Interview with Hull UK ISP KC (KCOM Group) - Page 4 - ISPreview
Interview with UK Broadband ISP KC (KCOM Group)
By: Mark Jackson - November 29th, 2010 : Page 4 -of- 5
"As ISPs we should respect our customers and give them the facts rather than hiding behind small print"

KC KCom UK Office Building PictureUK ISP KC Logo
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:

It is entirely right that customers should know what they are going to receive and then receive it.  Contention levels amongst some operators is at a level I would consider criminal, so therefore if an ISP advertises a line speed that then collapses at peak hours they deserve to lose their customers.  However, it is important to recognise that contention and traffic management, within sensible levels has given us the incredibly cheap broadband we enjoy in the UK.

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:

I would say that recent events around companies such as ACS Law have demonstrated that there are many flaws within the current approach.  It is wrong for the government to treat ISPs as a police authority.  The problem I see with the entire copyright issue is that we are dealing with a generation who have no concept of copyright.  We are in some kind of Babylonian revolution that will change the face of copyright as we know it.  Therefore it would serve everyone's interests if government, industry and ISPs could agree a sensible approach that sees costs being borne by the rights holders.

Q12 - Ofcom are also proposing to clamp down on ISP Fair Usage Policies (FUP) and Traffic Management measures, under the guise of a 'Net Neutrality' consultation. It is expected that this will focus on providers who advertise "unlimited" services and yet hide vague restrictions in the small print, with Ofcom likely to require greater FUP clarity.

Likewise the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has also launched a review into the use and abuse of misleading broadband speed and "unlimited" claims. What are your thoughts on the issue of how broadband services are advertised, with specific reference to speeds and usage allowances; how should the problem (if you see one) be resolved?

Answer:

I am a great fan of 'does what it says on the tin'.  We receive criticism for our download allowances when some of them actually give greater download capacity than some of our competitors so called 'unlimited services'.  If you are offering unlimited, as we do between midnight and 6am, then make it truly unlimited.  As ISPs we should respect our customers and give them the facts rather than hiding behind small print.

Bookmark and Share
Article Index:
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules