Broadband manual en final(1) by Consumers International

C O N S U M E R S I N T E R N AT I O N A L

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT A CONSUMER ADVOCACY MANUAL

KUALA LUMPUR

2012

Acerca de Consumers International (CI) Nuestra meta es asegurar que los derechos de los consumidores no sean ignorados. Fundada en 1950, CI es la federación mundial de organizaciones de consumidores. Con más de 240 miembros distribuidos en 120 países, somos la única voz global independiente y autorizada de los derechos de los consumidores. Estamos registrados en el Reino Unido como organización benéfica.

Editado y publicado por: Consumers International CI Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Tel: (603) 7726 1599

Fax: (603) 7726 8599

Holding Broadband Providers to Account: A Consumer Advocacy Manual Editado por: Jeremy Malcolm Diseño de la cubierta por: Andrea Carter Ilustrada por: Siddharth Mukherjee Impreso por: Lightning Source

Bajo licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento - Compartir Igual 3.0 creativecommons.org/licences/by-sa/3.0/ ISBN: 978-0-9569943-4-9

Contents

Introduction

1.1 Definitions

Consumer advocacy and campaigning 2.1 About advocacy and campaigning 2.2 Relationships 14 2.3 Communications

2.4 Monitoring and evaluation

2.5 Building a knowledge base for broadband campaigning

Broadband Internet and the consumer 3.1 Background facts

3.2 Access and adoption barriers

3.3 Broadband providers and contracts 41 3.4 Digital rights issues on broadband networks

Broadband advocacy campaigning suggestions 4.1 Broadband Disclosure Statement 4.2 Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Lock Me In!

4.3 Internet dispute resolution

Bibliography Index

Acknowledgements

1 Introduction

Broadband is a technology with the capacity to bring education, culture, government services and global communications into every consumer’s home or community. It is fast becoming an indispensable service for the consumer in the digital age; like power, water and financial services, which are also key concerns of the global consumer movement. Such is its potential to improve consumers’ lives in a multitude of areas, that in 2009, Consumers International (CI) and a number of its members declared that “Communications services are essential to everyone and should have consumer safeguards including the promotion of public interest that typifies other critical utilities.”1 Broadband not only benefits individual consumers, but their communities and countries too. Independent studies by the World Bank, McKinsey & Co and Booze Allen establish that in low and middle income countries, a 10 per cent higher broadband penetration accelerates the Gross Development Product (GDP) by 1.4 to 2 per cent.2 And its usage has been exploding: statistics of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) tell that by 2011, the global number of Internet users surpassed 2 billion, with about half of these being users of mobile broadband (an increase of more than tenfold since 2005).3 So important are broadband services becoming, and so quickly are they growing, that many broadband service providers have allowed consumer protection to take second place to corporate expansion and profit. The quality, reliability and accessibility of broadband services has become a new problem area for consumers in many parts of the world. Accordingly in 2011, CI commenced a campaign to hold broadband service providers to account, demanding that consumer protection issues and broader human rights issues that impede the use of broadband services by consumers be urgently addressed. Our work began with a global research project, which produced over 9000 responses from consumers in 40 countries around the world. This research, reported earlier this year and presented at a global CI meeting,4 revealed three main issues for broadband consumers worldwide:

Chiang Rai Declaration on Consumer Protection in Telecommunications, 30 July 2009, http://a2knetwork.org/ chiang-rai-declaration. 1

Shalini Singh. “Government spares telecos, penalises Internet users”. In: The Hindu 5 July (2012). url: http: 2

//www.thehindu.com/news/national/ article3603231.ece.

Broadband Commission for Digital Development. Broadband for the Global Good. 2012. url: http : 3

//www.broadbandcommission.org/ Documents/BD-BBLS-report-2012.pdf,

p. 21.

Jeremy Malcolm and Elyse Corless. “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”. In: Consumers in the Information Society: Access, Fairness and Representation. Ed. by Jeremy Malcolm. Consumers International, 2012, pp. 75– 90. 4

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

1. Internet connection speeds are unreliable, and claims made about speed are frequently inaccurate. 2. Consumers are forced into paying excessive prices, by lack of effective competition or by contractual lock-in. 3. Broadband providers do not provide a satisfactory complaint handling mechanism for consumers. This short book is the next phase in our broadband project, in which we provide members with resources to address these and other problems with broadband services through coordinated national campaigns. The book is an advocacy manual that provides the reader with the background knowledge needed to effectively plan and execute such a campaign to advocate for improvement in the provision of broadband services at a national level. Much like our 2010 manual Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone which dealt with intellectual property and access to knowledge,5 this work is intended to be an introduction to the subject area for consumer organisations, for many of whom broadband services are still a new and sometimes technical area. Additionally, the book provides practical guidance on advocacy techniques, and some out-of-the-box examples that can be easily adapted for use in any member’s national campaign to hold their local broadband service providers to account. Following this introduction, the book is divided into three main chapters, which are largely independent of each other, so that you can read only the chapters that are of interest to you. • Chapter 2, “Consumer advocacy and campaigning”, outlines the theory and practice of designing and implementing a national campaign on broadband services. It is also largely applicable to advocacy campaigns in other areas. If you feel that you are confident in the background to consumer advocacy, you are welcome to skip chapter 2. • Chapter 3, “Broadband Internet and the consumer”, begins by explaining broadband technologies and services, before describing the main consumer protection and human rights problems that can arise with these services. If you are already confident that you understand the technical background to broadband services and the problems encountered by consumers, you can skip chapter 3. • Chapter 4 (to which you can skip if you are very confident in both respects!) contains CI’s campaigning ideas to address the three main issues for broadband consumers that were identified in our research, as shown above. Accompanying these are readymade multimedia materials for use online and offline, which you can download in soft copy from our website in various formats.

Jeremy Malcolm and Frederick Noronha. Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone. Ed. by Jeremy Malcolm and Frederick Noronha. Consumers International, 2010. 5

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Definitions

Before proceeding, there are a few terms that should be defined up-front so that there is no misunderstanding for those who don’t read through the whole book. Most important, of course, is “broadband”. This is defined in more detail in section 3.1 on page 27, but for now it is sufficient to understand that broadband is a high capacity, always-available network connection that can be used to access the Internet. Broadband can be delivered and accessed through a variety of different technologies, which may be fixed line or “wired” technologies such as ADSL or cable modem, or wireless technologies such as 3G, HSDPA, WiFi or WiMAX. These are continually evolving, and it is not particularly important to know their technical differences. As a rule of thumb, other than dial-up modems that connect to the Internet through a telephone line on demand, and older mobile phones that don’t support 3G or faster mobile networks, most other Internet access technologies can be classed as broadband. A broadband connection supports applications such as video streaming and conferencing that older and slower technologies do not. If broadband is understood as a utility, then a “broadband service provider” is exactly equivalent to the power or water utility that provides electrical power or tap water to the consumer. The provider may also provide other services to the consumer, in what is called a “bundle”; for example, a telephone service or a pay television subscription. However in general, the broadband provider does not provide most of the content that the consumer accesses using their service. These are provided by independent content providers or hosts. For example, Google, Facebook and Wikipedia are not broadband providers but content providers, and are not (except tangentially) the subject of this book.

2 Consumer advocacy and campaigning

To campaign on broadband issues for consumers requires not only an understanding of Internet technologies and the problems associated with them, but also of how to translate consumers’ concerns into terms that policy-makers and industry can understand and respond to. This is at the essence of consumer advocacy. This chapter endeavours to provide an overview of the practice of consumer advocacy that can be used in campaigning on broadband issues, and also in a range of other policy areas that affect consumers.

2.1

About advocacy and campaigning

Advocacy can be defined as action aimed at changing the policies, position and programmes of governments, institutions or organisations involving an organised, systematic influencing process on matters of public interest. In addition, advocacy can be a social change process affecting attitudes, social relationships and power relations, which strengthens civil society and opens up democratic spaces.1 For some, advocacy has a more specific meaning which relates to engagement in government and inter-governmental policy processes, and can imply a reactive and direct approach that targets those specific processes. A programme of advocacy is referred to as a campaign; therefore advocacy and campaigning can be regarded as largely synonymous, both being terms for all forms of influencing (including, for example, lobbying and public campaigning). But again, it is also sometimes used in a more specific sense to refer to the process of generating support and pressure from public audiences – an approach more accurately referred to as “public campaigning” towards a particular cause of action. It is also sometimes distinguished from advocacy as being more planned and proactive and involving multiple channels of influence. Whichever definition that one adopts, both campaigning and advocacy are strategic processes with well designed activities that target key stakeholders and decision makers with the prime goal of

Nirmala S Pandit. “Advocacy: A Tool for Social change”. In: Consumer Network 2.4 (1995); Save the Children. Working for Change in Education: A handbook for planning advocacy. 2000. url: http://www.savethechildren. 1

org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/ WORKING % 20FOR % 20CHANGE % 20IN % 20EDUCATION.pdf.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

achieving positive change and/or raising awareness. Reasons for both advocacy and campaigning activities are to influence either public policy and practice, corporate policy and practice, public attitudes and behaviour, or decision making processes so that affected groups are involved and empowered to influence the decisions that affect them. In this manual, we will use both terms interchangeably with a common understanding that advocacy includes both singleissue, time-limited campaigns as well as ongoing work undertaken around a range of issues, and the activities may be conducted at a local, national, regional and international level.

2.1.1

Guidelines for campaigning

Experience shows that there are no strict rules for campaigning and advocacy work. The approaches used are context and issue specific. Local campaigns for example should take into account cultural and social factors and the local governance and political systems. Nevertheless there are a number of guidelines that should be kept in mind in order to have an effective advocacy campaign. Among these common principles are: • Focus: You must have a clear goal. There must be a clear understandable issue or problem that you want to tackle and you must be able to clearly explain the kind of solution you envisage. Furthermore, you need to have a strategic plan as to how you will undertake the campaign. • Clear communications: You must be able to communicate your goals, objectives and plans clearly to your target group and supporters. • Relevance: If your campaign is not important to the people it is trying to change or influence, it is unlikely to succeed. You must therefore be able to clearly demonstrate to your supporters and the target group that the problem the campaign it seeking to resolve is affecting them and the preferred solution is the best option. • Credibility: In order to be trusted to offer a solution, you must ensure that you are credible and factual. It is important to note that the opponents of the campaign will seek to question your credibility and the arguments that you present for change. You have to demonstrate that you believe in what you are talking about by leading by example.

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

• Timing: You should have a clear time frame for the campaign and also ensure that your timing of the campaign is good. Knowing that you will have to do different things at different places, you need to understand the context and the specific environment within which you want to campaign and have a clear understanding of your supporters and target groups. • Commitment: Advocacy and campaigning should continue until the issue that they are seeking to tackle is resolved.

2.1.2

Typical steps involved in campaigning

Below, we list some of the important steps that you may need to take in the planning and implementation of an effective advocacy campaign. 1. Identify the issue. To have an effective and successful campaign, we first need to identify the problem we want solved and educate ourselves about its causes and effects. We need to be sure that the issue that we want to work on is relevant and a priority to our constituents. There are several approaches in selecting an issue and gauging whether the issue is of priority to the constituents that we are working for. These approaches include analysing our complaints database, desk research, reviewing newspaper articles and academic journals among others. Recently, more structured methods of identifying problems and selecting a campaign issue have been developed and these include logical framework, a problem tree among others.2

NORAD. The Logical Framework Approach: Handbook for objectivesoriented planning. Fourth edition. 1999. 2

2. Set goals and objectives. Having identified the issue that you want to campaign on as an organisation or group, it is important that you now set your goals and objectives. The goal should be the long term target ambition of the campaign while the objectives are the short term achievements that you hope to register as you move towards the realisation of the goal. It is important to ensure that your objectives are SMART meaning Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Time bound.3 You can use the logical framework or “log frame” model to logically summarise the links between your goals, outputs, activities and inputs.4 This allows you to visualise the relationship between the goals of an advocacy initiative, and the proposed activities for achieving those goals. It can be expressed in a tabular manner or any other matrix of your choice.

