttled to 28.8 Kb/s. [optus.com.au] From the Optus price list:
'yes' DSL Basic 200MB
'yes' DSL Unlimited
Yes, they really call it "unlimited", in the same table with the limits. That table isn't easy to find. You have to go through three web pages, then download several Word documents
That's their DSL service. Their cable service has similar tiers and terms, but slightly different pricing.
Re:Throttling to 28.8 Kb/s. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, they really call it "unlimited", in the same table with the limits.
I'm always amazed by people whose frontal lobes are capable of generating and publishing such non-sequiturs without exploding.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My impression is that salesman, marketing people, politicians, and lawyers are often more interested in the effects their words have on others, than the actual soundness of the logic contained therein.
If one can claim that their broadband service is "unlimited" to get increased sales, without being overly sued, I think that's all some of these people care about.
It's evil: they're wil
Re: (Score:2)
Not by those on which it is apparently working? (it wouldn't really be done otherwise)
Re: (Score:2)
Not by those on which it is apparently working?
Yah. Them too. This just goes to show that ignorance is not bliss.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, they came up with a whole marketing campaign based around the notion that information on their internet service travels faster than the speed of sound - these people aren't high on the evolutionary tree as far as frontal lobes go.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Throttling to 28.8 Kb/s. (Score:5, Informative)
Those access fees are quite high compared to some of the competition. Possibly why they are using dishonest advertising to trick people who dont know or care that much into using them instead. Just looking at broadbandchoice.com.au shows several providers offering 150gb for $90 a month. A bit more than 12gb. Worth looking at this comparison http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/bc/?action=search&state=any&class=0&type=res&pre=3000&cost=100&speed=512&upspeed=0&ip=1&contract=99&upfront=999999&needhw=yes&conntype=1&conntype=4&conntype=5&sort=0 [whirlpool.net.au]
Re: (Score:2)
I've been with Optus for 10yrs, my current plan is 170GB for $70/mth (fibre, not copper).
Re: (Score:2)
BT Broadband do the same in the UK. However, they do not tell you what the maximum is on their 'unlimited' tiers. They just cap your download to 64kb/s out of the blue, at a month at a time.
Re: (Score:2)
Just go from here and fill out the forms as you go: http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/ [whirlpool.net.au]
Re: (Score:1)
So there is a shittier ISP than AT&T, i can get either 200 MB for $15 or 2 GB for $25 wirelessly. I understand using less than 200 MB on a cell phone plan, but with multimedia all the shit that you have to deal with on sites these days it is fucking insane to think that 200 MB is enough, software updates alone just for windows or mac I am sure exceed that on a monthly basis.
Re: (Score:2)
The 200 MB plans are used by people like my grandfather who only use the connection every 2 days to check their email. Anything requiring the use of the keyboard is too complicated.
Windows updates are surprisingly small since they are just bug patches and not new features. Updating a fresh XP SP3 I think would use up most of that 200 MB but after that it's way less. If you also factor in apps that update (whether with systray bloatware or check on run) it may run over the 200 MB limit.
200 MB wouldn't last m
Re: (Score:2)
For a long time Telstra was just as bad.
They also called their 10GB, (which later went to 12GB) plan 'Unlimited' (with the other plans being pay per MB over)). They also throttled to 64kbps (and still do), with 128kbps upload at all times (even when uncapped).
At 64kbps the internet is unusable. Certain sites will not load at *all*. The rest you usually have to refresh 4-5 times until it loads anything. Most of the time it half loads, then stops.
I have a feeling it has more than just the speed, because sites
Re: (Score:2)
12GB/month is ~38.8 Kb/s, so you could argue that they raise the speed once you've reached their 'unlimited' limit :)
ISPs, sell yourselves on _service_! (Score:5, Interesting)
With all the negative press these "limited-unlimited" plans have been getting both for cell phones and internet providers, I would think that a marketable slogan might now be:
"Due to the laws of physics, we aren't unlimited, but we'll do the next best thing and make it easy for you to monitor your usage and judge how much you are spending on bandwidth!"
It would be nice to have an ISP that attains success by being honest instead of by lying to their customers.
It seems the "unlimited" thing seems like such a good sell that every ISP feels the need to offer it, even when they can't actually handle the traffic. What ever happened to not selling things you can't offer?
(The corollary of SNL's "Don't Buy Things You Can't Afford.")
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It seems the "unlimited" thing seems like such a good sell that every ISP feels the need to offer it, even when they can't actually handle the traffic
Certain words and phrases are simply irresistible to certain mindsets, even when those words and phrases have long since ceased to have any real meaning. They just can't help it: they're so steeped in dishonesty that they don't really see any other way. If the law does come down on these people and force them to fix their advertising, I'm guessing it will be just as painful to these types as having all of their teeth root-canaled simultaneously.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps we should just let consumers ACTUALLY set their pants on fire. Then we can film it and make it the new reality show.
