Hyperoptic Defuse Complaint Over “full fibre optic broadband” Advert

The Advertising Standards Authority has ruled that UK ISP Hyperoptic did not break ad rules by describing their 1Gbps Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB) broadband network as “true fibre” and “full fibre optic broadband“, despite the last bit of connectivity into homes being done over Cat5e copper cable.

According to the ASA, a single individual had questioned whether the promotion on Hyperoptic’s own website was “misleading and could be substantiated” because they understood that copper cable was used for part of the connection from inside the building and into their apartment.

The promotion itself compared Hyperoptic’s FTTB network with slower hybrid-fibre rivals like FTTC: “Most ‘fibre broadband’ services are not Fibre Broadband. They are fibre-and-copper: fibre optic cabling from the exchange to your street, then copper phone wires into your building … Hyperoptic specialises in bringing full fibre optic broadband direct to multi-dwelling buildings such as apartments and offices … Hyperoptic fibre broadband is true fibre broadband. It pipes the UK’s fastest residential speeds all the way to your building using fibre optic cabling direct from the exchange.”

In fairness the complaint did make an interesting point about the conflict between describing an FTTB service as “full fibre optic“, which does have a small element of high capacity copper Cat5e cable involved, and then comparing it against slower hybrid-fibre services that also have a lot more copper and basic twisted pair cable at that.

The question is particularly interesting in light of a recent ruling in France, which introduced a new decree that made it more difficult for FTTB providers to advertise their services using “fibre optic” terminology if the network doesn’t actually deliver a fibre optic cable direct to your home (here). This is despite the fact that FTTB networks often promote and deliver the same or similar top speeds as pure FTTP/H ISPs, at least for now they do.

However the ASA ruled that Hyperoptic had no case to answer because the ISP’s promotion had already made clear that their network delivered a full fibre optic connection direct to the building, rather than an individual home.

ASA Ruling (REF: A16-332120)

We understood that ‘typical’ fibre connections consisted of fibre for a portion of the connection from the exchange to the cabinet, but that copper was then used from the cabinet to a customer’s building.

In contrast, Hyperoptic provided a fibre connection from the exchange through to the consumer’s building to a distribution point and from those distribution points, Cat5e cable was used to connect offices or flats to the fibre service. We understood that the location of the distribution points varied according to the architecture of the building and a small amount of Cat5e cable was used to deliver the service from the distribution points to individual customers.

Because we considered consumers were likely to interpret the claims to mean that, in contrast with ‘typical’ fibre broadband services, Hyperoptic’s service consisted of fibre from the exchange to a customer’s building, and that was the case, we concluded that the ad was not misleading.

In reality Hyperoptic was never in any real danger from this complaint because the ASA has previously ruled that both FTTC and Cable (DOCSIS) technologies could also describe themselves as “fibre optic” or “fibre broadband“, which flowed from an old February 2008 ruling. Some would say that this has resulted in a legacy of confusion that has made it harder for consumers to identify the advantages of one approach over the other, but others view it as fair. Also see our article – Will the Real Fibre Optic Broadband Service Please Stand Up.

At the time the ASA took the view that the copper coax element of Virgin’s network was only a small part of their fibre optic fed network and thus the ISP was deemed to have been justified in describing their service as “fibre optic“, even though this sort of promotional flexibility could in theory also be applied to plenty of ADSL or even wireless based networks.

As it stands few people will be concerned about the tiny bit of Cat5e copper in Hyperoptic’s diet and they continue to deliver impressive performance, although we suspect that the debate over how much copper exists in FTTC or Cable’s (DOCSIS) diet will not go away anytime soon and the same may also become true of future G.fast technology.