George T Doran. “There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives”. In: Management Review 70 (11 1981), pp. 35–36. 3

NORAD, The Logical Framework Approach: Handbook for objectivesoriented planning. 4

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

3. Build a knowledge base. Once we have identified the problem and defined the issue, our next step is to conduct more thorough research about the issue. We must be fully informed about the problem if we expect to persuade people and institutions to change policies for the better. Careful, objective research will educate us and our supporters about the causes and effects of the problem. This will involve gathering detailed information on the problem including facts, figures, contacts and references. Building a strong knowledge base is critical since the target groups will see you as an expert and you should have at your fingertips answers to some of the questions they may ask. The main information sources that will help you build the knowledge base include libraries, Internet resources, case studies, newspapers and talking to experts. Some hints for building a knowledge base for broadband campaigning are given below at section 2.5 on page 23. 4. Build support. Besides a knowledge base, a successful campaign will depend upon several other resources such as people, time, money and organisations. It is important to build support for the campaign issue at an early stage in the campaign process. The stronger the support for the campaign issue, the greater the chances of success. The campaign team should at this stage reach out to allies and advocates and form alliances and coalitions with other organisations, donors, professional associations, youth and women groups, activists and individuals who can support the campaign in one way or another. Some more on this is discussed in section 2.2 on page 14. 5. Know your opponents and potential obstacles. Besides knowing and reaching out to your potential allies in a campaign, it is important to note that not everyone will be happy with the changes that the campaign aims to produce. It is therefore important to map out and know your opponents and possible obstacles early enough in a campaign. A campaign will seek to persuade, convince and challenge the arguments of the opponents and therefore assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the opponents, knowing the potential issues that they may raise and preparing yourself on how you expect to tackle their arguments and deal with the other obstacles is critical in achieving success in a campaign. 6. Develop implementation and activity plan for your advocacy work. With all the facts at hand, it is important to develop a plan of action for the campaign. It is now the time to put down what needs to be done, whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the best way to do it, who needs to do it, what resources are needed to accomplish the tasks and

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

by when it should be done. This includes the preparation of a budget (see the box overleaf). Estimating the cost of an advocacy project can be difficult, especially for a long-term initiative. More than with other types of programmes, midcourse corrections will occur and can sometimes lead to higher costs. Therefore build some flexibility into your workplan and budget, revisiting them along the way and making adjustments as and when necessary.

A budget for an advocacy initiative may include: • Salaries and benefits for staff. • Supplies. • Activities and events (conferences, briefings, lunches, meetings, press conferences, etc). • Printing and distribution (brochures, reports, fact sheets, press releases, promotional items, briefing materials, etc). • Communications (telephone calls, fax, modem, postage). • Office space. • Consulting services (policy research, public relations services, private lobbying, legal services). • Training. • Travel. • Dues and fees. • Contingency (provision for unexpected expenses).

7. Implement the plan. Having developed the plan, it is now the time to implement the activities in the plan of action. It is important to implement the activities within the agreed timelines and budget and to keep your eyes on the agreed campaign objectives. Given that the advocacy campaign will be aiming to create change through a number of activities, there are numerous ways by which this can be accomplished. You should try and use the most effective tactics for your campaign cause. Activity ideas include blogging, events, radio/TV events, films and documentaries, art, fliers, posters and brochures, letters, slogans and petitions amongst others. An expanded treatment of this step is given in section 2.3 on page 17.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

8. Monitor, evaluate and revise plan where necessary. It is crucial that you create time as often as possible during a campaign to reflect on your performance towards attaining the set goals and objectives and to make any adjustments in your strategies, tactics, activities, messages etc. where necessary. Monitoring and evaluation must not be left to the end of the campaign. Monitoring and evaluation will also help in ensuring that the resources are well used and that the campaign stays focused on the goal. An expanded treatment of this step is given at 2.4 on page 21.

2.2

Relationships

As noted above, an advocacy campaign will involve relationships with both partners and opponents. By definition, this will take place in a political context. The more you understand the political environment you are working in, the more easily you can assess risk, and the less likely you are to make a mistake that will cause harm to the advocacy campaign. Answering the following questions will guide you in managing relationships better. 1. What are the key debates, and who represents each side? 2. Which issues (or people) have brought discontent to consumers, regulators, watchdogs and/or service providers? 3. How are policies created and ratified within government? 4. Which groups in the ICT sector are respected and which are disrespected or feared? 5. How do the policies you are concerned with relate to controversial topics? 6. What are accepted forms of dialogue and proper protocol for approaching policy makers? Before initiating advocacy, it is vital that you understand the policy concerns of the affected communities and whether there are appropriate advocacy roles you can play. As with other types of programming, the more your policy objectives emerge from participatory programme design, the better. Above all, you should be sure that your involvement in advocacy would be welcomed, rather than resented, and will not put others at additional risk. Particular suggestions about managing your relationships with partners and opponents are given below.

2.2.1

Working with partners

It may benefit your campaign to work as part of a coalition; that is, a group of organisations or individuals that come together to

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

work on a common goal. Coalitions can be temporary or longer term. Working in coalitions as opposed to going it alone has several advantages including the following: • There is strength in numbers. Coalitions can make you win a campaign that might not be won by one person or one organisation. • Coalitions bring together more skills and other resources. • They help build new leaders. • They provide a greater pool of ideas. • A coalition depicts that the issue you are campaigning on is of concern to many people. • A coalition brings in a unifying voice. • It minimises duplication and competition. • Coalitions help broaden the campaign issue and the scope of the campaign, eg, scaling up a campaign to a national and international level. It should be noted however that in order to steer a coalition effectively, you need some basic skills in getting people and organisations together and keeping the coalition together for the realisation of the goal. There are some basic principles that make coalitions stick and work. These are varied but the underlying principles are that coalitions must present a win-win situation. Note that each organisation or individual in the coalition would ask themselves what is in it for them. Coalitions must also be all inclusive and participatory. You need to demonstrate that every individual and/or organisation in the coalition is equally important and that you together own the coalition. Herewith below is a quick checklist on what makes a coalition work: • Respect and trust amongst members. • The leader is visible and unique. • The membership cuts across all stakeholders. • The coalition shares a common vision. • The goal and objectives of the campaign are shared and known well within the coalition. • The issues are well understood by each of the members. • Members of the coalition have equal say. • Members of the coalition all own the coalition and see the benefit of their membership. • Members communicate clearly and regularly.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

Conversely, there are some traps to be avoided in building and maintaining campaign coalitions: • Recognise that each member of the coalition has their own agenda. • Choose and work only on unifying issues. • Frame issues in a way that most of the coalition members can identify with. • Accept that working on consensus is at times difficult and accept divergent views. • Maintain focus on the goal and avoid distracting issues as much as possible.

2.2.2

Negotiation

Negotiation is a back and forth communication designed to reach agreement while leaving the other side intact and positive. Negotiation can play an important role in assisting policy-makers to obtain a better grasp of the complex issues, factors and human dynamics behind important policy issues. There are two types of negotiations. The first is the soft type where the participants are friend and the goal is agreement. In the second type of negotiation, the participants are adversaries and the goal is victory. In effective negotiation, there are four basic principles that are important to observe, in the classic formulation of Fisher and Ury. These principles are: separate the people from the problem; focus on interests rather than positions; generate a variety of options before deciding what to do; and base the result on some objective standard.5 A negotiation should be considered successful if it is efficient, produces a wise agreement when agreement is possible, and improves or at least does not harm the relationship between the negotiating parties. In negotiating over a variety of policy options, the following are some factors to consider. • Which of the policy solutions is likely to have the largest and most lasting impact on the problem? • What will happen if nothing is done regarding these policy issues? • Which policy solutions are readily achievable and which are likely to be expensive and/or time consuming? • Which policy solutions are likely to garner significant support or, alternatively, face significant opposition?

Roger Fisher and William Ury. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1983. 5

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

Before you start to negotiate, you also need to be clear on the following: â&#x20AC;˘ What is your goal? In other words, what do you want out of the negotiations and what do you think the other person wants? What is your expected outcome? â&#x20AC;˘ What trade-offs can you accept in the process? What can you concede and what do you think the other party can concede to? Do you have something that the other party needs and does not have that you can give in exchange for what you want? What are your possible compromises? â&#x20AC;˘ If the negotiations hit a dead end, what are the possible alternatives? What effect would not reaching an agreement have on you and or the other party and how would you handle that? What are the consequences of you losing the negotiations? You should also consider the history between you and the party that you want to negotiate with. Ask yourself whether there are any hidden issues that may impact on your negotiation. If there are issues that you think might negatively affect or influence the negotiations, think of how these issues can be handled.

2.3

Communications

Advocacy campaigns are about persuading the target group to take some desired action. To achieve this, you must build a compelling message and a strategy for communicating it. If you can make sure that your advocacy message is simple and concise, and delivered by a credible messenger using a tone and language that are consistent with the message, you stand a good chance of having a great impact on the target audience.

2.3.1

Developing campaigning materials

Campaigning materials are the basic tools for delivering the message to the target audience, building support and awareness and achieving the desired outcome of the campaign. Materials required vary depending on the context and the nature of the campaign that one is undertaking. There are various options and a wide variety of campaign materials that can be developed and used as a way of creating the desired change. The materials commonly used include but are not limited to products such as leaflets, stickers, T-shirts, newsletters, briefing papers, postcards, posters, banners, video news releases, direct-mail appeals, advertising and media releases. The content, design, production, format and distribution of these and any other campaign materials must be tailored to the requirements of the individual campaign. One major challenge in a campaign is competing for the attention of the target group and therefore the campaign material of choice must be one that delivers!

