@Home Critic Silenced By @Home 431
Scareduck writes: "We've all heard much of @Home's lousy service. Ed Foster's column today in InfoWorld discusses a fellow who got his @Home e-mail account pulled for posting @Home internal documents to a Usenet newsgroup explaining how tech reps are to assume problems are always on the customer's side. He subsequently posted them on various free Web services (WebJump and Angelfire) only to discover his pages mysteriously disappear. @Home earns bonus villain points for invoking the purely evil DMCA in their justification of this thuggish behavior."
Re:Hmm. (Score:2)
Yes they do. Just because the government stopped enforcing the monpoly doesn't mean that it just instantly disappeared. It was well-entrenched and it will take quite a bit of time for competition to return to that industry.
Re:No Political Party is right about everything (Score:2)
Damn right the constitution only applies to the government. The government is the only entity that needs constitutional limits, because the government is the only entity that has an inherent right to deprive other entities of their rights in the name of preserving the rights of others. If OmniMegaCorp (tm) could arrest me and throw me in jail, then they'd need to have constitutional restrictions requiring them to give me a fair trial. But they can't.
It's a mystery. What is it about the so-called "philosophy" of Ayn Rand and Co. that so bedazzles its votaries? How does this silly, airy stuff induce so many intelligent people so blithely to ignore the facts of the world, even when they thrust themselves under their very noses? "But they can't."? They can and did; OmniMegaCorp, or rather @Home, has granted itself the right to functionally abridge Wesley's right to free speech [aclu.org].
While being summarily muzzled by an overpoweringly powerful corporation is not as painful an experience as, say, being thrown in jail, or being beaten to death [lutins.org] over a labor dispute by the Ford Motor Company's armed security guards (1932) nonetheless it is a naked violation of one's right to free speech [aclu.org]. Yet you assert that the First Amendment only weighs against the government, and does not affect the bully-censors of that odious @Home company. If only the Federal Government is restrained by the First Amendment, then U.S. citizens's vaunted free-speech [aclu.org] right is a hollow one indeed.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
You have a funny idea of "their job" (Score:2)
Companies providing internet access for $20 per month couldn't break even on tech support costs, let alone the cost of providing internet access, if their TS people encouraged customers to call, and actually did their very best to resolve all problems in a polite manner.
Those same customers would never switch to a $50/month company that could profitably supply the tech support they complain they aren't getting.
Smiles and "Have A Nice Day" don't cost much, so they're worthwhile for McDonalds, so you get them. One of the great advantages of presenting a constantly happy, smiling face to the customer is that it makes them seem ridiculous and irrational if they actually complain about the poor quality of the food, or react as if being rushed in and out as quickly as possible is rude (perish the thought!). Imagine how you'd react if a regular restaurant demanded that you order the instant a waiter was available, gave you food that was pre-fabbed weeks ago and heated an hour ago, and rushed you out the door 15 minutes after you came in.
Remember, their "job" as restaurant personnel is to give you a high-quality meal in a relaxing environment. So they're totally incompetent, and rude. Oh, no wait, their job is to make money for their employers, by hook or by crook, just like everyone else's.
Tech support guys don't "mouth off to customers so they'll go away and stop interfering with [their] on-the-job leisure time", they prevent the customer from switching to another service with a minimum outlay of company resources. Sometimes the best tool for this is intimidation or ridicule.
Customers choose to be abused by demanding service at a price that doesn't cover the level of service they need. If customers actually switched to more expensive services when they got brushed off by tech support, they'd get good tech support. You don't always get what you pay for, but you never get more.
--------
Re:Rochester RoadRunner (Score:2)
Sorry, but I'd side with RoadRunner in this case.
When you read "up to X" in advertising literature, they are not guaranteeing that they'll be able to provide "X", just that they aren't able to provide "X+1".
Read the fine print. If it doesn't say "guarantee of at least Y", don't expect anything in terms of guarantees.
As for Port 25 blocks... 95% of those who want to host an SMTP server are doing it for relays or their own spamming enterprises. The other 5% are doing it as a part of their technical consulting, and that's against the "for home and personal use only" clauses of the terms of service. If you're a business, you are invited to use more professional-grade features. You're eating bandwidth, and they have to charge for it.
Re:The problem usually is on the customer's end. (Score:2)
Well, their goal is to get your problem solved as quickly as possible so they can minimize the number of customer support people they have to pay for, so I don't know why they would consciously decide on such a policy.
--
Nothing New, Comcast has had customers ARRESTED (Score:2)
You would think that treating your customers as criminals would be a real bad business strategy, but until there is a major overlap of *DSL and Cable Internet coverage, these companies are going to act like the monopolies they have always been in the past.
Its Amazing they're still in business (Score:4)
I'm a current @home subscriber, and have had nothing but problems with the way @home runs their service.
Many of the incidents, I attribute to sheer Idiocy. Example : 7 Months ago, my service gets cut off. I call and ask whats going on, as my modem isn't connecting.
The response I get is "We're upgrading your node, you'll be out of service for 3 weeks"
Well, isn't that just wonderful. I didn't recieve so much as a NOTICE that the service was going down, and to top it off, after the service came back up 3 weeks later, I recieve an email dated THREE DAYS after service was shutdown, notifying me of the service outage.
As if that isn't bad enough, I changed credit cards in June. Being a responsible individual, I call and give the new numbers to their billing dept so that they can continue billing me.
About 2 weeks ago, my service gets cut off again w/o any notice. Calling their tech support, I find out they've cut me off for "Billing Issues"
Apparently they never updated their accounting database with my new numbers, and had been billing the old card inneffectively for the past 4 months.
During this period, I never recieved a Phone Call, Email, or Mail Notice regarding the billing problem. They just chose to cut-off my service, w/o notification. Re-instating the service took about a week, because they "Cannot bill you manually, only on the 7th and 14th of the month"
Its amazing to me that @Home can stay in business with such poor customer service. I guess when you have a monopoly on Broadband access, you dont have to worry about appeasing your customers.
~MhaelRe:@Home's Customer Service (Score:2)
As a rule of thumb, if your problem is of a significant enough nature, politely ask for your problem to be escalated without going into details. This normally works, and you have the added benefit of speaking with a better trained and normally less stressed person who has the time to work with you.
Incomprehensible Manual? (Score:2)
"Netscape won't load and fucking pages, why does your service suck so badly?"
"Are you connected to the Internet, Sir?"
"Fuck yes, do I sound dumb?"
"And I assume that this is on a separate phone line?"
(PAUSE) "CLICK."
Not the ones like,
"I've noticed a steady decrease in throughput... Perhaps it's line noise, but I don't know how to test for that, can you help me?"
"Lemmie go pull out my testing equipment!"
Nobody sets out to be a jerk (Score:2)
tech support person providing polite and effective help for half an hour receives the same wage as a tech support person providing intimidation and ridicule for half an hour
...right up until they are fired for taking an hour and a half with each customer, and having frequent repeat callers, when the jerk next to you is taking 5 minutes and his callers never use tech support twice. You can't take the attitude that the customer is more important than your manager; you get to treat the customer well when the manager tells you to do so.
As a tech writer, what's best for the customer is always best for the company. Those documents only need to be written once, and the better they are, the fewer support calls and returns they will get. You are in a privileged position to be able to follow your natural inclination to be helpful, unless you are hired by a particularly incompetent bastard.
But the pressure to be rude to the customers comes directly from the customers themselves.
The customers select only the cheapest service, this puts pressure on the business to cut costs, which puts pressure on the tech support managers to squeeze more clients for the same tech support dollar, who then start firing tech support guys who take too long to get people off the phone. The jerks succeed, the nice, helpful people get tossed. Some are naturals, while many more are changed by the pressure ("Augh! This idiot is going to cost me my job! I'm under quota! How can I make him go away?").
Of course, the pressure from the customer comes in part from misinformation handed to them in advertising.
I applaud open and honest advertising like this [flex.com]. If more people saw that good tech support is too expensive for cheap products and services, they might start making informed decisions about whether they are willing to pay for it or would be better off learning to handle things for themselves.
Well, they get what you deserve for watching an hour of advertising each day. Of course you're going to make bad decisions based on all that misinformation. I hate paid advertising.
--------
FUD, was Re:Fun people at AT&T (Score:2)
Actually, IIRC they were talking about charging online merchants in this manner for sales made when the merchants were hosted on AT&T's actual broadband network (i.e. their lines, their hosting setup, @Home's main customer website etc....).
I believe that AT&T/@Home has a vritual monopoly in the US on the cable modem lines. (My cable modem is certinaly AT&T/@Home, and it makes me think I should be posting this anonymously... oh well.) If it weren't for DSL, it would be a virtual broadband monopoly. Is there a lesson in here somewhere? A lesson that's been learned over and over again in history?
In Chicago alone we've got a couple of decent cable competitors, one of which is owned by Microsoft. Let's not go over the top on this one yet.
If we had other cable companies to get our cable modem service from, we wouldn't have to endlessly bitch about @Home.
But you'd still want, to, wouldn't you? Be fair.
From the other end, @Home would have to clean up their act to keep their customers.
To be honest, they were very good to me when I was a customer. And I left them for reasons not involving them in any way.
I know I've swicthed phone-in ISPs several times, and have found one which has service and capabilities that really match what I want. If we can't vote with our feet, but can only bitch against people who have weird "intellectual property" laws to stifle that bitching, we're hosed.
Even if I believed everything I've heard about @Home & AT&T, they'd still not be as bad as Ameritech or British Telecom. There are a lot of crap companies out there. AT&T isn't the only bugbear.
The Death Penalty (Score:2)
Re:Fun people at AT&T (Score:2)
Only in the cities they serve. Time Warner's Roadrunner is the other monopoly. Except that DSL is becoming more and more available. Which is competition for both TW and ATT.
So they really don't have a "monopoly in the US". Just in certain cities.
Google cache is your friend... (Score:3)
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.somehost
Surprised? (Score:2)
Perhaps next time we can keep a closer watch on our "representatives."
it's different from your business (Score:2)
As for confidentiality, while there are some additional protections for companies (questionable, in my opinion), it's fundamentally still the responsibility of @Home to protect the confidentiality of their own documents. If we ever got to the point where merely stamping something "confidential" would allow a company to force anybody to stop distributing that information, we'd be in trouble.
Re:[OT] Re: Not again... (Score:4)
Granted, practicing medicine without a license is a criminal act in most of the world. To obtain said license one must have recieved a MD degree from an accredited medical school, so the distinction is pretty much academic.
Jouralists, unlike physicians, don't need a license to practice their trade. Posting text to the internet is legally identical to publishing it in print; giving the poster the same rights and responsibilities as a traditional publisher or journalist. It relates back to that little thing called "freedom of the press".
Re:[OT] Re: Not again... (Score:2)
Granted, practicing medicine without a license is a criminal act in most of the world. To obtain said license one must have recieved a MD degree from an accredited medical school, so the distinction is pretty much academic.
Jouralists, unlike physicians, don't need a license to practice their trade. Posting text to the internet is legally identical to publishing it in print; giving the poster the same rights and responsibilities as a traditional publisher or journalist. It relates back to that little thing called "freedom of the press".
Re:Its Amazing they're still in business (Score:2)
--
Change is inevitable.
Re:Not again... (Score:2)
Re:Groups do not have rights. (Score:2)
Rights are not conferred by laws. Laws exist to protect rights. The fact that the law gives a corporation certain "rights" does not mean that those rights exist morally.
In fact, corporations' "right" to exist at all is purely legal, not moral. It's granted by the government because corporations are a convenient way to organize large-scale activity. There would be no inconsistency in limiting corporations in any way... as long as the purpose of that limitation wasn't to destroy the rights of the underlying individuals.
Anybody who brings up the law in an argument about what corporations should be able to do is an idiot. The law is subject to change, should it be determined to be wrong.
Whistle Blower Protections (Score:3)
It certainly leaves @Home open to a class action law suites. Which is probally why they are irritated. If the documents have wide enough dispersement then it's no longer a trade secret. It could be used against them without suppression.
Dejanews is your friend (Score:2)
Dejanews archives most of Usenet, and as far as I know, doesn't honor cancels... You can look up a message by its message id on this page [deja.com]. The message id is right there in the Cancel Request control message.
Re:Hmm. (Score:2)
Do you use their POP3 and SMTP servers? Other than the mail service my experience with my cable modem has been quite good. Only 2 or 3 instances of outages lasting more than a few minutes in the last 4 months. The mailserver OTOH, is down at least once a week if not more often for hours at a time. My solution, pay someone else for mail service.
Depends on the Tech Support Rep. (Score:2)
My cable modem goes out every month or so - due (I'm told) to a bad router at the head end.
Usually when I call them, they're polite - they have certain things they have to go through ("release and renew your IP address"), but once they realize that I know more about TCP/IP than they do (I'm a network engineer/sysadmin - I maintain several large networks) things progress rather smoothly.
A couple of times though, I've had to talk to idiots who _refuse_ to listen to what I'm saying - they assume that because I'm the customer, they know more than me... it usually starts with "OK, click on the start menu.." - then I say "I'm not using Windows, I'm using Linux".. the response is "We don't support Linux".. my response is "That's OK, I do".. once the response was "I can't help you, because you're not running windows", so I tell him that this happens every month or so, and that he needs to have his techs test the head-end router for faults - after tearing him a new one he put me on hold for a few minutes, then came back and told me that I was right.
All in all, it depends entirely on the tech.. most of shaw@home is OK, but there are a few idiots in the barrel.
Document 1 - Chargeback model (Score:2)
Chargeback Model
-----------------------------------------------
------
OperatingProcedures
Subject: Chargeback Model
Date: 6/4/99
Procedure #: 5
Effective June 1, 1998, @Home will begin charging customers for "self
inflicted" service problems.
When a customer call is escalated to Tier 2 for a self inflicted service
issue, they will be provided service free of charge for the first offense.
At that time they will be informed that any future self inflicted service
assistance will be subject to a $35 fee. This will also be individually
communicated via e-mail.
The customer will be advised of a $35.00 service charge for telephone
support, or a $49.00 charge for onsite support, involving the
reinstallation of the Comcast @Home software or reconfiguration of their
computer. Example: hardware or software conflicts resulting from either
adding or removing software or hardware to/from their computer will be
subject to support charges. The customer support representative will
inform the customer if a service fee applies to the type of support being
requested.
The $35 fee will not be charged if the telephone support results in an
onsite visit. If it is necessary to perform an onsite service call within
one week of a Tier 2 $35 charge call, Tier 2 must immediately credit the
customer $35. At home will retain the applicable $35 fee for telephone
support or Comcast will retain the $49 fee for onsite support.
Tier 2 Call Center
In the event that a Tier 2 TSR rolls a truck within seven (7) days of a
prior $35 charge call, they must immediately credit the $35 and advise the
customer that they have been credited the $35 but that a $49 charge may
apply for the onsite service being scheduled.
The TSR must note this advisement on the truck roll work order. Example:
Customer advised of possible $49 service fee.
Comcast Call Center
In the event that a Tier 1 CAE rolls a truck within seven (7) days of a
prior $35 @Home charge call, they must have the fee credited. The CAE
should create a Remedy Ticket for the service call as usual and schedule
the truck roll. They must then create a second Remedy Ticket in order to
process the credit. The Remedy Ticket should be completed in the following
format and assigned to TSR.
Request Type: Inquiry
Category: Billing
Type: Invoice Inquiry
Assignee: TSR Priority
Description:
The CAE must inform the customer that the $35 telephone support fee has
been credited but that a $49 onsite charge may apply. The CAE must note
this advisement on the truck roll work order. Example: Customer advised of
possible $49 service fee.
Re:He didn't behave like a journalist. (Score:2)
Copyright law dosn't draw a distinction between a "policy document" and a best selling novel.
A distinction is likely to be made by a civil court in asessing damages though. Though in this case @home should fully expect to be counter sued for breach of contract.
Document 2 - Stolen Modem (Score:2)
From: Wesley
Stolen Modem
-----------------------------------------------
------
OperatingProcedures
Subject: Stolen Modem
Date: 6/4/99
Procedure #: 4
In the event that a modem (or other Comcast equipment) is stolen while in
the possession of a customer we should handle it in the following manner:
Advise the customer that they are responsible for the price of the modem
and that we will be billing him/her our cost on the equipment. Current
pricing should be verified with the Online Director of Finance before a
quote is made. While credit card billing is preferred, they have the
option of paying by check. A Police report must be mailed to the following
address (and payment, if paying by check made payable to Comcast Online):
Comcast Online
Attn: Director of Finance
One Belmont Ave. 11th Fl.
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
Once the payment has been made with a copy of the Police report, Comcast
will provide a receipt, via mail, and schedule an appointment to reinstall
the service at current reinstall prices. Service will not be restarted
without a Police report.
The customer should be advised to claim the loss on their home owners
policy for reimbursement and use the provided receipt as proof of value.
Re:One percent of three percent of the population. (Score:2)
Re:Rochester RoadRunner (Score:3)
but to claim up to X, it has to be possible to achieve X. I never expected to get 10Mbs transfer rates - I understand network congestion and cable's shared bandwidth system. However, before the cap, it was possible to achieve 10Mbs under perfect, though unlikely, conditions. I signed onto up to 10Mbs not up to 2Mbs.
As for Port 25 blocks... 95% of those who want to host an SMTP server are doing it for relays or their own spamming enterprises. The other 5% are doing it as a part of their technical consulting
Re:It doesn't seem like it was public domain. (Score:2)
1) THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A LAYPERSON AND A JOURNALIST.
The First Amendment's guarantee of "freedom of the press" has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court to mean exactly the same thing as the Amendment's guarantee of "freedom of speech." Don't believe me? Check out New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), among other prominent cases on the issue. Therefore, our good Wesley, if protected at all, is protected whether or not he's a "journalist."
2) THESE DOCUMENTS ARE NOT A TRADE SECRETS
A typical definition of a trade secret can be found under Arizona law:
"Trade secret" means information * * * that both: (a) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use [and] (b) Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.
The reason that these documents are not trade secrets should be obvious -- they have no independent economic value. Rather, they are just a set of (rather draconian) policies that have value only within the context of the company.
3) WHILE THIS MATERIAL IS IP SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT LAW, WESLEY CLEARLY HAS A VALID "FAIR USE" DEFENSE
Four factors govern fair use: The nature and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or if it is for nonprofit educational purposes; the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and the substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and the effect of the use upon the potential market for and value of the copyrighted work. This work has no market value and was being used for nonprofit educational and informative purposes.
I swear, you libertarian-types give me the creeps. You scream bloody murder when the government violates your rights, but if it's a corporation misusing the law to do it, you bend over and pull down your pants. Sheesh.
--J (yes, IAL)
Document 3 - @Home Self-Installation (Score:2)
From: Wesley
@Home Self-Installation Procedures
-----------------------------------------------
------
OperatingProcedures
Subject: @Home Self-Installation Kit
Date: 5/10/00
Procedure #: 22
1. Screen all potential customers per current computer requirements.
2. Determine if sub resides in either the Alexandria, VA market (ALEX1) or
the East Brunswick, NJ market (EBNSK1).
If so:
3. Describe the @Home Self-Installation Kit to customer.
* The @Home Self-Installation kit is at no cost to the customer and a
free month is offered with it.
* Cost: Standard monthly service charges and modem lease charges will
apply.
* Eligible customers should be computer savvy. Must be comfortable
with installing hardware/software. (A good question to ask the sub is if
they have ever installed a sound card or memory). The installation may
require opening their computer. (If the subscriber has any apprehension or
hesitation regarding this criteria; THEY ARE NOT A CANDIDATE).
* Must have an active cable outlet within 20ft of computer.
4. Obtain customer information and build account in BOS.
* Leave the New Connect pending with no date.
* Document in the remarks field in BOS that this is a self-install
subscriber.
* Determine whether customer wants a USB (CATC) or NIC (Intel PCI).
You will document this in Remedy later on.
5. Provide customer with details of the product ship date (will be shipped
within 24 hours via 2nd day UPS), contact numbers for customer
service/Tech support (1-888-793-0800) and computer information they will
need to complete the install (logon, password, DNS, and IP address; this
info will also be shipped to them).
6. Close the sale with new customer (Use current Quality Assurance
guidelines).
7. Access customer account in Remedy.
* Create a new ticket.
* In Summary field, write: Self-Installation
* In the Request Type menu choose: Service
* In the Category menu choose: Self-Installation
* In the Type menu choose: Self-Installation
* Leave ticket pending
8. Send Mailpad to Innotrac
* You will select either the Self-Installation/NIC option or the Self-
Installation/USB option according to the customer's specifications.
* The recipient will be kwilliams@innotrac.com
Pre-provisioning/Account Activation
*To be done by designated CAE's only!
1. Innotrac will email back a spreadsheet containing customer name, modem
number and UPS tracking number.
2. Enter the modem numbers into the corresponding customer accounts. (BOS)
3. Activate customers account in BOS.
* Click on Find Request
* Double click on the New Connect pending (with no date)
* Insert today's date in the cable team complete date field
* Write self in team tech field
* Insert today's date in the other complete date field
* Write install in other tech field
4. Apply the free month credit to the account in the Adjustments field.
5. Access customers account in Remedy
6. Locate the open ticket labeled self-installation
7. Input the UPS tracking number and modem number in the work log field.
8. Close the ticket.
Installation Problems
1. No self-install customers should be transferred to Tier 2 prior to a
truck roll by local market.
2. An install charge is applied to any customer's accounts that require a
truck roll due to a failed self-install.
insightful my ass! (Score:2)
It sometimes amazes me how the average IQ of Slashdot readers has dropped in the past 12 months.
--
Copyright (Score:2)
After all, do you want a situation where the Pentagon could have stopped the NYT from publishing the Pentagon Papers just by pointing out they were copyrighted?
--
Re:It doesn't seem like it was public domain. (Score:3)
I have to wonder, why does someone have to be a Designated Journalist before one is "allowed" to investigate things of interest to oneself?
This guy wanted to find out why @Home service -- a service he is paying for -- sucks. So did a lot of other people who were in the same boat. So he does some digging around, finds a sympathetic soul at @Home willing to spill a few beans. He then publishes his findings.
Tell me: What, ethically, is wrong with this? You may argue that the documents were company confidential, and the company should be able to prevent their disclosure. But where, in concrete legal terms, is the line on actionable disclosure?
Let's say someone uncovers internal documents of a certain ISP revealing they have an official policy of "losing" account cancellation requests, thereby continuing to bill customers' credit cards. This is clearly information that is material to the ISP's competetive advantage. Should it be treated as a trade secret? Should be the ISP be able to silence its disclosure?
"But that practice is flagrantly illegal!" you cry. Okay, how about something more nebulous: Based on studies that most people give up after 10 minutes, the ISP (confidentially) establishes a policy mandating a minimum 15 minute wait on hold for tech support. They also use caller-ID to immediately identify the caller, look up their account and, based on previous call frequency or experience, weight their calling priority. This is clearly a practice that is grievously disrespectful to their customers, but it's not illegal. Should this information remain confidential? Should the ISP be able to prevent its disclosure?
Ethically, I see little wrong with what Wesley did. Its revelation is merely embarrassing to @Home, nothing more.
Schwab
Re:The problem usually is on the customer's end. (Score:3)
This is exactly the sort of attitude that gives geeks a bad name.
Most of the people calling tech support aren't "stupid"; they just don't enjoy wasting hours reading some incomprehensible manual... and I say this as a tech writer myself: there are a LOT of bad manuals out there. They don't get their kicks from playing with computers. I do, but that doesn't make me smarter than them, just different. (And better paid, but that's another discussion.)
I have non-geek friends who are perfectly intelligent, even brilliant, individuals. They use AOL, because it's simple and they don't have to mess with it. They don't have the inclination to spend a couple weeks on the phone with tech support trying to troubleshoot a bad DSL connection, as I did. They're English professors, not network engineers. And the last thing they deserve is some snotty geek-snob treating them like morons just because they dared to call tech support. That would be like your mechanic laughing at you because you didn't understand the [insert rambling, incomprehensible car problem here] and then getting hostile toward you because you didn't know how to fix it yourself. After all, all you'd need is a brain and a [insert name of obscure, baffling automotive tool], right?
Letting the companies have rights... (Score:2)
Here Are The Documents (Score:2)
Sample:
The following procedure outlines the proper steps to be taken when dealing with customers that have been suspended for AUP violations and customers wanting to report an AUP violation.
If you are talking to someone who has been suspended, warned or terminated for an AbuseViolation:
1. Verify that they are a customer who has had action taken against them, and not someone reporting abuse.
2. Transfer them to the Policy Management phone line. This phone is answered 7 AM to 7 PM, Monday through Friday PST. The direct line is (650) 569-5399. You may distribute this phone number freely. If no one is available to answer the phone, Policy Management will call them back if they leave voice mail.
3. Do NOT discuss the issue with them, the Policy Management Team will do this when they speak to the customer.
If you are talking to someone who wants to report a Violation of @Home's Acceptable Use Policy:
1. Direct them to send email to abuse@home.com. Please include any relevant documentation: log file excerpts, email message or Usenet posting with complete headers, URL, etc. This is the preferred method of reporting an abuse violation and will cause a ticket to be automatically generated. The Policy Management team will follow up on the report. Do NOT open a ticket and assign it to Abuse.
2. If they insist on speaking to someone, transfer them to the Policy Management phone line. This phone is answered 7 AM to 7 PM, Monday through Friday PST. The direct line is (650) 569-5399. You may distribute this phone number freely. If no one is available to answer the phone, Policy Management will call them back if they leave voice mail.
If you are talking to someone who has a question about @Home's Abuse Policy:
1. Direct them to http://www.home.net/aup where the AUP is posted.
2. If they have a question about the policy as written, they can send email to abuse-policy@corp.home.net.
Re:The problem usually is on the customer's end. (Score:2)
I had to spend 7-8 hours on the phone with Comcast@Home in Indy to get things moving. They sent me three, count 'em three modems before they got one that worked.
Seems that when you call the Tech Support # they give you, you get Customer Service. The girl that answered my call refused to listen to what I was saying, and could only accept a problem of, "The power light isn't on." Once you convice Customer Support that you need to talk to a tech, they give you a different # to call, and open a ticket stating, "The power light isn't on." Once you talk to a tech and tell them what the real symptoms are, (Which the guy I spoke with understood, since I described them in American English exactly has I had told Customer Support. He cancelled Customer Support's resolution visit by someone who only knew how to plug it in.), my problem was addressed. (My modem had a broken jack as delivered, and I had some old POS cable that was no good, several bad connectors, and a bad ground.) After that, it was only a few more hours to convince them that my service should be turned on beyond just provisioning of the modem, and assigning an IP through DHCP.
I admit that I was a little slow on the up take when 2nd tier tech asked what I was near. Foolishly, I thought she meant a major intersection. The conversation, frustrating at the time, but amusing, saddening and revealing in hindsight, went something like this:
@Home: "What are you near?"
Me: "71st & Merdian St."
@Home: "No, what city are you near?"
Me: "I'm in Indianapolis."
@Home: "What is that near?"
Me: "It's not near anything, it's a city. You provide me service inside it."
@Home: "I need to know what that is near!"
Me: "IT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF INDIANA."
@Home: "But what is that near?"
Me: "It's in that middle of the state!?!?"
@Home: "But what is nearby to Indiana?"
Me: ".............................."
Me: "Take your pick, Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, Illinois."
@Home: "Well, we don't actually have facilities in Indiana, you need to be set up in Illinois. We'll have them complete setting up you account. This may take a few hours."
I guess I had trouble thinking that a supposedly intelligent person would know where the states that their customers are in are. Hell, I knew where all the states were in 1st grade! Too much to ask for, geography.
--
Document 4 - Customer Credit Calculation (Score:2)
From: Wesley
Customer Credit Calculation
-----------------------------------------------
------
OperatingProcedures
Subject: Customer Credit Calculation
Date: 6/4/99
Procedure #: 13
The following is a procedure to properly calculate customer credit for
service outages.
When a customer requests credit for a service outage, it is the policy of
Comcast Online to credit the customers account for the period of time the
outage was experienced. Always round up to the next full day.
The process for determining the proper amount to credit a customer will be
based on the customer's total monthly service fee. Once the total monthly
fee is determined, the amount should be divided by 30 to obtain the proper
credit for each day of service interruption. Below are examples.
Scenario 1
4 day service interruption
Basic service of $39.95
Franchise fees of $2.00
Total service is $41.95
$41.95 divided by 30 = $1.40
$1.40 X 4 days = $5.60 credit
Scenario 2
2 and one half day service interruption
Annual service of $399.50
Franchise fees of $19.98
Two multiple IPs at $83.40 each
Franchise fees of $4.17 each
Total annual service is $594.62
$594.62 divided by 12 = $49.55
$49.55 divided by 30 = $1.65
$1.65 X 3 = $4.95 credit
These are guidelines for basic service outage credit. Refer to your
Supervisor for additional assistance if needed.
Re:He didn't behave like a journalist. (Score:2)
The only context where "de-classified" makes any sense is when dealing with a government agency. Where specific statute laws apply. "Internal confidential" is effectivly a synonym for "trade secret" when applied to a company.
Also the analogy is poor because medical products tend to be tightly regulated...
Document 5 - RF Troubleshooting (Score:2)
From: Wesley
RF Troubleshooting
-----------------------------------------------
------
Solution(s): Be sure that the high pass filter is on the entertainment
side of the directional coupler.
Online Installation Check Guide
The following steps should be used as a check list for the installation
for the additional outlet. If there is a problem with the signal to the
modem after the install, refer to the list to diagnose any problems. If
the problem persists, refer to the following section for specific problems
and solutions.
Electrical outlets should be properly grounded (if not inform the
customer).
Verify correct grounding of cable drop (possibly on cold water pipe).
Remove high-pass filters from the tap if present.
No jumpers in the data path should be shorter than two feet (shorter
jumpers could act as an attenuator)
Older negative traps used to block pay channels may not pass the
downstream frequencies (585mhz) and may have to be replaced.
Verify that the high-pass filter is correctly installed on the
entertainment side of the customer's drop.
Attach a bright orange drop tag to identify Comcast@Home customers.
Installation Diagram
Specific RF Problems
Problem: The cable modem light is not lit after the connection is made.
Solution(s):Ensure that a DC-10 coupler is attached to the line. The modem
may be receiving a signal that is too high (+5db), resulting in no signal.
This problem exists when the modem is not receiving the correct signal.
The first step is to make sure that the negative traps have been replaced.
The older negative traps will not allow the required signal to reach the
cable modem.
This situation also occurs if @Home has not provisioned the modem. Contact
@Home and check to make sure the modem has been provisioned. This process
can take about 15 to 20 minutes. If the modem has been provisioned, check
with the TSR if the information on the work order is correct.
Place a signal generator on the modem drop to trace out to the node. If
there is no signal from the node contact the dispatcher and inform of
trouble. A line tech will be needed to check the problem.
Problem: There is a problem receiving a signal upstream, indicated by a
flashing modem light.
Solution(s): Be sure that the high pass filter is on the entertainment
side of the directional coupler.
The problem most likely lies further down the line. First check the drop
leading back to the house with a signal generator. This should be a common
procedure for the A/O installer. If a signal is received from the drop,
the problem may lie in the line extender. A Line Tech should be called to
check if an equalizer is missing in the return path. There might have been
some trouble with the line extender, and the equalizer was not replaced
when a replacement amp was installed. This is not uncommon for systems to
experience when they first turn two-way on. Make sure that the amp is
prepped in both directions.
If the A/O is installing a directional coupler after the ground block, be
sure that the jumper is at least two feet long. Short jumpers at high
frequencies do not mix. This causes the modem to be confused at the signal
it is receiving. Even if the modem indicates a signal lock, the signal may
not be received properly. A symptom of this problem may be time-out errors
when attempting to ping the gateway or DNS address.
Problem The customer's house is the last one off the tap and a modem
signal lock cannot be obtained.
Solution: This is an ongoing problem in the RF side of the installation.
The difficulty is that the signal is not strong enough by the time it
reaches the last house. In addition, the tap block creates attenuation in
the signal, complicating the problem. A line technician is needed to check
the amplifier down the line, and boost the signal strength. If possible,
ending taps should be identified beforehand, and a line tech could
investigate before the install.
Problem: The connection is lost shortly after receiving cable modem signal
lock.
Solution(s): Check the negative traps combinations. Usually traps are used
as a single filter for premium channels like HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, and
Disney. Most filter combinations will work at the tap, but there are some
that will prevent the proper frequency from reaching the modem. For online
customers, these channel traps should not be reinstalled at the tap, but
on the entertainment side of the directional coupler.
Check the equipment used for the installation. A bad directional coupler
will stop the signal from reaching the modem. More extreme equipment
failures include bad taps, cable modems, and other connections.
*NOT* corporate right to privacy (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but that's a bunch of hogwash. There is only one corporation whose concerns about privacy I must respect, and that's only because I've signed documents saying I'll do just that. With all other coroporations, I can say anything about them I darn well like.
I'm sure that Wesley signed no such NDA with @Home. Unless he himself obtained the documents illegally--and I see no reason to suspect that he broke into @Home networks or ofices; after all, why would he need tech support if he could do that--then the person who violated @Home's trade secrets (even assuming that they qualify as trade secrets) is the one guilty of something.
Remember, it's the corporation's responsibility to prevent proprietary information from leaking in the first place, not our responsibility to look the other way.
Look at it this way: If somebody's suspenders break while they're walking down the street, they could be found guilty of indecent exposure; you're not going to be found guilty of invasion of privacy if you look. Good manners dictate you look the other way...but I'll show good manners to corporations when they start behaving at least as mature as pre-teens.
b&
Re:Hmm. (Score:2)
And like The Blob, they seem to be reforming into larger and larger entities anyway.
Re:Mind if I quote you on that? [OT] (Score:2)
--
Re:it's different from your business (Score:2)
If something is stamped confidential, and mailed out to thousands of people, then it isn't confidential, no matter what stamp is on it.
This sounds basically like what Microsoft tried to do with the Kerberos specs. They made them available for public download through a mechanism that did not require you to agree to anything, and then later tried to claim it all as a trade secret. Quite rightly IMO, it didn't work.
Re:Not again... (Score:2)
Or one or more largish organisations who will back him up, one advantages the professional journalist tends to have.
Not again... (Score:5)
I love Slashdot (I'm here aren't I?) but I'm getting really tired of this whole "All corporations are evil!" mentality. The guy published some of their internal documents. That's their private stuff. If someone published your old mash notes to your significant other, you'd probably want to squash it too. This is not a case of an independent reporter being "silenced" by the evil MegaCorp(tm), it's about some guy who took internal company documents and posted them publicly.
For crying out loud, let companies have some rights, okay?
Re:Not again... (Score:2)
Ah yes, corporate America, that abused underclass of the 21st century, every day working hard for their customers and getting nothing in return.
get real!
These corporate monopolies deliver crappy service while making huge profits secure in the knowledge that there customers have nowhere else to go, and you want me to feel sorry for them when their attitude is exposed for all to see? not likely.
--
Re:It doesn't seem like it was public domain. (Score:3)
Others have addressed the issue of copyright. As far as confidentiality is concerned, if Wesley has not under an agreement, he is under no obligation to preserve the confidentiality of anything. The person who gave the documents to Wesley may have violated some kind of agreement, but Wesley probably has not.
...phil
Re:Not again... (Score:2)
Except the documents are covered by copyright. This issue is that of "fair use"...
Fun people at AT&T (Score:4)
Remember, @Home is owned by AT&T, those fun people who were talking about charging online merchants a fraction of any sale to a AT&T Broadband customer, and even for just "delivering" those customers to the merchant in the first place.
I believe that AT&T/@Home has a vritual monopoly in the US on the cable modem lines. (My cable modem is certinaly AT&T/@Home, and it makes me think I should be posting this anonymously... oh well.) If it weren't for DSL, it would be a virtual broadband monopoly. Is there a lesson in here somewhere? A lesson that's been learned over and over again in history?
If we had other cable companies to get our cable modem service from, we wouldn't have to endlessly bitch about @Home. From the other end, @Home would have to clean up their act to keep their customers. I know I've swicthed phone-in ISPs several times, and have found one which has service and capabilities that really match what I want. If we can't vote with our feet, but can only bitch against people who have weird "intellectual property" laws to stifle that bitching, we're hosed.
-Rob
Speaking from experience (Score:2)
Of course, as someone above said, it's not easy to get good support techs with the job market like it is. I had one tech that worked for me whose favorite thing to do was to tell the customer to reinstall windows, and if they didn't have their Win CD, he wouldn't help them....I couldn't fire him because there was no-one else to hire. Whaddaya do?? (He was fired eventually, but not for being incompetent....)
Speaking of @Home, though I have had some less than stellar conversations with their support organization. For example - It took me almost an hour to explain to one of their L2 techs why there was 'excessive' latency (85ms) between one of our customers and one of their customers that were only 3 blocks from each other.............. um... hello??? Ummmm...different networks??? ummm...not excessive @ 85ms... Duh...
At the same time, it's not really easy to detemine which of your customers are experienced sysadmins or network admins, and which are idiots that just know the WORD sysadmin. I have also run into a lot of customers that CLAIM to have all sorts of certs. (CCNA's that don't know a router from a switch, MCSE's that can't figure out how to set NT up for DHCP, and one particular IRIX user ("well I'm not a user, I'm a sysadmin dammit!") who couldn't get proclaim (IRIX DHCP client) to work.....even with step-by-step instructions, and I mean BABY steps.) Again, whaddaya do?
To be honest though, when you're supporting a customer over the phone with a Cablemodem, you really have to start from scratch every time (until, that is the customer knows the drill well enough to tell you exactly what they did before calling). This is due to one simple fact....CUSTOMERS LIE! All the time...daily...hourly...especially when they don't want support to know that they're running a NAT box connected to 5 or 6 other machines. Even better are the ones that will lie to you WITHOUT the NAT box.
Tech: "how many computers do you have attached to your modem?"
Customer: "Um......one"
Tech: "really?"
Cust: "Yup, just the one."
Tech: "Wow, that's cool, because the ARP cache on your modem shows 6 separate machines!!!"
Cust: "Doh!!!!!"
In all cases like the aforementioned, I like the idea of the "remote slapper", or even better, a small device that will deliver a taser-like blast of electricity to the end-user's ear when support determines that the problem is a PEBCAK error (Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard).
One 'tiny' more thing.....if @Home is using DMCA as justification, then IMHO shouldn't the ACLU work PDQ to get the SCoUSA to overturn this BS law ASAP??? Just asking...
=====
Re:Not again... (Score:2)
He, under the protection of the first ammendment, published to the web. It was the publication, the PUBLIC disemination, that made him a journalist.
That being said, he's as little a journalist as you can get, and his problem is not having a team of corporate lawyers out to back him.
This should be a major issue to everyone here on Slashdot, and the web. We all publish, we are ALL journalists, and we *ALL* deserve the protections and garuntees of the first amendment to speak freely in print or other public media.
Re:No Political Party is right about everything (Score:2)
I think you're confusing freedom with handout.
Freedom for corporations, and freedom for individuals both come down to the same thing. Freedom for two independant parties to form a contract on whatever terms they consider to be acceptable. Employees have a right to unionize. They have a right to leave work if they have to take care of a family member. But people also have the right to sign a contract agreeing not to unionize or take family leave, and corporations (which, in case you've forgotten, are composed of people) have the right to refuse to hire anyone who won't sign the aforementioned contract. Damn right the constitution only applies to the government. The government is the only entity that needs constitutional limits, because the government is the only entity that has an inherent right to deprive other entities of their rights in the name of preserving the rights of others. If OmniMegaCorp (tm) could arrest me and throw me in jail, then they'd need to have constitutional restrictions requiring them to give me a fair trial. But they can't. The worst they can (legally) do to me is sue me, and for that they need to go through the courts, which are guided by the laws passed by the government, which is restricted by the constitution.The link was just to the front page... (Score:2)
</KarmaWhore>
--
Personal experience with @home (Score:5)
OK, I cannot connect to the 'net. First reaction: ping the gateway. It responds. Nose around -- a-ha, it's their DNS servers that are down.
Wait a day, they're still down. Fine, I find myself a public DNS server, plug it in and I have a working 'net connection. Still, I want the @home DNS servers back...
Call the customer service. Spend some time explaining to the first "tech" what DNS is and why it's useful. Got some info: he can ping the servers, the're up. So it's likely a routing or a connectivity problem. However he cannot fix anything or actually do anything because his database is down. Oh well, call tomorrow.
Tomorrow: rinse, repeat.
Next day: rinse, repeat. But I acquired a useful piece of knowledge: whey you get your first 'tech' say the magic words "escalate me to tier two". It generally works and I don't have to spend half an hour explaining what a nameserver is and why do I need it.
Next day: talking to tier two guy. He has no clue what's wrong. Tries to reset my cable modem from their end, tell me to call tomorrow.
Next day: finally somebody who seems to have a clue. He checks some permissions on some routers, updates them, tells me that it'll take a couple of hours for the changes to propagate and I'll be fine.
Next day: he lied. DNS servers are still not pingable from me (BTW, no machine on that subnet is pingable, a clear routing problem). Call again, bitch and whine, be told that there is nothing more they can do.