Re: (Score:2)
Certain words and phrases are simply irresistible to certain mindsets
I can understand that. What I can't understand is why the advertisement regulators aren't on their asses in one millisecond for blatant false advertisement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
<confused
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I always get a laugh when I ask someone how fast their internet is and they respond: "Unlimited!"
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What ever happened to not selling things you can't offer?
ISPs are a business notorious for overselling. It makes less tangible sense today, but think back 15 years ago when each customer needed a physical modem to dial in to. Now everything is digital, so they will cram as many users on the same line as they can until it stops making fiscal sense because of lost customers.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Due to the laws of physics, we aren't unlimited, but we'll do the next best thing and make it easy for you to monitor your usage and judge how much you are spending on bandwidth!"
Too many words. People are stupid. Lies work better. I go now.
Re: (Score:2)
I know one ISP (iiNet) that actually did something similar: instead of making their largest quota unlimited, they made it 1TB then advertised the fact that it was the largest in the country.
And being able to monitor your usage is pretty much a given here - even Telstra/Bigpond showed you how much you'd used (at least they did back when I was with them).
Big deal (Score:2, Informative)
But hey - things can play out different in Oz right? Whatever keeps those delusion flags flying is fine by me.
Re:Big deal (Score:4, Insightful)
Then the FCC should revoke Comcast's license, plain and simple.
Re:Big deal (Score:5, Informative)
The ACCC are quite popular in Australia because they actually make companies behave.
They're the reason you can't enforce DVD region-locking in Australia, for example. (DVDs are still often sold region-locked, but players can play any region.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And they tend to come with a sheet on how to unlock them.
Mind you, they seem to have paid no attention to region-locking of computer DVD players.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's called "government regulation". It actually works outside the United States of corporAtions. FCC can not stop Comcast, because Comcast paid lobbyists who paid congressmen to remove any punishing powers from FCC before it even got them. In any normal country, if the cable operators would be doing to Internet what they are doing now in the US the government would step in and either fine them obsene amounts of money (not a million, but something like 10% of their income until they fix the problem) or just
Re:Big deal (Score:4, Interesting)
Two completely different cases here.
ISP's in Oz cant throttle p2p connections, they can only throttle entire connections and this must be advertised with the service. ISP's in Australia are dumb pipes, doing any kind of throttling or port blocking without the customers knowledge is illegal. That being said, throttling (the entire connection) after a certain cap has been reached is completely legal as long as it has been advertised (customer knows when signing up for the service).
This complaint is because a customer feels that Optus has misrepresented their service in their advertising, not because Optus is throttling (in plain English, Optus was caught lying). As other posters have mentioned the ACCC (Australian Completion and Consumer Commission) our competition watchdog is quite popular and does work, albeit a little slowly.
Limited ISPs (Score:4, Informative)
In germany there's an ISP called kabeldeutschland that claims 100mbit down 6mbit up (its cable + fiber behind).
Except from 6pm to 8am you get less than 1Mbit up/down on every protocol except HTTP. Everyday, no matter how much you downloaded or not (there's no download cap actually).
Quite sucky and probably borderline legal. They documents only say "up to" of course with no mention of the enforced 100k/s limit depending on the time of the day.
Their marketing material however, compares their 100mbit versus the 16Mbit of traditional DSL like the best thing since sliced bread. Except the traditional DSL provides 16Mbit on every protocol internet supports regardless of the time of the day, and is therefore much better. (and cheaper!)
In Which Optus is like Dunhill. (Score:1)
Optus are utilising the same basic tactics that the Tobacco industry uses - they flagrantly dodge strict advertising laws, but all they ever get is a slap on the wrist.
Even if Optus only got a thousand new subscribers with that campaign, then they'll still make a long-term profit if they get fined by the ACCC.
It gets worse... (Score:3, Informative)
Take a look at the plans by Comcen, a smaller ISP that I'm with. Their new ADSL2+ plans throttle off-peak bandwidth down to 2Mbps all the time, even if you haven't exceeded your quota!
See the plans here [comcen.com.au]. Click a plan to get more information, where it will say "Off-Peak Speed: Speed is slowed to 2000Kbps (2Mbps) during off-peak only". All but one of the plans has a permanent throttle on night-time bandwidth.
What if you're a professional who wants to sync or back-up data to your work at night? What if you're a techo like me doing after-hours remote maintenance over a VPN? If you're with this ISP, you won't get a choice, you'll be throttled, even if your physical link can do over ten megabits!