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

Some of the factors that you need to consider while choosing the relevant campaign materials to adapt for your campaign and the distribution channels that would work are the following: • Decide upon your target audience. Advocacy campaigns can be targeted at various audiences including policy makers, government officials, consumers and the general public, professional associations, industry, donors, and the media among others. While selecting the target audience, you should ask what change does the campaign seek? Who are the people with the key to make this change? Where should the change start from? Can you directly reach the people who can make the change or might you have to go through other people? Who are these people you have to convince as well? How sustainable will the outcomes be when you target different people? • How best to reach this audience. How large is the target group? Where is the target group located? What are the major characteristics of the target group? What communication materials do they depend on for their mainstream information? For example if you are targeting Internet users, it may be useful to conduct your campaign predominantly online – but if targeting non-users, of course a different approach is required. • The information that we want to convey. The content of the message refers to the main point or idea that you want to communicate to the audience. In order to make sure that you have the correct content, ask yourself what single idea you want the audience to take away after they receive your message. Do you want people to come to an event, write a letter of protest, change their habits, boycott or make a donation? Be clear, focused and compelling. The material used and the manner in which it is used should present a straight-forward message on what you want the audience or target group to do. • The language to be used. The language of the message must be appropriate for the target audience. In order to know whether the language is appropriate, ask yourself how the audience would interpret the message. Would they get the same meaning as you intended them to get, and could it be interpreted differently by various audiences? Typically, a communicator has one or more of these five basic purposes: to inform, to persuade, to inspire and motivate, to instruct, or to entertain. The purpose will affect the choice of language. When you simply want to inform, your aim is to objectively deliver facts and knowledge (for example, the number of broadband users in the country, or a description of the policy environment). On the other hand when your purpose is to create opinion in favour of an issue you want to convince by using

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

arguments that speak to the mind as well as the feelings of the reader. • The messenger to communicate the message. The messenger is the person or people that are going to deliver the message. Ask yourself whether the person that you have identified to deliver the message is credible to the audience. Would the audience or target group listen to the messenger? Is it possible to include beneficiaries as spokespersons or messengers? Advocacy networks can send a powerful and more meaningful message to policy makers by letting the message come from a member of the affected population, eg, disgruntled broadband service users. • What methods of distribution are available within your context? The communication channel you choose to use to deliver the message is called the format. Ask yourself whether the appropriate channel would be a letter, email, fact sheets, public rallies, press releases, posters or even a courtesy call or face-to-face meeting. Different channels are more effective for certain audiences. You could use different or even multiple channels for some audiences but what you have to be sure about is that the audience will take you seriously. What display opportunities and places are available for posters or exhibitions? Who will distribute leaflets and newsletters and where will they be distributed? Will there be events or other opportunities that you can use to distribute the materials? Will you need licenses and permits from some authorities to distribute the materials? How do cost, time, logistical consideration, and reach to target audience affect your choices? • The timing of the campaign and how long the material will last. In advocacy campaigning, the place and time for the delivery of the message is also very important. You need to know which other events or issues might distract or help you in getting the attention of your target audience. Keep up to date with the political debates and news stories. Are there other political events that you can link up with to draw more attention to the issue? Is there an electoral campaign underway that might make policymakers more receptive than normal to your message? If you can, tie your message to such current events. This will increase your impact and give your message greater attention. Also do make sure that the information in the material will not expire before the end of the campaign. • How much money do you have for the campaign? There are several types of materials that one can choose from for different types of campaigns and advocacy work, and the budget is often a deciding factor in choosing between these. Hiring a public relations or consulting firm, for example, can be

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

an important way to communicate your key advocacy messages, but it is costly. Holding meetings, writing media commentary, or arranging site visits are relatively lower-cost activities. Know your budget and what you can afford lest you run out of steam midway!

Have you considered the following ideas to spread your message? • Face-to-face meetings • Public rallies • Fact sheets • Posters and flyers in public places • Public debates • Press releases • Press conferences • Contests to design posters, slogans, etc. • Websites • Emails

2.3.2

Use of the media

Engaging the media in your campaign often provides the best opportunity to reach the most people within your target audience at a given time. Therefore, the importance of planning and executing a media plan cannot be stressed enough. To be effective: • Assess the media with the widest outreach. This will require researching all types of media outlets (newspapers, radio, television, etc.) in your area. Make a complete list of these outlets along with contact names, phone and fax numbers, and email addresses. Online social media such as blogs, Facebook, Twitter can also be effective, particularly when you aim to engage existing Internet users in your campaign. • Write a media plan. A media plan should include ways to generate interest in your issue; educate policy makers, legislators, and the public; reveal alternative information to reporters; or force a decision maker or candidate to take a position. Your media strategy needs to be

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

tailored to effectively reach the decision makers you are trying to influence. If you are reaching out to service providers and policy makers, you will want to aim your efforts toward the op-ed pages and editorial board meetings. If your message is targeted to reach the general public, morning news radio and press events will reach a broader audience. â&#x20AC;˘ Become a reliable source for reporters. As a broadband consumer advocate, you understand the existing Internet service environment in your country and the wider issues faced by all stakeholders. You need to make this knowledge and expertise available to reporters. Try to keep the relationships with the media friendly and honest, and do not be afraid to approach reporters with an issue or a story idea. Remember that they are doing their job by reporting your agenda, so try to make it easier for them by maintaining open lines of communication. â&#x20AC;˘ Access to the media is access to the public. The issues printed or broadcast by the media can be shaped by the information you provide. Take advantage of prime time to hold TV/radio interviews or be hosted in popular issue-based talk shows. Let the media, and the community, know you are part of the larger picture, but also discuss the local impact of a national story, eg, improved and expanded access to broadband services, bridging of the national digital divide, improvement of the economy, etc.

2.4

Monitoring and evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation are key activities for keeping an advocacy initiative on track, and for assessing the changes it has achieved based on its stated goals. Effective monitoring and evaluation requires careful planning. These plans are an integral part of designing an advocacy initiative, since you will have to establish prior to implementation what information is necessary for tracking progress, and how you will obtain this information. Advocacy activities often need to be adjusted, revised and re-directed. This is especially so for long-term advocacy. Such changes, however, should only be made on the basis of good monitoring data. For example, 1. What new information have you learned through public events, meetings, or reading the newspapers? 2. Have political conditions changed since you first planned the initiative? 3. Have your target audiences changed their opinions? Monitoring should focus on tracking outputs, activities, and inputs. When such information is not known, it is difficult to advance your plan.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

Outputs are usually changes in knowledge, awareness and/or opinion of target audiences about the policy issue. For example, you may have a campaign to promote a Broadband Disclosure Statement (see chapter 4), which simultaneously targets industry to adopt such a statement voluntarily, and the government regulator to mandate it. If you are fortunate enough that the statement is widely adopted by industry voluntarily, you would probably want to change the focus of your activities. Rather than continuing to lobby the regulator, which is no longer necessary, you can now work with industry on implementation, and on educating consumers. Advocacy initiatives should also carefully monitor activities and inputs into those activities. By keeping a record of your activities, you can learn from the results of each activity and become more effective as an advocate. The broader your target audience, the more important this becomes. For example, you may want to track new information about your target audience that will affect your message, or activities that are successful versus those that are less successful. In comparison to monitoring which takes place from the earliest stages of the campaign, evaluation of an advocacy campaign focuses on the impact and effects of the campaign. Evaluations assess the extent to which your policy goals have been achieved (such as changing knowledge, opinion and/or awareness of target audiences, and changing actions by policy-makers such as enactment of policies), as well as the ultimate impact of these changes on the well-being of households and individuals. Advocacy initiatives need to demonstrate their positive impact on peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lives. Evaluation is a discipline in itself, and is often outsourced by an organisation to an independent external evaluator. Amongst the difficulties that the evaluator will encounter in evaluating an advocacy initiative are the following: â&#x20AC;˘ When a policy is enacted after a high-visibility advocacy campaign, the group responsible will usually take credit for the results. However, it is usually difficult to know exactly what led policy makers to make a certain decision. Thus, attributing the results of advocacy work can be difficult indeed. When advocacy campaigns are carried out by a coalition, it becomes nearly impossible (and often counterproductive) to attribute credit. â&#x20AC;˘ The unique characteristics of advocacy make it necessary to think in new ways about how evaluations should be carried out. While policy makers may approve new and favourable policies, or revise and change old ones, these changes may take a long time to yield results that can be measured at the household level, that is, to yield impact changes. This may have consequences for the timing of evaluations. Impact may need to be measured in a post-evaluation, after a certain period of time has passed rather than in a final evaluation of an advocacy initiative.

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

2.5

Building a knowledge base for broadband campaigning

The general principles given previously are intended to provide guidance for advocacy and campaigning across a range of policy areas, but only in a few cases was specific reference made to the case of broadband. In this last section of the current chapter, we will apply some of the above principles in that more specific context, illustrating how a consumer organisation might prepare for a broadband advocacy campaign by analysing the specific policies and issues that apply to that industry. Three tasks are described as part of the process of building a knowledge base for broadband campaigning: identifying the relevant stakeholders, analysing the market and how well it is serving consumers, analysing the policy environment that regulates this market, and developing a policy strategy that identifies options for policy change.

2.5.1

Identify stakeholders

Amongst the major stakeholders in the broadband advocacy campaign will be: 1. Broadband Internet service providers. 2. Licensing and regulatory authorities. 3. Civil society organisations involved in the ICT sector, such as Internet user groups and digital rights groups. It is therefore important to identify and list these organisations which shall play a role in the broadband advocacy campaign. Pay particular attention to policy-makers and those who influence them. Who are the actors who make critical decisions about these policies? Consider all the actors you identified above, not limited to government regulators but also service providersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; associations, Internet activist groups, etc. You should identify the actual individuals who make direct policy decisions, and those actors who can influence direct decision makers. Determine their degree of influence, their market share, their resources, and their interests in these issues, as applicable. The more information you have about the actors that may influence and affect policy change, the easier it is to devise an advocacy strategy.

2.5.2

Analyse the market

Next you should analyse the market and how well it operates for consumers. You could begin by identifying the existing variety of broadband services offered in your country. You can get this information from the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s licensing and regulatory agency, Internet industry association, Internet user association (such as the local chapter of the Internet Society), or online ISP directories.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

By interviewing the major broadband service providers in your country it may also be possible to learn: 1. Who are the big players in the broadband service industry. 2. Which service providers have the largest client base. 3. Which service providers wield the most influence in the industry. 4. Which service providers are new to the industry. You could then identify existing policies that govern broadband services in the country. This would include pricing regulations, codes of conduct, and standard terms and conditions, disclaimers and service level agreements, etc. Then you can move on to gather information about the issues consumers are facing with the broadband services availed to them. Are there online complaint forums? Do a search on the major ISPs’ names, and see what you can find. Look in the letters pages of any local Internet magazines. You may also have obtained some information on this from the local Internet user groups, if any. If you participated in CI’s global broadband research in 2011, then of course you have a head start already.

2.5.3

Analyse the law and policy environment

Analysis of the law and policy environment is critical for subsequent planning of an advocacy initiative, and will help you assess whether policy change is likely to be successful or not. This includes gathering information of existing relevant laws and policies, and about formal and informal policy making processes. Without a sound knowledge of how policy decisions are made and who controls such decisions, both formally and informally, it is not possible to effectively advocate for a policy change. Therefore, consider the distribution of power between ICT policy makers in your country and the consumers as well as other stakeholders that are affected by the policies. The answers to the following questions may guide what advocacy strategy you shall employ: • What is the level of political openness in your country or region towards public dialogue on broadband services policies? • Can consumers and other stakeholders participate in policy decisions about Internet connectivity and broadband issues? • Where are key decisions on Internet service policies made and who controls such decisions? • What are the rules, restrictions, and conditions under which you have to operate when conducting broadband consumer advocacy?

CONSUMER ADVOCACY AND CAMPAIGNING

• Does your country provide sufficient political space to NGO’s for influencing policy? More open political systems normally pose less risk to national or local groups participating in political life. Groups in these countries have more options to choose from when trying to develop advocacy strategies and influence policy makers. And in some cases, the policy environment may be open to dialogue with NGOs on some issues (say, ICT sector), but not others (say, family planning policies). Advocating for a popular and widely discussed issue will require a different strategy than advocating for an issue which only few people know about, or which does not arouse general interest. Therefore, ask: • Is this a topic of interest for the general public? If not, which section of the demographic is likely to discuss this topic? • Has news regarding Internet service policies recently been featured in the media? Finally, the overall political and social climate may also influence your choice for an advocacy strategy, and it is therefore important to account for factors such as upcoming elections, recession, political unrest, government’s support from different sectors in society, and recent policy changes in your analysis. Consider: • Are broadband services a priority for the current government? • Does the government plan to make any changes to existing regulations? • What Internet connectivity policies were approved or rejected in recent years?