Next day: Going through the usual rigamarole when the tech notices that I do my pings, etc. not from a Windows machine. The fact that it's OpenBSD throws him off stride in a major way. I spend half an hour arguing with him (he: we don't support non-Windows OS; I: I don't want you to support my OS, I want you to fix your routing problems). So he goes off to find a supervisor, returns, tells me that no, they don't support anything.
OK, I offer him to reboot the machine to Windows (it's dual-boot) if he thinks (hah!) it will help. He goes away to consult with a supervisor again and returns to tell me that they don't support dual-boot machines. At this point my jaw starts bouncing on the floor and I spend some time trying to understand his logic. His (that is, his supervisor's) position was: Wipe out the hard drive, reinstall Windows, and then we'll support it!!! At that point I gave up trying to communicate.
Next day: magically, the DNS servers appeared back, I could ping them, access them, etc. I have no doubt that somebody accidentally/normally/for-some-other-purpose just rebooted something and as a side-effect fixed my routing problem.
Do I like @home customer service? Guess!...
Kaa
Re:This dosent suprise me... (Score:2)
>of "broadband" Internet service, but pretty much
>anywhere you can use a 56K modem to dial a local
>number to get to the internet.
Broadband is just another "public utility" and consumers are entitled to public utility service that's as good as they have in any other town.
Your post is akin to "You might not have a choice of providers of 'electric' light, but unless you live on the moon, you can buy candles from any company you want."
-Dean
@Home's Customer Service (Score:2)
What I really don't understand is how some people have ZERO problems with @Home. NONE! I don't get that. My cable modem when I had @Home was up for maybe an hour a day tops. I switched ISP's. @HOME SUCKS!!!
[mrzer0]
soooo (Score:2)
An important point... (Score:5)
Imagine for a moment if documents leaked out from @Home were published in the New York Times. Now, if @home wanted to go after them, they'd have to file a lawsuit and go through numerous hurdles. Even if their suit was successful, the paper was printed, the impact was made. The printing can't be undone and it may be argued that is shouldn't be undone. The legal consequence is paid by the paper for this but what is done is done.
In this case though, @home just has to have a lawyer type up a letter and e-mail it to a few places to have this shut down. There's no judicial order, or oversight of any kind. The yanking of the document was purely based on the whims of the corporation. Unless the ISP feels some moral obligation they aren't going to fight it. And frankly moral obligations don't boost sagging stock prices.
Personally I think that if @home feels they have been so wronged by this, they should go after the guy who did it in court. What he did may or may not be wrong and in doing so he should be aware that he is opening himself up to legal risk. So let that play out. Take it to court and see what the court says. We are giving away the right of judicial review to a bunch of lawyers and word processors. That's a VERY dangerous precedent.
---
Document Mirror (Score:3)
News on ct2600.org [ct2600.org] and mirrors @ ct2600.org/athome [ct2600.org].
Just who manages this kind of company? (Score:2)
I know what they are doing with the cable system in my area, I have friends on the "inside" as it were. They sent out a Email to all the people in our area annoucing that they would be performing "upgrades" to our service. I found out that this is not exactly true. One of the things that they are doing is DECREASING the overall speed in our area. This is called an upgrade. They are doing this because more and more people in our area are signing on, and they need to preserve bandwith for everyone. As a sysadmin I can understand this. I cannot condone calling this an upgrade to my service however.
I know one of the former tech support Guru's for my area (left for better pay and respect) and I got a good deal of some of the internal doings at @home. I would say that the main problem is that the individual companies tied to @home are still running with the "cable TV mentality".
It seems that the managers in my area are quite familiar with Cable TV, but are totally clueless when it comes to the internet. My friend (no, I will not give out his name thank you very much) told me horror stories of how members of upper management would dictate how certain server upgrades or changes were to be made, yet they have no networking experience of any kind.
There are both good and bad people in my area. Some really know their stuff, some dont. It just seems like the dilbert principle applies here. The least capable people are promoted to management where they can do the least harm.
Re:Hmm. (Score:2)
Well I sure wouldn't want their cancer causing documents anywhere near me. :)
Seriously though, it's a good point, and the same basic idea I was talking about in another post I just made. Sometimes consumers have a right to know regardless of whether the company likes it or not and regardless of copyright, trade secret, or other laws.
Re:Hmm. (Score:2)
They do have a monopoly on *cable internet access*, which is exactly the point.
The problem usually is on the customer's end. (Score:4)
The vast majority of calls to tech support are from people too stupid to comprehend the fucking manual even if they bothered to read it.
--
Re:Where is presumption of innocence? (Score:2)
They will only do that if they have no other option
How about one of the poor victimized corporation suing or getting criminal charges filed?
Because then they'd have to convince people who have utterly no reason to be sympathetic to their position.
"Your honour we did something stupid and the defendant caught us doing it..." isn't going to make the best of cases, even if they don't get a judge who decides that it's lame enough to be worth fining the plaintiff for contempt of court.
Re:Telocity (Score:2)
It doesn't seem like it was public domain. (Score:3)
According to @Home,
"These are our confidential and copyrighted documents shared with our cable partners and not intended for the public."
What reason do we have to disbelieve them? If Wesley could claim freedom of speech, it's trumped by confidentiality and copyright law!
Surely you must admit the law is not on Wesley's side.
Unless, perhaps, he was a journalist, and was acting under freedom of the press. Is he a journalist, or a speaker? Seems like a speaker to me. Still, noone should doubt where the law stands. (Firmly on the side of those with the money).
-Ben
Please stop your disinformation (Score:2)
This is obviously a troll, but since it is also outright disinformation someone needs to speak up.
I am not a Libertarian, although I will be voting Libertarian in this election.
However, your assertion that libertarians don't want any lcoal government is untrue. They wish to return FEDERAL government to a form which operates within the parameters specificed by the US Constitution. The party does not advocate eliminating local governemt (as the constitution does not prohibit it).
There may be some individuals who do advocate little or no local government, but for each person who does you'll find another individual who does not.
Finally, you assume a government is necessary to "encourage other companies to attempt a service in the area." That assumption makes about as much sense as assuming we need need a government to encourage companies to offer us Science Fiction programming, as opposed to, say, Lyric Opera. We need government for neither -- we as individuals and as customers can decide (and in this instance the free market really is the best arbiter).
And yes, if you live on the Ass of the World you'll probably have to lay your own cable, just as our ancesters a hundred years ago living on remote ranches often had to make their own roads and dig their own wells. Its part and parcel to living in the middle of nowhere, so you'd better get used to it. What makes you think you have a right to have the cost of your service subsidized by others?
Reliability (Score:3)
The servers go down EVERY DAY. Sometimes 3-4 times per day. Downtime duration is anything from 3 minutes to 1/2 hour.
And this is only on my segment....
Re:Not again... (Score:2)
http://www.thestar.com/editorial/smart97/200010
They know @home is bad business for them because they provide extremely shitty service.
Groups do not have rights. (Score:2)
Re:You Have Rights if You Take Responsibility (Score:2)
What about the right of people to comment of the products though?
Companies have rights. Does the truth? (Score:2)
So Rogers should be mad.
Consumers, upon discovering this policy, should be mad but unsurprised. Unlike most people, I've had good luck with Tech Support staff, but mostly because I've worked as one in situations that make Rogers problems look like a minor itch not worthy of scratching and know how to talk to them. That helps a lot.
A lot of people treat tech support staff like dirt and display abysmal manners and that won't generally be too useful in getting them to go "over and above the call" for you. Treat people with respect and you'll generally get more done - and if that fails, you've always got the other option.
The question of whether the policy should be allowed to be private or not is fully divorced from the right or wrong of these documents being posted. I personally think customer support policies and privacy policies should be _legally_mandated_ to appear verbatim internally and externally and companies should be forced to hew to them (and not, as with most privacy policies, able to change them at a whim and retroactively). BUT THAT IS ANOTHER ISSUE.
This fellow was probably in the wrong. If he was, he should be punished.
Rogers is not in the wrong legally, but is morally reprehensible. They should be discouraged by hitting them in the pocket book and making such things publicly known - bad press won't make them happy.
Good Topic, LAME POST -- RTFM, it's a way of life. (Score:3)
I've returned consumer devices that required reading the manual: it's a sign of poor design and poor value.
Why do you have a computer?
