Q8 - Given that smaller operators can often appear to deploy "super-fast" broadband for less than their larger rivals, do you feel that the UK government risks wasting public money by potentially ploughing it into subsidising larger operators who could end up costing more and delivering less to broadband 'slow spots' and rural areas?
Answer:
Yes certainly and this is already happening simply by introducing uncertainty and delay into the market – the sooner the procurement scope for the BDUK market testing trials is out for scrutiny into the public domain the better for all concerned.
Q9 - Is there a risk that some communities, which could benefit from a niche NGA broadband solution supplied by a smaller operator, could still lose out due to some of those same small ISP platforms being closed to rival providers and thus restricting competition into a small local monopoly?
Answer:
Yes, unless the local access service provider is otherwise regulated to act in the community interest. This is precisely why NextGenUs UK CIC is a community interest company – to protect local communities from monopoly abuse, ensure the network doesn't get flogged off to the highest bidder in a few years and to guarantee a minimum of 65% return of profits to the local community.
The NextGenUs approach is to apply David Isenberg's Stupid Network paradigm that opens the Digital Taps and lets folks get on with using the network as they see fit – the role of ISP is both changing and simplifying in the next gen world.
End.
Market Regulation
Q10 - Ofcom recently launched a tougher voluntary v2 code of practice for broadband speeds. This aims to ensure that ISPs offer a more accurate assessment of the subscribers predicted connection performance. It also added a 'get out' clause to long contracts, allowing those who receive significantly less speed than expected to leave without penalty. What are your thoughts on this latest update?
Answer:
Well if the customer is on FttH then the problems of signal attenuation that plague legacy copper wire broadband delivery are negligible within 20Km fibre route length.
An internet service is a digital supply chain comprised of many links, only some of which are under the control of the service provider (as no one owns the internet) so we need to be careful in defining performance levels... what could be a good idea for OFCOM is to set up a series of reference speed test servers, both providing a useful public service and capturing directly actual user data.
Q11 - Ofcom has also begun a series of consultations on its new code of practice for tackling internet copyright infringement ("illegal" file sharing by ISP customers), which directly relates to the Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA). The code essentially set out how ISPs should tackle Copyright Infringement Reports (CIR) and send notifications (Warning Letters) to those accused.
However both the DEA and Ofcom's approach have been heavily criticised for failing to understand the problem, not correctly apportioning costs (25% shouldered by ISPs and the rest to Rights Holders), proposing an apparently weak appeals process and generally ignoring how ISPs, as "mere conduits" of information, actually work. What are your thoughts on this?
Answer:
Each host on the internet must be take ownership of its own actions in order to peer responsibly.
The network infrastructure simply enables data communication at a distance to take place, the common carrier or mere conduit – the DEA was rushed though Parliament in the run-up to the May 2010 General Election and urgently needs revisiting to ensure clarity and practicality of operation.