2.5.4

Identify options for policy change

With the information that you now have in hand, you will develop options to address the issues that you have uncovered. Your policy analysis should help you identify options for policy change and determine the relative impact they may have on the problem. For easy analysis of the policy findings, the following steps can be followed: • Problem identification: Depending on the purpose of the analysis (ie, a long-range strategic plan, programme, or project design) the problem can be more general (broadband services) or specific (monopoly and lack of transparent pricing models, privacy and security issues, broadband accessibility in rural areas, etc). Problem statements should specify who is affected by the problem. • Direct causes: The analysis identifies the most direct factors that contribute to the problem identified, eg,

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

1. Inadequate policies to regulate the operations of broadband service providers in matters such as price control, countering monopoly, consumer protection, privacy and security, lack of complaint resolution mechanisms, inadequate legislation, etc. 2. Inadequate resources (budget, expertise and priority) allocated by government to adequately govern the ICT sector. 3. Lack of sufficiently inclusive consultation with stakeholders in formulation of policies. At this stage, you need to be specific. Why, for example, are the policies lacking? Is it due to opposition to broadband service regulations by business leaders? Is it due to lack of awareness by consumers? Answers to the above questions will ensure that the options you develop will attack the identified problems in an effective way. Having isolated problems that you could address, and the causes of those problems, identify different options to address each policy issue. In order to identify options clearly, it is useful to list all policy issues and describe what changes would have to take place to have an impact on the problem you have identified. If the analysis includes strong causal links between policy issues and the problem, then a change in any of the identified issues should yield an impact on the problem that you want to solve. Go back to your list of stakeholders and determine whether the identified actors support or oppose specific policies that bear on the issues you have identified. Would it be most effective to attack the problem through the existing regulatory bodies, or through direct action by civil society to advocate for broadband consumer rights and protection? You donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t have to choose between issues and strategies when building a knowledge base, but rather identify which changes would yield the desired result. After this, you can consider the best options for policy change. Your goal is to rank these ideas in order of preference. This will feed directly into your later implementation and activity plan. You are now well on the way to a successful broadband advocacy campaign!

3 Broadband Internet and the consumer

If you have read the previous chapter, then you have an idea of the process of advocacy and campaigning. But you might still not have a clear understanding of the technical and market issues involved in the supply and consumption of broadband Internet services, and the issues for consumers to which they typically give rise. This chapter should fill in those gaps.

3.1

Background facts

The term broadband generally means a high-speed, “always on”, communications link that carries information between one location and another. The Broadband Commission for Digital Development says: an always-on service (not needing to make a new connection to a server each time a user wants to go online), and high-capacity: able to carry lots of data per second, rather than the particular arrival speed of the data.1

A broadband link connects your premises to your service provider’s network. Major service providers are companies like Verizon, AT&T, Virgin, Orange, Telefônica, Telstra and others. These companies are also referred to as Internet service providers (ISPs), although they usually sell both phone services and Internet access. Your broadband link goes through infrastructure like wires, poles, cables, antennas and dishes. Today we use one of several existing technologies to connect households: • Pairs of copper wire running to the local telephone exchange (DSL or ADSL connection). • Co-axial cable also used to supply cable television (HFC cable). • Antenna and radio waves (WiMAX, WiFi, 3G or satellite technologies). These household connections are mostly considered to be “fixed broadband”. They work in one location only and the equipment

Broadband Commission for Digital Development, Broadband for the Global Good, p. 19. 1

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

can’t move around. Households with fixed broadband links have a cable, antenna or satellite dish to a small box on the side of the house or apartment building, with another cable going to a modem linked to your computer.

3.1.1

What is the difference between the Internet and broadband?

While many people use the terms interchangeably, the Internet is not the same thing as broadband. In fact, you can use a broadband link to receive many different services which may be completely separate from the Internet, such as videoconferencing, security monitoring and health monitoring services. The Internet is a collection of networks and computers all joined together using the same basic communications technology. A broadband service is simply a fast, always-on way of linking your premises to the Internet and other services. Think of the Internet as a city. Broadband is the highway leading there. You can connect to the Internet without a broadband connection. For example some people still use a slow “dial-up” connection using a phone call. People subscribe to an Internet service from an ISP. The ISP usually supplies you with a modem to plug into your computer. You link to your ISP’s network and then can access the Internet to check your email, look at websites, do online banking or shopping, download podcasts, watch videos, share your photos, do social networking and everything else the Internet offers.

3.1.2

Service types and access devices

Currently the majority of people in developed countries can get a broadband connection using DSL over the telephone lines or with HFC cable. (See table: Current Broadband Technologies). If they can’t get these, they might have to use the much slower dial-up method via the phone, link through a satellite, or use fixed wireless. Some houses in new estates are lucky enough to have fibre-optic cable, which means they can get a very fast broadband service.

Service type

Physical connection

Connection type

Household gadget

Table 3.1: Current Broadband Technologies Peak speed range

Best distance

DSL

Copper wire

Telephone plug

DSL modem

0.5Mbps – 24Mbps

400m – 4km

HFC Cable

Coaxial Cable

Customer Access Unit

Cable modem

0.5Mbps – 50Mbps

100km

WiFi

Public spectrum

Antenna

Wireless adapter

0.5Mbps – 50Mbps

180m

WiMAX

Licensed/Public Spectrum

Antenna

Wimax modem

10 Mbps

30km

Satellite

Licensed spectrum

Antenna

Satellite modem

1 Mbps – 50 Mbps

National

Licensed spectrum

Internal antenna

Dongle / 3G modem

100 Kbps – 3 Mbps

5 km

FTTP

Fibre-optic cable

Termination unit

Gateway / router

100 Mbps – Gbps

60 km

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

Table 3.1 on the preceding page shows the differences between broadband technologies using commonly available equipment. Upload and download speeds have been combined and each can vary considerably. All figures are approximate and subject to change (Mbps = Megabits per second, Gbps = Gigabits per second). Note that distances and speed can vary depending on local conditions, and all wireless systems, even mobile ones, can reach greater distances with a more effective antenna or when there are few users. Fixed antennas can give much greater speed and range than a mobile handset because they are bigger, and can be pointed very precisely towards the tower to pick up the maximum signal strength. The mixture of service types and access devices used will vary from country to country. Wireless options are more prevalent in many developing countries that have limited fixed line telephone networks. Some countries such as Australia, South Korea and Singapore have invested in national broadband networks, which make fast broadband available to a large part of the population at comparable conditions and prices. In countries that have relied on private investment only, coverage is typically more patchy, with the fastest services concentrated around urban areas.

3.1.3

Internet connected devices

Conceptually, there is a distinction between the network device through which a connection is made to an ISP (described in Table 3.1 on the facing page), and the device which actually presents Internet-accessible content to the consumer. In the simplest case, these are respectively a device such as a modem, and a computer to which it is connected by a cable or a local wireless network. This can be confusing, because a user might reasonably assume that their computer is their access device, and report that they use WiFi to access the Internet – whereas in fact they only connect over WiFi to a router or modem in their own home, which is in turn connected to an ISP over DSL. In other cases, the functions of access and use of the Internet are combined into a single device – the most obvious example being a mobile phone handset, which both directly makes the network connection to an ISP, and also provides an interactive interface for the use of Internet services. Even so, the conceptual distinction remains, because in many cases the mobile phone handset can also be used as an Internet access device for other nearby electronic devices such as computers and tablets, by sharing its own Internet connection over the consumer’s own local network (via Bluetooth, WiFi or cable). In such a case of a tablet that shares a 3G phone’s Internet connection over WiFi, the service type applicable to the tablet’s Internet connection is 3G, not WiFi. So, in surveying consumers about their method of Internet access, you should be careful in the wording of your questions.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

This section would not be complete without mentioning that there are Internet-connected devices other than just computers and phones. Our Mexican member Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco, summarising research by the Mexican Internet Association, reports the interesting fact that whilst PCs and laptops are the most popular hardware for accessing the Internet in Mexico, video game consoles are actually in next place, ahead of mobile phones and PDAs. Even whitegoods such as certain models of refrigerator can be connected to the Internet, and in the future – who knows?

3.1.4

Plans and bundles

A “plan” is simply a contract for Internet services between a consumer and an ISP. There are pre-paid and post-paid plans, with the most common period for post-paid plans being monthly. Often a plan may have a minimum contract term, particularly if it is a bundle. Another condition typically attached to plans is a limit to the amount of Internet content that may be downloaded and/or uploaded during the contract period without incurring an extra charge. There are numerous other possible conditions, some of which will be dealt with in section 3.3.3 on page 45. A “bundle” (or package) is a plan that includes both Internet access, and other products and services. The most common items that are bundled with a plan are: • A telephone line – this is particularly common for DSL services, which run over a fixed telephone line, and of course for mobile phone plans that include both Internet and telephone service. • Telephone calls – also common with mobile phone plans that may bundle a certain number of minutes to certain destinations. With fixed line Internet connections, sometimes VoIP (Voice over IP) calls are bundled with the plan. This will typically require you to plug your telephone handset into the Internet access device provided by the ISP, so that it can route your calls over the Internet. • The rental or instalment purchase of an access device or handset. For fixed line Internet services, including a modem is a common way for the ISP to ensure that all its customers are using the same technology, which can be more easily supported by its technicians. For mobile services, handset makers partner with telephone companies to push new handsets onto consumers to perpetuate a continuous upgrade cycle. Indeed in some countries, such as the United States, it has traditionally been difficult to enter into a mobile phone contract without obtaining a new handset. • Pay television services are also commonly bundled with Internet services in some countries. This is especially common where the Internet service is provided over an HFC cable which is

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

used for pay television. But with IPTV technologies, television services can now be bundled over almost any sort of broadband connection. According to a large scale EU-wide survey, 42% of households obtained their Internet service through a bundle; most commonly with Internet and telephone line, but almost half of cases of bundling included TV.2 Based on our own survey conducted by CI members in 2011, a similar percentage of Internet plans across all regions include a bundle, though the products bundled together do vary by region; with television much more popular in Latin America, and device rental or purchase much more so in the Asia-Pacific region.3

3.1.5

Applications and services

Just as the electricity grid can power all manner of electrical devices, so the Internet can support a wide range of different services and applications. A common misconception is that the Internet is the World Wide Web, which is what we directly access using a Web browser when accessing popular websites such as Google, Facebook and Wikipedia. But in fact whilst it is by far the most popular, the Web is only one of the services that the Internet makes available, and a relatively recent one dating back to 1991, decades after other Internet services such as email were first used. Today, though some early Internet services have fallen by the wayside (for example a service called Gopher was superseded by the Web), numerous other services that run over the Internet are still widely used, including: • Instant messaging and chat. • Voice or video calls (of which VoIP, already mentioned, is an example). • Services such as FTP and BitTorrent for downloading large files. • Multi-player games that run outside of a Web browser. Importantly, these are amongst the services for which broadband is most important. Most of the Web still functions adequately on a slower speed connection such as a dial-up modem, but there is little point in attempting to access streaming video over such a connection. You may also encounter the term protocol. A protocol is a standard that specifies the format for the communications that an Internet service uses. Most Internet protocols are standardised by a body called the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), though those for the Web are standardised by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Some Internet protocols function at a low level that can be thought of as the Internet’s “plumbing”; most importantly, TCP/IP, which defines the format of the “packets” of information exchanged by most other Internet services. On top of this (at a higher “layer”, in technical terms), are protocols such as HTTP

European Commission. ECommunications Household Survey. 2011. url: http://ec.europa.eu/ 2

public _ opinion/archives/ebs/ebs _ 362_en.pdf, p. 9.

Malcolm and Corless, “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”, p. 81. 3

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

which defines how Web pages are transmitted and SMTP which defines how email is exchanged. At a still higher layer, standards like HTML (for the Web) and MIME (for email) are used to specify how the content transmitted is displayed to the user. Finally there is an application. Whilst this can also be synonymous with a service, it is more often used to refer to a piece of software that provides the user with an interface to access an underlying Internet service. Thus a Web browser such as Firefox or Chrome is an application for accessing the Web, Thunderbird and Outlook can be used for accessing email, and Skype is an application for accessing a VoIP service (in that case, a proprietary service that is not specified by an IETF-defined protocol). To confuse the picture slightly more, there are Web applications that can be used for accessing other Internet services that do not, fundamentally, operate over the Web itself. A well known example is Gmail, which can be used to access email over a Web interface. Conversely, there are applications that don’t present themselves as web browsers, but which do present an interface to Web-based information. An example is the Facebook app for smartphones such as the iPhone. Whilst this may seem messy, the fundamentals remain simple: the Internet includes a variety of services, defined by a variety of protocols that are mostly defined as open standards, and these are accessible to the user through a variety of applications. In campaigning on broadband, we are mostly concerned with the most fundamental layers of the Internet service, that are within the control of the ISP. That is, the ISP should provide access to the Internet that does not discriminate between the applications or services supported (this is called “network neutrality”; see section 3.4.5 on page 56), but is not expected to exercise control over the content that third parties make available over those services (and indeed, in general, should not be doing so).

3.2

Access and adoption barriers

N Lucchi. “Access to Network Services and Protection of Constitutional Rights: Recognizing the Essential Role of Internet Access for the Freedom of Expression”. In: Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law (JICL) 19.3 (2011). url: http://www.cjicl. 4

com/uploads/2/9/5/9/2959791/cjicl_ 19.3_lucchi_article.pdf.

British Broadcasting Corporation. Four in Five Regard Internet Access as a Fundamental Right: Global Poll. 2010. url: http : / / news . bbc . co . uk / 2 / 5

Most fundamental of all issues for broadband consumers, of course, is whether they have access at all. This is fast becoming seen as a question of human rights, with a number of countries having enshrined this principle in law.4 Four out of five respondents to a BBC surveyed conducted in 2010 stated that they regarded Internet access as a fundamental right,5 and the Council of Europe too has recognised “people’s significant reliance on the Internet as an essential tool for their everyday activities and the resulting legitimate expectation that Internet services be accessible and affordable, secure, reliable and ongoing.”6 The Chairman of America’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC), similarly, has stated that “Broadband has gone from being a luxury to being a necessity for full participation in our economy and society.”7

shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08 _ 03 _ 10 _ BBC _ internet_poll.pdf.

Council of Europe. Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public interest. 2010. url: 6

https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc. jsp?id=1678299.

Edward Wyatt. F.C.C. Plans to Overhaul Telecom Fund to Focus on Expanding Broadband. 2011. url: http://www. 7

nytimes.com/2011/10/07/business/ fcc- plans- an- overhaul- of- theuniversal-service-fund.html?_r=3.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

Stimulating public and private investment in broadband is an enormous task in itself, on which CI does not realistically have the capacity to make a difference on a global scale. Therefore we have chosen not to make this a part of our work on broadband, instead focussing on consumer protection and human rights issues on which we and our members can make a difference.8 Thankfully there are other organisations, such as the UN Broadband Commission for Digital Development, that are more suited to that larger task of broadening access to the Internet throughout the world. Nevertheless we will briefly cover here some of the issues that impact upon the availability and adoption of broadband to consumers, particularly highlighting the roles of governments through programmes such as universal service and national broadband schemes.

3.2.1

Broadband availability

The availability of broadband and its adoption are separate though interrelated questions. If broadband service is not available in a given location, then of course the adoption rate will be zero. Only where it is available can we then look at barriers such as cost that may impede its adoption and use by consumers. Accordingly we will first deal with the issue of broadband availability, before moving on to the issue of adoption. The availability of broadband depends on the extent of broadband deployment in a particular geographical location. The term “broadband availability gap” is a measure of those who do not have access to broadband in a given location, and can be used to estimate the “investment gap” that would help bridge the broadband availability gap in that location. Determination of the broadband availability gap is an onerous task owing to the lack of pertinent information like deployment of broadband infrastructure and which people have access to which services. In fact there is a need to come up with a statistical model to estimate the broadband availability gap. A recent survey by the FCC estimated that nearly 7 million housing units in the USA amounting to 14 million people are without broadband service that meets the national broadband availability target of at least 4 Mbps and 1 Mbps of download and upload rates respectively. Of course the corresponding numbers of those without an acceptable broadband service in developing countries like India is much higher, as broadband deployment in India is a lot less widespread. CI member CUTS wrote in its submission to CI’s 2011 broadband survey: The biggest challenge in India before consumers is the access to the broadband services. Though there has been tremendous growth in Internet and broadband service from 3.6 million in the year 2003 to 20.33 million in the year 2011, still the penetration of the Internet services is just around 2% of the population. If we take only broadband penetration it is less than .5% (½%). There were just 8.8 million

Malcolm and Corless, “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”, p. 89. 8

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

broadband connections at the end of FY10, against the target of 20 million by 2010 set in the Broadband Policy of 2004.

The poor availability of broadband services in developing countries is a cascading effect of the lack of other essential infrastructures, such as telephone lines and even electricity. For example CI’s Nigerian member Consumer Awareness Organisation wrote that “lack of constant electricity supply and the high cost of running generators adversely affect Internet access in the country”. But even in developed countries, the lack of infrastructure impedes the rollout of fast broadband services.9 In technical terms, the following measures are needed to extend broadband infrastructure to bridge the broadband availability gap:

Paul Budde. US Telecoms Market Further Deteriorating. 2012. url: http: 9

//www.circleid.com/posts/20120217_ us _ telecoms _ market _ further _ deteriorating/.

• Wired network upgrade: The telephone companies can offer higher speeds by increasing the capacity of networks. This can be accomplished by extending their fibre cable networks closer to the end users. • Wireless network upgrade: The wireless network can be upgraded more swiftly owing to the constant development of new technologies. For semi-urban and rural locations the wireless network upgrade is very attractive as laying fibre for such places is not cost effective. With the advent of WiMAX, standard wireless broadband can be made a reality for more people at a comparatively low cost. • Satellite network upgrade: The next generation high throughput satellites can increase the data rate of satellite communication links up to 100 Gbps. This increase in data rate would lead to an increase in upload and download data rates up to 2 to 4 Mbps. More difficult than the technical measures above are the political and economic barriers to be overcome to stimulate public and private investment in broadband infrastructure. The UN Broadband Commission emphasises private sector led development,10 but in many cases this will not be economical. Therefore service providers should be lobbied to establish broadband centres in rural and underserved communities as part of their Social Responsibility programmes. They should be encouraged to see such investments from the social rather than the economic angle. Even so, there are some investments that will not be made without the intervention of government. These include: • Government funding in communication infrastructure development especially for rural or semi urban areas. This is very important as most private operators are reluctant to lay fibre or erect wireless infrastructure to cater to rural population needs. In certain cases, the government may join hands with private partners who are interested in having broadband service provided to rural areas.

Broadband Commission for Digital Development. A 2010 Leadership Imperative: The Future Built on Broadband. 2010. url: http://www. 10

broadbandcommission.org/Reports/ Report_1.pdf.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

â&#x20AC;˘ In addition to federal and state government broadband initiatives, community or municipal based broadband initiatives also need to be encouraged. For example, in the USA, as of October 2009, there are about 57 fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) municipal deployments that serve about 3.4% of FTTP users in North America. Such initiatives need encouragement, at least in the initial stages. â&#x20AC;˘ Government mechanisms can devise mechanisms for demand aggregation. For example, in most cases, Internet in community locations like state universities, comes with restricted access to the outside community. Steps need to be developed to use the government money for such locations more effectively. â&#x20AC;˘ New government programmes can be introduced especially in rural areas to promote digital literacy and ICT know-how. Even though the number of users may be low due to high illiteracy level, the educated people in such areas such as teachers (primary and secondary levels), local government workers, postal agency and community bank workers will benefit immensely from such services. This in turn will bridge the information gap between such rural dwellers and their city counterparts. Measures can also be taken by governments to provide an enabling environment for private investment in broadband services in rural areas, such as easy financing and the means to share capital expenditures, and balanced competition to ensure the quality and affordability of services.11

3.2.2

Universal service

Ernst & Young and FICCI. Enabling the next wave of telecom growth in India. 2011. url: http://emergingmarkets. 11

ey . com / wp - content / plugins / download-monitor/download.php?id= 69.

A more specific concept that has been part of telecommunications policy for decades is that of the universal service obligation (USO). This is aimed at providing telecommunications service to all citizens on an equal basis, and in some countries this extends to Internet service. The UN Broadband Commission writes: Out of 132 countries worldwide having established a definition of universal access and/or universal service by 2009, more than two-thirds had included Internet access in that definition. And at least 30 countries had explicitly mandated access to broadband, including Brazil, China, Ghana, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Peru, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland and Uganda. Their number is constantly growing, while some countries have gone even further. For example, Finland was the first nation to declare broadband a legal right in 2009, entitling every person to have access to a 1 Mbit/s Internet connection by mid-2010.12

In the USA, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was aimed at ensuring universal service to all its citizens. The broad aims of the project, which can be considered as broad representative requirements for broadband access in all countries, are given as follows:

Broadband Commission for Digital Development, Broadband for the Global Good, p. 15. 12

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

• Promote the availability of Internet at reasonable rates for all citizens. • Increase nationwide access to telecommunication services. • Advance the availability of telecommunication services to the citizens in rural and urban areas alike. This scheme was bolstered in 2011, when the FCC decided to divert funds previously used to support voice telephony into the support of broadband networks. The UN Broadband Commission has recommended that by 2015, all countries should have a national broadband plan or strategy or include broadband in their Universal Access/Service Definitions, and that “entry-level broadband services should be made affordable in developing countries through adequate regulation and market forces (for example, amounting to less than 5% of average monthly income)”.13 10 of the 23 CI member countries that participated in our 2011 member survey reported having a universal service obligation that covered Internet access. For example, our UK member Consumer Focus reported:

Broadband Commission for Digital Development, Broadband for the Global Good. 13

The UK Government has launched its Broadband Strategy in December 2010, when Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt pledged to put £830 million of public money, via the BBC’s licence fee, in to the project to put a “digital hub” in every community from which each household will receive speeds of 24Mbp/s or greater. It is hoped that the onus will be on the private sector to deliver the infrastructure needed to widen out broadband access, especially to rural and more remote parts of the UK. The previous Government had signed up to a Universal Service Commitment (USC) of providing 2Mbps to 90 per cent of households by 2012. No such target has been set by the present Government. The aim is now to “be the fastest broadband provider in Europe”. However there are no clear details on how this will be achieved and what speeds this will cover, in particular with regard to households in rural and remote areas where coverage remains a significant barrier.