It is ridiculous to say that everything a consumer picks up should be easy to use without reading a manual. That's a dreamworld mentality for people who don't believe they should ever have to learn anything.
Now we have to put out substandard merchandise with tons of overhead costs to ensure that John Q. Public can figure out how to do complex tasks without any knowledge whatsoever. Don't slow down technology!
If you aren't willing to pick up the manual, to have any idea of how to actually operate the merchandise, and expect that the world should revolve around you, then you become part of the problem.
That's the justification of the users to not read manuals ~ 'I shouldn't have to read a manual, I just paid $xxx for this merchandise!' If you purchased nuclear waste and were contaminated because you didn't read the documents on properly shielding yourself from radiation, who is at fault? The person who sold the waste, or you?
It is the responsibility of the consumer to be educated when living in the consumer market. In the case of @Home service, it is the consumer's right to this type of information. The OS's aren't tricky, and the providers of the service should have a checklist to go through step by step to determine if the system is set up correctly. If they cannot provide consumers with the service they claim to provide, then they should not be in the business. In a consumer market, this is the only way they should be able to survive.
Re:Guess again (Score:2)
Everything is copyrightable, unless it is written by a government agency or employee in the course of carrying out his duties. Now, how enforceable the copyright is varies from case to case depending on several factors such as whether the copyright owner's ability to profit from the copyrighted work was damaged due to the alleged infringement or whether the infringement reduced the market for the copyrighted work, etc. I don't think those sorts of things apply in this situation. That means they will probably fall back on trade secret law, which may or may not apply, depending on how he managed to get ahold of the documents and whether a court decides that they are, in fact, proctected by trade secret laws.
Re:Not again... (Score:3)
Yes, but Journalists have certain rights (and some would say responsibilities) to publish certain information. Since he was openly publishing this information, he was acting as a journalist.
Of course, to get a degree in journalism, some of the longest courses are ethics classes. I'd be interested to hear from someone who has attended those classes to get an idea of what is considered the "right" thing in this case.
Keep in mind that he was given these by a source inside @Home, meaning that a representative of @Home gave the information to the public. I know journalists have some (questionable in some cases) right to keep their sources a secret.
Again, I'm operating off of vague knowledge, but the right of the press is an important aspect to consider.
--
Evan "Supporter of Corporations, supporter of the little people who are the Corporations"
Re:Not again... (Score:4)
And does the fact that he is Just A Little Guy make @Home's "customer service" policy any less vile?
stirring the pot since 19 mumblty mumble
Wesley will return (Score:3)
- that
setup. It would be pretty funny to see if they try to get a DSL provider to take some sort of action against a user criticizing cable.Lost in the (e)mail (Score:4)
Re:I'm wondering... (Score:5)
I live in Clearwater, FL and there are a SLEW of internet providers. I literally have my pick of 100 or more ISP's. I work as a Network Engineer now, and previously built a local ISP from the ground up.
The company I choose to do business with now is called Intelligence Network [intnet.net]. They have a strict policy of using only Cisco routers and switches, and only Sun Microsystems workstations and servers. Personally, I like playing with old Sun hardware, but I greatly disagree with many of Sun's policies regarding licensing. Nevertheless, no informed individual in the business can say that your average Intel/Bay Networks enterprise-level network can even compare with your average Sun/Cisco network. That's Point 1: Quality.
Secondly, they are a small-to mid-sized company. They have four static T-1's and a burstable OC-12. I'd prefer they had a burstable T-3 instead of the four T-1's, but nevertheless, that is again one of the signs of a smaller, more personalized company.That's Point 2: A small, non-conglomerate company.
Next, they have little to no advertising. They rely on the quality of their service to keep their business at a solid level. They are not in the business seeking profits (or else they wouldn't be spending well over $1,000,000 per server they have), but rather they are in the business to provide a purely quality-oriented service. Point 3: No major advertising.
Lastly, their tech support is good. This is the hardest to gauge and monitor. They have perhaps a dozen technicians. Some are assigned to dialup service, some to DSL and T1/E1 service, and some to colocation and other services. Atop this they have 3 head technicians who actually comminicate directly with the customer. In fact, they're so good with communication that they gave me a free 10mbit SBUS ethernet card for an old Sparc IPX i've got for a firewall. They are the kind of company that wants to get personal with the customer and actually develop a relationship with them. Point 4: Personal Customer relationships.
Okay, one more point. This one is very arguable and lies entirely in my preference. I like this company because they do NOT try to match the bottom-price market. Instead, they charge a fair price for a very reliable service. They are not motivated by high-volume income, and it is very clear by the quality and (relatively small) size of their company. I look for this with every business or service I deal with.
For you performance geeks out there, my DSL connection has had a total of approximately 2 hours of downtime in the last year. I monitor my uptime by 30-second intervals and keep it logged in MRTG-style reports. Those two hours were an accumulation of many very short service failures, many of which I proved were due to AT&T doing maintenance at 4am on Sunday morning every other month. Nearly all of the rest of it, short of approximately 20 minutes, was due to GTE/Verizon (many bad things to say about them). Their end result from these points is an extremely reliable service, and my performance is ALWAYS 99% or better of my bandwidth provisioning.
If you want a _quality_ provider, open up your local phone book and pick a handful of ISP's you have never heard of in your local area. Call each of them and ask them two simple questions:
- What hardware do you use to run your network and servers?
- How much bandwidth do you have, and from what providers?
If they have the bandwidth to realistically support the performance they claim, and they are using quality hardware, you've got a company that meets three of the above points: Quality, Small Company, and NO Major Advertising. At that point, there's only one way to really test their customer service, and that's to use their service.Don't expect your "cheapest and fastest" advertising ISP to get you anywhere. Throw in a few more dollars and ignore the claimed performance gains, and deal with a company that actually wants to provide service.
Re:Good Topic, LAME POST -- RTFM, it's a way of li (Score:3)
As for your computer and nuclear waste analogy, clearly, there are devices and processes for which it is either necessary or interesting to learn a lot about them. But that's driven either by professional needs ("nuclear waste") or interest (Linux). If every alarm clock, automobile, lightbulb, refridgerator, washer, drying, etc., demanded that kind of attention, we'd never have time for anything else.
Or, to put it more succinctly, if a consumer device requires more expense in terms of time to set up than the benefit in terms of fun or time savings derived from it, it's not rational to keep it. And since the fun or time savings derived from many consumer devices is pretty small, having to read a manual often crosses that threshold.
Not suprised. (Score:4)
Even when there is a copyright, there is some copying permitted by the fair use doctrine.
They must know this is bogus, but they know they can get away with it by bullying people with abusive legal process?
Why would anyone be suprised?
Mattel / TLC / MSI sued me because they didn't like their critism. Mattel / TLC / MSI sued the CPHack guys because they didn't like people seeing their dirty laundry. Mattel sued the MPAA because they didn't like the Barbie Girl. Mattel lost the Barbie Girl case, the judge said that a company can't use trademark law to silence criticism.
Only by taking on some of these abuses, we can win.
Hmm. (Score:5)
If he knew the company had designated them 'confidential' or 'not for public release' or whatever, then damn straight.
Oh.. and who says *anyone* is requird to do business with you if they don't want? Hey.. @home has *THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE*. Just like I do in my own business.
Hey.. I run a consulting business. Does that mean that if someone wants to be my client, but then badmouths me, I have to continue providing him service? I think not.
Oh yeah. And on the ISP side.... it is *correct* for technical support to assume that all problems are on the users end, because 99.9% of problems *are* on the users end.
Re:Not again... (Score:3)
Well, strictly speaking of course you're right - the guy publishes internal protected documents not belonging to him and is therefore clearly legally up a certain creek without a necessary implement.
But if you go beyond the surface legalities here it looks more like a case of the 'net interpreting censorship as damage and routing around it.
The problem statement would appear to be "@Home has service level problems and inconsistent practices in dealing with it. @Home shows little interest in resolving these issues and wishes them not to be discussed".
The list of consequences from this would appear to be a history of postings and action-attempts by @Home customers, none of which were successfull because the Big Nasty Corporation showed no interest in dealing with the problem, and lots of interest in suppressing it's discussion.
However, because of the actions of this fella, @Home's wishes have been effectively denied. Regardless of the legalities, the underlying documentation explaining the causes & action-plan (i.e "we're crap" and "blame the customer" respectively) *have* got out in the wild.