But WHY? (Score:2)
The issue is that you cannot say UN-limited,then promptly deliberately apply a limit.
Forbid flat-rates (Score:2)
To me it seems that flat-rates are never flat-rates, but bets of the providers on a average consumption per user, and that the "outliers" are few enough to ignore their legal complaints or pay them off. Usually the latter is stated somewhere in the fine-print.
this means:
-Provider wins in average because normal user never used the data he pays for by the flat-rate.
-Provider wins even more because he is not even bound to providing a flat-rate, even for those who use more.
My suggestion:
-Line providers and Inte
Supersonic (Score:2)
Does that mean the connection is advertised to be faster than shouting TCP data out loud from the rooftops?
Because they're probably in the clear in that case.
I'd be happy if I got ... (Score:2)
... at least 6mbps, but my service provider throttles everyone.
Almost all Optus connections are throttled ... (Score:2)
But I like it that way (yes, I'm with Optus).
When I had a basic 256kb/64kb sec ADSL connection with Telstra, they charged something like 15 or 20 cents per megabyte if we went over quota. One month I got a bill for $120 on a nominal "$29.95 per month" account.
After an ongoing billing dispute with Telstra (their billing system was an Urban Legend of fail), I paid everything out and we signed up with Optus.
My monthly bill went down, my connection instantly doubled in speed (512/128) and as soon as they instal
Re: (Score:2)
Even if the service was advertised as having no limit ("unlimited")?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It's _called_ Unlimited. Seriously...
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Yeah that means "unlimited time". It used to be, back in the 90s, you were only given 100 hours (approximately) per month. Even today some providers like Netzero only give you 10 hours.
So unlimited time is a nice benefit, and should not be held against the Aussie ISP. Especially when they TELL you exactly 200 GB.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So their other plans not called unlimited are limited time, are they?
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Alright I looked it up. "Unlimited downloads" is what the fine print says. The other plans only let you have a fixed number of downloads during primetime.
I guess it's similar to how cellphones only let you have XX minutes during primetime, unless you specifically buy an "unlimited minutes" plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The other, limited plans only let you have 50 GB during peak hours.
The unlimited plan lets you have unlimited GB during peak hours.
That's the difference. Like some phone plans only let you have 50 minutes during peak; or you can get unlimited peak minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What's this 'unlimited time' crap?
I had cable service back around 1999 and used a NetWare server as a firewall, mostly to play around with filtering ads. Since I had it on 24x7, when the cable company ran a contest and gave a t-shirt to the user with the most hours online, I won. No problem.
The second month, they gave me another t-shirt, and then asked me if I would mind if they gave a third t-shirt to some other user... Well, I said no problem.
Third month, I'm the #1 user again, and the marketing depart
Re: (Score:2)
'Time' doesn't mean anything for online usage.
It does if your ISP limits you to 10 hours per month (netzero or juno). Others like AOL have a 4 hour per call limit and then disconnect you, unless you click a "stay connected" popup. (This can be defeated by killing the AOL bacground program, so you never get disconnected.)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, yes, dialup is constrained by available modems.
I'm thinking more about typical brodband - cable, DSL, wireless.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah that means "unlimited time".
Way to work that weasel. Back in the dial-up days, I signed up with a ISP for an "unlimited" account. I had my account terminated because I was connected too long. It was then explained to me that "unlimited" meant that they didn't restrict where you could browse.
The reality is that the marketing folks really like "unlimited" even when they can't actually deliver. So they won't be truthful and call it the "200GB Plan" or such. Instead, they'll slip in restrictions (or not even document restrictions as
Re: (Score:2)
Way to work that weasel. Back in the dial-up days, I signed up with a ISP for an "unlimited" account. I had my account terminated because I was connected too long. It was then explained to me that "unlimited" meant that they didn't restrict where you could browse.
See? EVERYTHING comes down to net neutrality!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
On an "unlimited" plan, you get for example 50 gig. This 50 gig is at the maximum (theoretically) speed allowed by that plan by the ISP. Should you exceed that 50gig, your speed gets throttled down (or "shaped" to use the weasel word). You still can use your connection to do whatever you want, and for no extra charge, it's just that it's practically near impossible to actually do so when your
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the issue is with what they are doing, simply how they are advertising it on billboards/radio/tv/etc. Even if their website says otherwise, it could still be a problem if they advertise otherwise.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I just looked up their plans. They have multiple tiers, but the AUS$60 plan allows 120GB prior to being throttled
You can buy upto 200GB if you are a heavy user (with 256k throttle when exceeded). That's still 1/3rd my full speed CATV plan and not that bad.
Re: (Score:2)
I just looked up their plans. They have multiple tiers, but the AUS$60 plan allows 120GB prior to being throttled
You can buy upto 200GB if you are a heavy user (with 256k throttle when exceeded). That's still 1/3rd my full speed CATV plan and not that bad.
Yes, I'm on AT&T U-Verse myself, and I'm currently on the 12 mbit/sec tier. I was on the max plan, rated at 18 although I was getting 22, but I decided to save a few bucks a month and back it off to 12. I have to say, Comcast's ridiculous commercials aside, I've been very happy with the service. I used to have Comcast and got less speed and more latency, for more money.
Re:I see no problem with this (Score:5, Insightful)
If the customers desires more than 250 GB, then let him buy more from his Aussie provider.
If that Aussie provider doesn't want to end up in court, let him advertise what he's actually offering. This isn't about the quality of service, it's about their quality of ethics.
I live in the U.S., and it's stories like this that make me feel better when I read other stories about countries where you can buy gigabit services for thirty bucks a month. Of course, one has to wonder whether those services are sold under similar misleading terms. I wouldn't know.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, isn't it obvious? A gigabit service is one which lets you transfer a gigabit of data per month. So don't be surprised if your 4 gigabyte DVD image needs 32 months to download. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
>>>4 gigabyte DVD image needs 32 months to download
Wow that IS slow. Even on dialup it would only take a little over 9 days
Re: (Score:2)
Shh! Don't give 'em any ideas! On the bits thing, either. Next we'll see the marketing claims of 120GB/mo change to the much more favorable 960Gb(its)/mo... (they'll be hard-drive manufacturer "marketing" gigabits too...)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah Australia's service is pretty bad. One of the worst according to these figures by Speedtest.net (average internet speed):
Russian Federation 8.3 Mbit/s
U.S. 7.0
E.U. 6.6
Canada 5.7
Australia 5.1
China 3.0
Brazil 2.1
Mexico 1.1 Mbit/s
Re:I see no problem with this (Score:4, Informative)
Your numbers are out of date, and here's the latest from that website
Mbit/s
11 US/Russian Federation (tie)
10 E.U.
9 Canada
8 Australia
7 China
4 Brazil
3 Mexico
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Yeah, because the experience of the internet is so amazingly different if you're at 8Mb/s or at 11Mb/s.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If that Aussie provider doesn't want to end up in court, let him advertise what he's actually offering. This isn't about the quality of service, it's about their quality of ethics.
This story caught me by surprised; at first I was like "what's the big deal?", because ISPs shaping/limiting connections after you've passed your monthly download limit is standard operating procedure here, and has been for years.
The big thing here is apparently the ISP in question was advertising this service as 'unlimited' and not clearly stating that it was, in fact, limited. This, too, was a bridge we crossed years ago with the ACCC stomping down, hard, on the practice - I haven't seen the word 'unlimi
Re: (Score:2)
much better than in the US, say
Ha. You don't have to work very hard to do better than we do in that regard. Some are better than others, of course. Currently I'm on AT&T, and I am getting better than my rated download speed, a faster backchannel than I ever got from Comcast, and haven't heard a peep about caps or limits. Of course, in my area I'm fortunate to have several options for broadband ... if anyone needed to know why competition is good, well, there you go. They fight for my business.
I remember when we were house shopping
Re: (Score:3)
That is not correct. The service is actually adretised as '1 Mbit/s' or '10 Mbit/s' service and in such case it is reasonable to expect that I should be able to get what I paid for - such as 1 Mbit per second for the whole duration of the contract (and the 128 Kbit upload too).
Re: (Score:2)
If you paid for 250 GB (for example) and you hit that limit, I think the companies have every right to cut your off completely, just the same as my calling card or cellphone "cut me off" when I run out of minutes.
People need to stop being petty when they moderate. He has a valid point. Currently Comcast is doing the same thing except they are'nt offering unlimited service (I think their current bit is "the fastest fast"). I'm pretty sure some other ISP's are doing the same thing as they don't want any scrutiny from the FCC. The comment is valid, if they make the limits clear they the ISP is well within their rights to either ask you to pay up or disable your service till the next month. Modded up +2 under rated.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Dude, I had the only comment on this article for like 2 minutes and I'm the one who gets modded redundant.
a.) Another post beat yours by 2 minutes.
b.) Complaints about typos in the summary are redundant anyway. We get it, you're too smart to read something with a spelling error in it.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Strange the First Post was at 10:58 and his is at 10:49, meaning his was 9 minutes before being anyone else commented - so Yes I can see that /. has some problems.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
he probably posted when it was still in the firehose. i've noticed when i post in the firehose, my post tends to disappear for a while after the story hits the main page.