Net result? Well, a whole bunch MORE people think that not only has @Home got a service problem, they've also got an attitude problem. This may influence their purchasing decisions, and may impact @Home the only place they care - the pocket.
Of course, if your stuck somewhere where the choice is @Home or nothing, then perhaps not. Perhaps all that's happened is an (effective) monopoly has been exposed once more as a Bad Thing, rather than any good coming from the episode.
Non-compliance with DCMA (Score:3)
Mmmm... could it be that these 'notifications' were sent to his @Home mailbox? And could it be that, just perhaps, this is why he didn't get them - because the email service wasn't working (again)?
Wonder how that would show @Home up in court...
Re:Not again... (Score:3)
That's nice. This has nothing to do with "open source". This is about a balance between a company's right to internal privacy and that company's customers' right to know how and why they're being treated in a certain way.
Was Wesley liable for posting those documents? Most likely, even before the DMCA. Was he right to do it? In this case, I say "yes" - customers are being treated in a way they perceive as inappropriate for a company they're giving their money to, and these documents give them firm answers. Wesley will get punished (already has, actually), but his actions were right, since he brought out the truth. @Home is justifiably angry since it was their stuff posted. However, they should also be hanging their heads in shame for having policies that turn their customers - the people who give them money so it can continue to exist - into just another problem to be avoided as quickly as possible. There's a reason @Home has something of a reputation for lackluster service, and it's policies like these that put corporate comfort over customer satisfaction that are the cause.
For the record...Rogers@Home farms their tech support out to a call centre here in Toronto, which has its own crappy reputation. But I seem to have had more luck than many users of the service.
-------------
Former @homer (Score:5)
Customer Service in the 21st Century. (Score:4)
It makes for interesting/enlightening reading. I found it somewhat disturbing - partly from seeing how cold-blooded companies have become about customer service, but equally because it's really hard to fault the practices on rational grounds.
Re:The problem usually is on the customer's end. (Score:5)
Hell yes. Asking the user the equivalent of "is it plugged in" is an appropriate first-stab at almost all customer-level problems.
I'd like to see these @home documents/policies in context.
If the context is "assume it's the customer's problem when you pick up the phone, but be willing to escalate upon presentation of evidence", I have no problem with the policy.
If the context is "even when the customer demonstrates more clue than you, and cites evidence that the problem is not on his end, adamantly refuse to escalate and continue to blame the user", I've got a big problem.
With the documents, it's impossible to determine what @home really meant by "suspect the customer first".
Case in point - numerous customers on my dialup POP had experience mysterious dropped connections and latency (unable to even ping or traceroute the ISP's DNS server, followed by a disconnect in 2-3 minutes). I assumed I was one of them and responded to a general invitation from one of their senior tech support folks to report such problems directly to him.
The senior Bob mailed back and said that after looking at the logs, whatever I'd been seeing wasn't appearing on his end, and looked like normal disconnections, instead of the problem he was trying to debug. I was skeptical (as my symptoms matched that of the other complainants), but when he suggested that I try removing all other phones from the line to eliminate the possibility of retrains screwing up my results, I gave it a shot, and my problem went away. Solid 49333.
Sometimes even for a clued-in user, the problem is still on the user's end. And I learned that V.90 is still young. And I can now tell with 90% accuracy whether my roomie has a phone plugged in based on my initial connect speed.
Of course, this ISP also had sufficient clue that a few weeks later, when a traceroute revealed that all packets to the news server were either vanishing or going into a loop, the entry-level Bob I spoke with was able to say that "yeah, I'll escalate, that looks like a router problem". He may not have understood what the router problem was, or even what a router was, but at least he had the clue not to ask me to reinstall Windoze.
[OT] Re: Not again... (Score:3)
Since he was openly publishing this information, he was acting as a journalist.
If I took out your appendix, would that make me a doctor? No. If I installed Linux, would that make me an open source advocate? No.
Give journalists just a bit more credit. Just because some dude grabs some internal documents and posts them doesn't make him a journalist.
Hell, even if he were a bonifide Washington Post Watergate veteran, stealing is stealing. Were he a journalist and he did steal internal documents, he'd have no special protection from the law. Shield laws only protect journalists from revealing their sources. Shield laws don't give us the right to break the law.
InitZero
Re:ok, breath deeply and think about this (Score:3)
A vast majority of my calls are regarding an error caused by the user. But, I see it as part of my job as to help the user clear up the error and not do it again in the future.
I've made calls into service support because I was *certain* they were screwing up. I even had a list of things they should probably check. When the Tier One support started walking me through the steps to diagnose the problem I was thinking, 'schmuck, I need to get to a real tech', until the T1 guy in his checklist had me check my DNS where I had transposed numbers. I was the idiot. Now, I applaud the service I got because they were set up to help me locate and fix the errors I caused.
All companies that service customers need to realize this and not dump it back in the customers lap. When I do something stupid to my car, my mechanic doesn't shake his head and say 'it is something you did, it isn't my responsibility'.
Broadband ISPs should have a "techie's" support. (Score:3)
I don't know, but this sounds a whole lot better than the heavily scripted "tech support" that ISP's are currently offering. I'd appreciate a guy with an actual brain inside his cranium instead of these marginally fluent morons filling in positions at the desk.
This Is Why We Have a Court System (Score:3)
Even if you think @Home is correct in this case, it is absolutely horrifying that the law has been set up to default to allowing companies to silence their critics. I mean, we have a Court System. This is why we have it. If @Home sued to have those pages removed, and their case was reviewed in a public court of law, and the judge decided that they were within their rights to request that the material be removed, that would be one thing. I might disagree with the law, but the process makes sense, and it has natural checks to prevent abuse (public opinion, presumably impartial judiciary, etc.)
I find it very scary that the system has been set up to make it so easy for a company to get pages removed, without any public review.
-Dan
Re:Fun people at AT&T (Score:4)
AT&T purchased TCI, so now in areas of the country where TCI offered @Home the service is billed as "AT&T/@Home". @Home remains an independent entity, not considering that Excite and @Home merged some time ago.
Matt
Just posting them was the wrong solution... (Score:3)
He has no right to republish the documents. I don't particularly like @home's draconian behavior, they are within their rights.
Wesley didn't author those documents, therefore he has no right to publish them as he did. The documents contained @home's speech, not Wesley's. Thus @home has the right to control their publication.
Just posting stolen documentation is not protected speech. He could have put up a commentary citing the leaked documents. He could even quote any relevant sections. The point is Wesley's speech is protected. If he was speaking or was the author of a document which he had posted, then @home would not have been able to do what they did.
Sorry, but because @home was controlling infrormation that belonged to them. This is not censorship.
gwonkYou Have Rights if You Take Responsibility (Score:3)
But don't take my word for this. Ask any Republican or Libertarian why a given corporation should be allowed to get away with some inethical behavior (e.g., cheap products, substandard service), & once you pin them down on the facts that what was done *is* inethical, they end up whining ``Well, they're just doing what every other comapny is doing. And they have to make a profit."
Gee, if an individual down the block abuses his children, treats his spouse like a servant, abuses alcohol or drugs, & someone were to say ``Well, he's busy making more money so we'll forgive him", that would be a lame excuse to me. So why do we allow fictive individuals -- which is what a corporation actually is -- to use this excuse?
Seems to me corporations have more rights than the rest of us already. And none of the responsibilities.
Geoff
Re:Lost in the (e)mail (Score:5)
It's a consumer market, stupid. (Score:3)
When you sell stuff to consumers, it should work when it's plugged in and it should be obvious how to use it. It shouldn't require reading lots of manuals. That's not just because it's a nuisance, but if the thing is so complicated to use that it requires reading a manual, it just won't be very useful. The manual will get lost, other family members won't bother, the person who originally waded through the manual will forget, and within six months, it will get tossed or it will be obsolete, repeating the cycle all over again. Consumer devices are supposed to make life easier and provide fun; and these days, that means a minimal investmnet of itme. I've returned consumer devices that required reading the manual: it's a sign of poor design and poor value.
In fact, the same ought to be true for stuff sold to professionals, but professionals have less choice in the matter because for them, stuff they get sold is needed to get a job done.
If @Home pushes platforms (Windows, MacOS) that require tricky installations and can be misconfigured in a myriad of ways, they have to pay for that in terms of support costs. If they don't, they won't get a lot of customers, of course. In the short term, that's the way business works for everybody. In the long term, maybe that will provide sufficient incentive for @Home to support consumer friendly hardware and software (and, no, I don't mean Linux either).