In India, the government is spending approximately Rs. 20,000 crore (USD$3.6b) from a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), called Bharat Broadband, to connect 250,000 self-governing villages (gram panchayats) through a national fibre-optic network. The SPV is funded by levies charged on telecommunications companies, and now also on Internet users directly, which has sparked controversy.14

3.2.3

Broadband adoption

The best source of information about the gaps in broadband adoption is the regularly-updated statistics of the ITU, whose latest data at the time of publication reveals, amongst other key findings, that the number of Internet users in developing countries doubled between 2007 and 2011, but that still only a quarter of inhabitants in

Singh, “Government spares telecos, penalises Internet users”. 14

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

the developing world were online by end 2011. Within this, fixed (wired)-broadband penetration remains low in developing regions, at 0.2% in Africa and 2% in the Arab states by end 2011, but mobile broadband penetration is higher, reaching penetration levels of near 5% in Africa, and above 10% in all other regions, and growing worldwide by 40% in 2011.15 Unsurprisingly the best served regions include the United States and Europe, with nearly two-thirds of Americans having broadband at home according to a 2010 FCC report,16 and more than half of European households according to a 2011 European Commission report,17 with these numbers continuing to grow. Non-adopters of broadband are those who do not use the Internet at all and those who access the Internet using a dial-up connection. A household’s decision to subscribe to broadband is influenced by a number of factors, including income, education, availability, and affordability.18 In developed countries especially, broadband adoption is more constrained by demand than supply. In fact in many countries investment is being made into broadband infrastructure at a faster rate than the adoption of broadband services. Understanding broadband adoption or the lack of it requires understanding from the following perspectives: • Education: In the aforementioned FCC survey it was reported that nearly 82% of the people who had some college experience (not necessarily graduated) have broadband at home. Only 46% of those who did not have college experience have broadband at home. This points to the fact that the computer/ICT exposure that students had during their college days may have influenced them to appreciate the virtues of a broadband connection and thereby have it at home. • Income: Income is another important factor that could play an important factor in understanding broadband adoption. For instance, the FCC survey reports that in the USA nearly 87% of those whose household income was greater than USD$52,000 had broadband at home. This is in contrast to the case where only 47% of those whose household income was less than USD$52,000, had broadband at home. • Attitudes about the Internet: Another important element in understanding broadband adoption is that people are sometimes driven by important misgivings with respect to Internet access. Some of these are: the Internet is too dangerous for children, my personal information can be stolen, there is easy access to offensive material, etc. Allaying these misgivings by educating people about the virtues of Internet access can make these so called “fence sitters” reconsider adopting the Internet. • Cost of service: This is another important issue in understanding broadband adoption. According to CI’s 2011 research, the

ITU. Key statistical highlights: ITU data release June 2012. 2012. url: http:// 15

www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/statistics/ material/pdf/2011%20Statistical% 20highlights_June_2012.pdf.

FCC. Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. 2010. url: 16

http://download.broadband.gov/ plan/national- broadband- plan.pdf,

p. 23. European Commission, ECommunications Household Survey. 17

George S Ford, Thomas M Koutsky and Lawrence J Spiwak. The Demographic and Economic Drivers of Broadband Adoption in the United States. Phoenix Center Policy Paper No. 31. 2007. url: http : / / 18

ssrn.com/abstract=1093005http: //ssrn.com/abstract=1093005.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

cost of Internet access for users in North and Latin America was almost 50% more than in the other regions. The FCC survey reported a lower average figure, of around USD$40 for broadband service, but this is still much more expensive than most users in developing countries can afford. This impact of the cost barrier is examined in more detail separately in the next section 3.2.4. • Lack of accessibility: This includes lack of digital literacy, inaccessibility for the disabled, and language and cultural obstacles, all of which are also examined separately below. Apart from all of the above factors, as our member Consumer Focus found in its recent research, many people without home Internet do not express a desire to adopt it, whereas some with Internet access have no interest in using it.19 At this time, the services and applications available online quite simply do not meet their needs. Provided that the potential benefits of broadband adoption are adequately understood by consumers, it is of course not for the consumer movement to attempt to force broadband onto those who truly believe that they have no use for it!

3.2.4

Addressing cost barriers

Other than competition issues (which, because of their close association with consumer policy, are addressed separately below in section 3.3), the following are some of the measures suggested to improve broadband adoption by addressing the cost barrier. • The FCC survey reports that nearly 36% of non-adopters of broadband cite financial reasons for the lack of broadband at home. To address this, governments could create subsidies for low-income groups for adoption of broadband both for equipment purchase and monthly tariff. • Pilot programmes could help determine which parameters directly influence the broadband adoption of low-income users. Some of these parameters may include a subsidy for installation, or subsidy for customer premises equipment such as modems, wireless cards and computers. • Further, governments can consider the promotion of wireless technologies and standards as a way to bridge the affordability gap of broadband. One possible way of making this happen is to allocate spectrum to providers via auction, contingent on providing low-cost wireless broadband service. • Also, private companies that are motivated to provide low-cost broadband service but that struggle to do so in a competitive market, can be encouraged through government programmes that offer tax or other benefits, so that the low income groups can benefit directly.

Jillian Pitt. Broadband minded? Overcoming consumers’ barriers to internet access. 2010. url: http : / / www . 19

consumerfocus.org.uk/files/2010/ 10/Broadband-minded.pdf, p. 14.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

Consumer advocacy has an important place in addressing cost barriers. This is illustrated by the case study of India, where a recent government decision to increase a revenue share impost on Internet service providers has resulted in end users being faced with a 7% monthly increase across the board, increasing to 8% from April 2013. Consumer organisations were amongst those fighting against this decision (though unsuccessfully so far). These included Jyoti Consumer Advocacy Group and VOICE who submitted written objections in response to the statutory consultation undertaken by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) in 2009. Indian consumer advocate Bejon Misra was quoted in the media as saying: It is unfortunate that the government has hiked Internet prices without understanding the aspirations and affordability of consumers, and struck a body blow to broadband access, the lifeline of economic growth, national competitiveness and social development.20

3.2.5

Digital literacy

Tasks that experienced users take for granted – using a mouse, navigating a website or creating a username and password – can be daunting for new or less experienced users of the Internet. 22% of non-adopters cite digital literacy as their main barrier to broadband adoption in the FCC survey. This group includes people who are uncomfortable using computers and those “worried about all the bad things that can happen if [they] use the Internet.” Digital literacy is an evolving concept. Though there is no standard definition, digital literacy generally refers to a variety of skills associated with using ICT to find, evaluate, create and communicate information. It is the sum of the technical skills and cognitive skills people employ to use computers to retrieve information, interpret what they find and judge the quality of that information. It also includes the ability to communicate and collaborate using the Internet – through blogs, self-published documents and presentations and collaborative social networking platforms. Digital literacy has different meanings at different stages of a person’s life. A fourth grader does not need the same skills or type of instruction as a 45-year-old trying to re-enter the job market. Digital literacy is a necessary life skill, much like the ability to read and write. Different approaches therefore need to be taken for older and younger population groups: • Senior citizens: Many surveys indicate that the senior citizens of any particular country lag with respect to broadband usage. Training programs can be developed to teach the basics of email, Web access and other practical broadband applications. Also specific part-time employment programs can be tailored to senior citizens who develop their digital literacy skills. • High school and college students: Specific courses need to be designed and incorporated into the curriculum of high school

Singh, “Government spares telecos, penalises Internet users”. 20

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

students that would increase the broad awareness of students. Further, subsidies can be given to both high school and college students to buy computers and other broadband related equipment like modems. Using students as campaign agents on campuses can also be useful. Student union leaders can be approached to include the campaign in their major activities such as the Student Union Week. This is another area in which consumer groups do have a role to play. As CI member ADEC found in its report compiled for our 2011 broadband research as follows (translated from the original French): Only 6% of respondents have an acceptable understanding of broadband Internet, as there is a notorious lack of information available to users/consumers. This poses the problem of quality of representation of users/consumers. The conclusion is clear: consumer associations, serving on consultations on the sector, are far from fulfilling their duties. Indeed the effectiveness of such representation necessarily involves regular consultations with classes represented for their opinions and perspectives, and at the same time about activities in the sector. This requires institutional and formative capacities that these associations do not always have. This issue could be overcome by putting together a network, synergy or coordination of these associations in their activities.

3.2.6

Accessibility

Another important and cross-cutting issue is accessibility for people with disabilities. Some 39% of all non-adopters in the FCC survey had a disability, much higher than the 24% of overall survey respondents with a disability. It is not a surprise that non-adopters include a disproportionately high share of people with disabilities. People with disabilities share many characteristics with other nonadopters (ie, both groups are older and have lower incomes than adopters), but having a disability may be an independent factor contributing to lower levels of broadband adoption at home. For example, some of the other impediments that people with disabilities face include: • Devices often are not designed to be accessible for people with disabilities. • Assistive technologies are expensive (Braille displays, for example, can cost between USD$3,500 and USD$15,000). • Services, including emergency services, are not accessible. • Web pages and new media applications cannot be accessed by a person using a screen reader. • Internet-based video programming does not have captions or video descriptions offering an account of what is on the screen.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

A separate but related issue is that of cultural diversity and multilingualism online. It becomes all the harder for a consumer to become digitally literate if they are not verbally literate in the language or languages in which Internet content is available to them. This can be addressed through measures such as cultural grants and awards to promote the development of local online content.

3.3

Broadband providers and contracts

The work of the UN Broadband Commission in promoting broadband development has been highlighted above. However, the work of the Commission also has its limitations. A 2010 report of the Commission concluded, “We believe that the greatest hope for success in promoting the deployment and use of broadband networks lies in a market-led approach facilitated by an enabling policy environment.”21 But it can be argued that this over-emphasises market solutions, and pays too little attention to the areas of market failure. Perhaps notably, although the Commission claims to be a “multistakeholder partnership”, in fact it does not contain any civil society commissioners. Its co-chair is Carlos Slim – the Mexican billionaire whose anti-competitive practices have been blamed for the high cost and poor availability of Internet services in his own country.22 This section will pay much more critical attention to the deficiencies of broadband service for consumers, in areas where it is available at all. It will be found that there are a number of very grave shortcomings in what the market provides in many countries around the world, and much scope for consumer activism to improve the situation. There are a veritable litany of problems to which the attention of consumer advocates needs to be addressed, and these will be broken into two groups. The first, to be examined in this section 3.3, are those that concern the behaviour of the broadband provider in the market, and in its contractual relationship with its customers, namely: • Uncompetitive markets • Misleading advertising • Unfair contract terms • Unfair billing practices • Poor complaint handling The subsequent major section “Digital rights issues on broadband networks” at 3.4 runs through a number of additional more technical aspects of the Internet connection within the broadband provider’s control that can affect the consumer’s rights and interests.

Broadband Commission for Digital Development, A 2010 Leadership Imperative: The Future Built on Broadband, p. 18. 21

The Economist. “Let Mexico’s moguls battle”. In: The Economist 4 February (2012), pp. 52–53. url: http: //www.economist.com/node/21546028. 22

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

3.3.1

Uncompetitive markets

As noted above, cost barriers are one of the principal barriers to the adoption of broadband Internet services, and these are exacerbated where competition is lacking. Globally, 20% of the world’s broadband users are served by just two ISPs.23 That figure actually looks good compared to the situation in individual countries. For example, in Latin America, it was reported that 3 ISPs control roughly 78% of the market in Brazil, and 85% in Argentina. It has also already been noted that in Mexico, the dominant telecommunications operator is owned by the world’s richest man as at 2012, and charges amongst the world’s highest prices for broadband.24 Our member from Kenya reported in response to our 2011 member survey:

Nate Anderson. Just two Chinese ISPs serve 20% of world broadband users. 2010. url: http://arstechnica.com/tech23

policy/2010/07/just- two- chineseisps-serve-20-of-world-broadbandusers/.

The Economist, “Let Mexico’s moguls battle”. 24

Competition is mostly seen in metropolitan cities. Many semi-urban and rural towns have few to zero providers. Most Internet providers are end-user or last mile providers. The national terrestrial fibre optic infrastructure that carries bandwidth are owned by very few companies. (Approximately 5 companies countrywide.)

Our Senegalese member reported only two ISPs in that country – Orange and Arc Informatique – serving almost 2 million Internet users. Even in the UK, which is generally a highly competitive market, our member reported “less competition and even lack of coverage in rural and underdeveloped urban areas”. In India, also generally quite competitive with about 155 ISPs, nonetheless 80% of the market are covered by just three of those providers – BSNL, MTNL and Bharti.25 A highly competitive market was reported in three countries that responded to our survey. In many countries, the dominant ISP is either a government monopoly telecommunications provider, or a former monopoly that has since been privatised but which still dominates the market. This in turn is often because of its control of telecommunications infrastructure such as copper telephone lines or cable TV, which it refuses to offer to competitors on fair terms. For example, America’s high broadband prices and limited competition have been attributed to the fact that it has two separate and independent networks both served by large, entrenched incumbents. Telecoms analyst Paul Budde writes, “Structural changes are essential if the USA wants to maintain its leading economic status in the digital economy.”26 The solution to this conundrum is a regulatory one: to mandate that broadband infrastructure for telecommunications, such as ducts, trenches and cables to customer premises, be shared between competitors on “open access” terms. This makes the investment in such infrastructure more cost-effective overall, with the benefit flowing to consumers in the form of lower prices, increased competition, and wider coverage in areas that would otherwise be under-served.27 Whilst the transition to open access is a possible topic for broadband advocacy in markets that do not already feature this model,

Singh, “Government spares telecos, penalises Internet users”. 25

Budde, US Telecoms Market Further Deteriorating. 26

David Souter. “Global Information Society Watch 2008”. In: ed. by Alan Finlay. Uruguay: APC and Hivos, 2008. Chap. Institutional Overview, p. 37, p. 42. 27

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

it may be over-ambitious for smaller consumer organisations, since this transition has taken regulators years to accomplish in countries like Australia and Japan, and these are countries in which strong and effective laws against anti-competitive conduct exist. Conversely competition rules were seen as completely or largely ineffective by 11 of the 20 consumer groups that responded to our survey and stated that such laws existed in their country. There are however smaller scale uncompetitive markets in which advocacy can be effective, even for small consumer organisations. For example, several respondents to CI’s 2011 consumer survey, including individuals from Vietnam and Brazil, mentioned that the managers of their apartment buildings provide an exclusive license to only one ISP to provide Internet service to all residents. Such residents are unlikely to obtain Internet access on terms as good as those available in a competitive market.

3.3.2

Misleading advertising

One of the most fruitful areas for consumer advocacy is in campaigning against misleading advertisements by ISPs. In fact there is a great amount of disgruntlement among Internet users against the advertising gimmicks of broadband providers. The most common misleading advertising strategies of which customers need to be aware are given below: • Most broadband service providers specify that data rates “up to” a certain value are achievable. But for example, if a broadband service provider says up to 6Mbps is possible, the actual data rates achievable may be much lower. Research of the UK regulator Ofcom found that some ISPs advertise maximum speeds that may be twice as fast as those actually achieved, particularly for current generation copper-based ADSL services.28 Consumers can argue that broadband service providers need to specify the actual data rates that can be achieved under different network load conditions. Also, the maximum data rate specified, must be achievable by a reasonable number of customers and a minimum assured data rate should be provided. • Another commonly used word by broadband service providers is “unlimited”. But the word unlimited is usually accompanied by a rider that actually caps the download or upload quota. In many such cases any consumer who exceeds the maximum possible upload or download limit is charged extra. In other cases, the speed of the Internet connection is artificially “throttled” to a minimum level, similar to that of a dial-up Internet connection. In our 2011 member survey on broadband, advertising was regulated in most countries (20 of 29), but its effectiveness against these tactics was seen as limited; 11 rating it as ineffective or useless, and only two as very effective. The consumer survey conducted at the same time backed this up.

Ofcom. UK fixed-line broadband performance, May 2011: Research report. 2011. url: http : / / stakeholders . 28

ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/ telecoms-research/bbspeeds2011/bbspeeds-may2011.pdf.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

Nevertheless there are countries that have regulated the advertising of broadband speeds, including the following: • In Nigeria, the NCC Guidelines on Advertisements and Sales Promotions published in 2009 require service providers offering Internet connections to clearly state the connection speed available to end users, distinguishing between upload and download speed. If the connection speed quoted is only achievable under special circumstances, then the circumstance must be stated. • In Brazil, from November 2012 it is mandatory that the lowest speed achieved on the network (as measured by a service called SIMET, discussed later at section 4.1) be at least 20% of the advertised speed, and the average over the month be at least 60% of the advertised speed. Currently, most providers deliver to a lesser standard. For example, our member IDEC offers this excerpt from the terms of the ISP Virtua: The operator guarantees to the subscriber the minimum of 10% of the contracted nominal speed within its network, as it is a restricted and controlled environment. Due to intrinsic characteristics of the Internet, there are no guarantees when the data origin is originated in third parties’ network.

In contrast a competing ISP, Oi, now guarantees a minimum 10% of the contracted speed in the Internet no matter which network the user accesses. • In the United Kingdom, the regulator Ofcom has published similar specifications, which allow an ISP to advertise a certain speed in association with an Internet service so long as at least 10% of users can actually receive that speed. In its report to CI’s broadband survey, our UK member Consumer Focus described this scheme: As the result of discrepancies between advertising broadband speeds and the actual speeds consumers are getting, Ofcom recommended the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) and the Broadcasting Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP) to tighten advertising codes administered by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to ensure that ISPs are promoting their advertising so customers can have confidence in what they are being sold. Consumer Focus also called for the Codes to be tightened in relation to advertising of the term “unlimited” versus fair usage policies and traffic management.

Cracking down on misleading advertising is only part of the solution. The rest involves educating consumers about the technologies, so that they can assess the claims that ISPs make for themselves. As Consumer Focus goes on to explain: The key drawback of the information provided lies in ISPs over reliance on assumed consumer knowledge of Internet functionality and services. This is evidenced in particular by a lack of any accompanying explanations with regard to:

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

• speeds and how these are affected • data caps and allowances and what the measurements signify in terms of use • peer to peer and VoIP services, for example which applications fall within these categories and how they may be affected

In particular, data caps, fair usage policies, and premium charges are largely unfamiliar concepts to the consumer. The Kenya Consumer Organisation concurs, claiming in its response to our 2011 research, “There is little or no information on speed variation, excess charges, minimum contracts, penalties for early termination, any future changes to contract terms and absolutely none on how personal information would be used.” This can be tackled by consumer organisations and ISPs working together to provide consumers with the knowledge that they need to make the right choices, based on information that is fair and accurate. To make this easy, CI has prepared a template Broadband Disclosure Statement which ISPs can be encouraged to adopt. It is described in more detail in the next chapter.29 At a minimum, consumers deserve a complete description of what they are getting when they buy “unlimited Internet access” from an ISP, or sign up for a connection with a certain advertised speed. Only if they know what is going on and who is to blame for under-performance can consumers make informed choices about which ISP to choose (to the extent that they have choices among residential broadband providers) or what counter-measures they might employ. Policy-makers, as well, need to understand how the evasive and ambiguous rhetoric employed by some ISPs to describe their network’s performance and management compares with their actual behaviour.

3.3.3

Unfair contract terms

Contractual terms are deemed unfair when the consumer is misled about the contract, their legal rights, denied full redress, etc. Some of the unfair contractual terms commonly found in broadband contracts against which consumers need to be educated are: • Binding customers without providing service. • Retention of payment on consumer cancellation. • Supplier retaining the right to cancel without notice. • Locking the consumer in to an excessively long contract term. • Excessive notice periods for consumer cancellation. • Supplier reserving the right to change what is supplied. • Price variation clauses. Our Brazilian member IDEC comments:

See section 4.1.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

The problems are even worse when considering that these are frozen “adherence contracts”, meaning that their clauses are not negotiable, and are frequently unknown to the consumer. Even though they are available in the companies’ websites, it is not always simple to find them. In addition, the contracting conditions enhanced in the webpages are those that favour the consumer, whereas those that could be considered harmful are less visible.

In some countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia, and Brazil, consumer law allows unfair contract terms to be challenged through a legal or administrative process. This is an obvious campaign strategy for consumer advocates in these countries. Another tactic for opposing excessively long contract terms is given in the next chapter at section 4.2.

3.3.4

Unfair billing practices

Amongst the most common unfair billing practices affecting broadband consumers are the billing of fees that were not agreed to in advance, and billing of excess usage charges without breaking the usage down in sufficient detail that the user can check it (for example, by stating the cap that was exceeded, the date or time when exceeded, and showing the excess data in MB or GB not just in currency). As an example of the former problem, our Mexican member Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco, who interviewed 34 consumers in a series of focus groups and one-on-one interviews, reported to CI, “It has to be said that 100% of those who declared not to have it easy to cancel their subscription was because of the provider’s cancellation policy that establishes a high penalty fee, they were never told of that policy until they asked for the service cancellation.” Legally, such a fee is not enforceable unless it was agreed to by the customer. But a grey area exists where the fee was notified in small print text, or in a “terms and conditions” page hidden behind a link. In such cases, it may or may not be enforceable depending on how well the term was drawn to the consumer’s attention. The very recently completed ISO 14452, otherwise known as Network Services Billing – Requirements, is a standard to address these sorts of issues. CI was instrumental in drafting this standard that establishes best practices for billing of all sorts of metered services. The standard sets out requirements for utility bills, covering billing procedures and collection of charges, dispute resolution, treatment of vulnerable consumers, disconnection procedures, and switching suppliers. The standard applies to broadband service providers with post-paid plans, and in the absence of a more specific national standard (such as Australia’s Telecommunications Consumer Protection Code), consumer advocates have a clear and important role in promulgating this standard throughout the industry. Less obvious as a billing problem is the issue of bundling. Bundles are a popular way of packaging together a range of communications products and services that a household may need, typically

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

with a discount over the cost of purchasing or subscribing to them individually. To this extent, they may benefit consumers. However, they can also result in consumers acquiring services that they do not really need. In European research, about one in six EU citizens (16%) believed that bundles included services they did not really need. There was also a feeling among one in ten EU citizens (10%) that bundles are less transparent and clear about costs and conditions than individual services.30 Mandatory product bundling may also require consumers to acquire services from a supplier whom they would otherwise not select, as typically the bundle requires consumers to take products in which the operator is not dominant, in order to access products in which the operator is dominant.31 Finally and most significantly, acquiring Internet services as a bundle can hinder the user in switching providers. For example, if a user’s telephone service and Internet service are supplied together, a user will have to deal with the hassle of changing or porting their telephone number if they wish to change broadband provider. If their television subscription is bundled with their Internet, then they will be less likely to switch either, because of the disruption that changing one will cause to the other. The above European research accordingly found that those Member States with the highest proportion of active switchers are among those with the lowest proportion of households with a bundle.32 Accordingly in most cases consumers are better off choosing services that actually charge based on usage as against a flat bundle option which will lock them in to using services that they may not want, and make it harder for them to shop around for a better deal on the services they do use. For more information, see the campaign idea “Don’t Lock Me In!” at section 4.2.

3.3.5

European Commission, ECommunications Household Survey, p. 28. 30

Broadband Commission for Digital Development, Broadband for the Global Good, p. 173. 31

European Commission, ECommunications Household Survey, p. 31. 32

Poor complaint handling

CI’s 2011 consumer survey on broadband showed evidence of serious problems with complaint handling by ISPs. Three quarters of those who complained about problems with the speed of their connection ended up dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with how their complaints were dealt with. For those who complained about technical problems with their connection, 62% remained dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with how these complaints were resolved. For billing complaints, the figure was 54%.33 These findings are supported by independent research. ACCAN (summarising data from Australia’s Telecommunication Industry Ombudsman, the TIO) reports that more than half of the consumers surveyed reported contact with their service providers five or more times before ringing the TIO, and more than half had waited at least a month before escalating their claim there – for almost a third of complainants, it was over three months. 60 percent of consumers reported spending three or more hours unsuccessfully trying to

Malcolm and Corless, “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”, p. 83. 33

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

solve their complaint before approaching the TIO, with one in five saying they spent more than nine hours resolving their complaint, and half reported contact with more than three different departments.34 Clearly, industry is not doing very well in resolving complaints by itself. Whilst service providers should be encouraged to establish accessible consumer service centres, there is only so much that a company will voluntarily do to make it easier for its customers to complain. Therefore regulatory and consumer agencies in some countries have established independent mechanisms for the resolution of complaints by Internet consumers. In our member survey, 12 of 29 respondent member countries had established such a mechanism, though their scope and mode of operation varied significantly. These included: • The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India is the regulatory body for telecom services in India. It oversees all the telecom policy decisions bearing the consumers’ interest in view. TRAI does not handle individual consumer complaints but gives guidelines for consumer complaint redressal.35 CUTS explains, “As per TRAI’s regulation about Complaint Redressal Mechanism, telecom service providers are mandated to have a 3-tier redressal mechanism. If consumers are not satisfied with the call centre, they can approach the Nodal Officer and Appellate Authority, respectively.” TRAI’s Telecom Consumers Complaint Redressal Regulations, 2012, are available on its website. • In the UK, Communications Ombudsman (CO) is the largest independent ombudsman service that resolves complaints from consumers about companies which provide communications services to the public. This includes phone and broadband companies. CO is approved by the UK telecommunications regulator Ofcom, under the Communications Act 2003, as an alternative dispute resolution service. CO is independent and consumers can use its services free of charge. CO is an alternative to the courts. If consumers are not happy with its decision they can retain their right to ask the courts to consider their complaint. CO is funded by the telecommunications industry.36 Similar to CO, a second Ofcom-approved alternative dispute resolution service for Internet complaints in the UK is the Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme (CISAS).37 • National Consumer Complaints Centre (NCCC) is a non profit organisation which was established in 2004 in Malaysia. It focuses on two of the fundamental rights of consumers which are the rights to be heard and the right to redress. NCCC provides a venue for alternative dispute resolution or ADR for consumers when they fail to resolve their grievances with private or public organisations. NCCC also serves as a one stop centre for all types of consumer complaints. In 2010 alone, NCCC managed

Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. Resilient Consumers Report. 2011. url: http://www.tio. 34

com.au/ __ data/assets/pdf _ file/ 0020/9434/Resilient- ConsumersReport-Aug-2011.pdf.

See http://www.trai.gov.in.

See http://www. ombudsman-services.org/ communications.html. 36

See http://www.cisas.org.uk/.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

about 34,381 consumer complaints and the sector with the highest number of complaints received is Communication & Multimedia, with broadband issues the main cause. NCCC provides free services and access to legal advice on all consumer issues, and also participates in many consumer law reviews and issues meetings regionally. Although they are not publicly funded they receive support from Federation of Malaysian Consumer Associations (FOMCA). • Australia has an independent Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman where consumers can take their complaints if they are not able to resolve them with their provider. They receive about 200,000 complaints per year.38 The role and powers of the TIO are included in the Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards) Act 1999. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) undertook an 18-month inquiry, called Reconnecting the Customer to find out why there are so many complaints to the TIO and in general about telecommunications. They produced a wide body of research.39 • In Brazil, the national telecommunications regulatory agency is called Anatel. The agency, which is administratively independent and financially autonomous, is responsible for activities such as implementation of national telecommunications policy, license regulation, managing radiofrequency spectrum, and protection of consumer rights, among others. However, the Agency is criticised for its failure to universalise essential services and ensure competition, and has been accused of being unduly influenced by the telecommunication companies. Brazil also has a governmental structure for consumer protection, called Procon. There are Procons in each state and in some municipalities. These public bodies are connected to the state or municipal governments and are designed to implement policies for consumer protection in its territory. Among its main tasks are receiving and processing individual and collective administrative claims, against suppliers of goods or services; guiding consumers and providers about their rights and obligations; and proposing class actions. Lastly, the Federal Public Prosecutor (FPP) defends citizen’s rights (right to life, dignity, freedom, etc.) before the Supreme Court, the Superior Court of Justice, the regional federal courts, federal judges and election judges, in cases that involve the public interest, whether by virtue of the parties or the subject. As for consumer rights defence, the FPP has a specific chamber for Consumer & Economic Order. • In Argentina, the Undersecretary of Consumer Affairs of the Ministry of Economic Affairs oversees a National Consumer Arbitration System, under which consumer complaints are received and processed, mediation bodies are developed and decisions summarised. Separately, the National Directorate of Internal

See http://www.tio.com.au/.

ACMA. Reconnecting the Consumer. 2011. url: http://www.acma.gov.au/ 39

webwr/_assets/main/lib310013/rtc_ final_report.pdf.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

Trade has responsibility for other matters of consumer protection such as consumer law enforcement. • The Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) is the sector regulator for Nigeria’s telecoms industry. It was established by the Nigerian Communications Act 2003 and regulates all aspects of telephone services both fixed and mobile. It also regulates Internet services both fixed and wireless. It is a governmental agency and is funded by the federal government.40 • The Uganda Communications Commission (UCC) under the Department of Consumer Affairs provides information regarding consumer rights and obligations, complaints handling and online complaints. Some work is on going to develop guidelines for protection of consumers against unethical advertising and the ICT Ministry through NITA-Uganda is working on draft legislation for “Electronic Transactions” which is yet to get to Parliament.41

See http://www.ncc.gov.ng.

See http://www.ucc.co.ug.

See http://www.artp.sn.

• The Public Complaints Standing Committee (PCSC) is Kenya’s multi-sector Ombudsman. Its mandate however is limited to complaints against public entities such as state agencies and corporations as well as the civil service. Its mandate therefore covers publicly owned commercial entities. • In Senegal, the Autorité de Régulation des Télécommunications et des Postes (ARTP) has jurisdiction to assist consumers with complaints against ISPs.42 In many countries, although a mechanism for independent complaint resolution may exist, most consumers are unaware of it. In India for example, awareness about the contact details of the Nodal Officer was found very low, only among 2.4% of the customers surveyed by CUTS. Similarly there has not been any marked improvement in the case of awareness about the contact details of the Appellate Authority – less than 2.5%. An academic study conducted in South Africa recommends: Prior to consultations, it is important that consumers are aware of the regulator’s existence and of the services it offers. The regulator could improve visibility by means of a strategic media and publicity campaign via its website and the distribution of printed consumer leaflets and guides. A short guide on the regulator’s role and its consumer protection services could be a useful marketing tool that will help educate consumers.43

Consumer participation in the redress organisation is also important. For example, Australia’s TIO is overseen by a multistakeholder Council comprising five user and public interest group representatives and five industry representatives. Our Senegal member ADEC states: Participation in industry regulation should not be limited to mere participation in meetings, as currently occurs. Experience clearly

Isabelle Gross, Charley Lewis and Russell Southwood. Consumer Best Practices in the Telecoms Sector. LINK Centre. 2011. url: http://link.wits. 43

ac.za/papers/Gross- et- al- 2011Consumer-Best-Practice.pdf, p. 5.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

shows the ineffectiveness of this option. The full enjoyment of democracy cannot rest on the foundation of such restricted representation. The consumer/user must be offered the option to become an actor, hence the absolute need for information, co-creation, active participation.

For countries which do not already have an independent or effective complaints resolution mechanism for the Internet industry, this should be a high campaigning priority. We offer some further suggestions for a campaign on this theme in the next chapter.

3.4

Digital rights issues on broadband networks

The preceding section dealt with consumer protection issues concerning the broadband provider’s contract for service with its users. This section looks at a range of more technical issues in regard to broadband networks that affect the consumer’s rights and interests, which should also be considered by consumer activists: • Technical unreliability • Consumer privacy • Filtering and censorship • Security • Network neutrality Many of these are addressed in more detail in CI’s previous book Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone, under the heading “Communications rights”.44

3.4.1

Malcolm and Noronha, Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone, pp. 87101. 44

Technical unreliability

CI’s research on broadband, conducted by our members in 2011, suggests that poor or very poor reliability of their broadband connection affects slightly under a quarter of broadband users. This result is reasonably consistent with separate European research, in which about a third of respondents felt that their Internet connection was prone to break down, and slightly more (36%) disagreed.45 Whilst broadband reliability problems are therefore not of epidemic proportions, they do negatively affect a significant segment of consumers. A common way of measuring reliability is “availability” which is the amount of time that a system is expected to be in-service. It is often expressed as a statistical time measure (eg, Mean Time To Failure, MTTF) or the percent of time over some period that the system is available for service. Internet services supplied to enterprises commonly come with a service level agreement (SLA) which guarantees “five nines reliability”, which means that the service is

European Commission, ECommunications Household Survey, p. 22. 45

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

available 99.999% of the time, which in turn equates to down time of less than 5.26 minutes per year. This is a very high-level of reliability that is appropriate for commercial grade services.46 In the event of the guarantee being breached, the enterprise can claim a service credit or some other measure of compensation. A similar guarantee is seldom offered to consumers of broadband services intended for households, however. But whilst it is understandable that a lesser degree of liability is warranted, in recognition of the lower price paid, it is unreasonable that no service level should be guaranteed at all. Yet typically the terms and conditions of a household broadband service will attempt to completely exclude liability for lapses in service, at most allowing the consumer to terminate the contract in the event of an extended outage. This is an area in which consumer groups have a role to play in raising the industry’s standards. Technical problems are inevitable and at some level acceptable, but are compounded and can become unacceptable when they cannot be resolved through the ISPs’ technical support processes. One of the complaints made by respondents to our survey was that technical support personnel were not sufficiently knowledgeable, and that in some cases the function had been offshored to a help desk in a different country. Whilst this may save money for the ISP, that saving must be weighed against the cost of customer dissatisfaction. Best practices indicate that even front-line technical support personnel should be trained to handle the technical queries from potential or current customers on all basic questions related to: • Technical configuration and testing of all wired and wireless broadband services supported by the ISP. • Application of the ISPs’ policies such as capping and filtering, with access to real-time information about these. • Familiarity with popular Internet software and operating systems, including configuration of security mechanisms. • Familiarity about the nominal and actual data rates that can be provided by a given broadband connection. Dissatisfaction with the level of knowledge displayed by technical support personnel led one Brazilian respondent to our consumer survey to call in a private technician at his own expense. But another strategy that consumers should bear in mind is to ask for their problem to be elevated to a higher level technician at the ISP. In general, all problems are first heard by a junior level technician, and if they are unable to assist they ought to refer it to a more senior colleague. If they fail to do so, you should always ask for that referral.

William Lehr et al. Assessing Broadband Reliability: Measurement and Policy Challenges. 2011. url: http:// 46

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/document/ view.action?id=7021705978.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

3.4.2

Consumer privacy

Consumer privacy online is the subject for a complete book in itself, and we do not seek to give it an exhaustive treatment here. In particular, we are not concerned here with the behaviour of online content providers such as social networks and search engines, who use technologies like online behavioural advertising to track consumers on the Web. This will be the subject of future work by CI and its members, but it exceeds the scope of the present volume because it lies outside of the control of the consumer’s broadband service provider, who is generally independent of those who provide Internet content. However there are two important areas in which consumer privacy is affected directly by the behaviour of broadband service providers: packet inspection and data retention. Packet inspection is an automated analysis of the data that the user transmits or receives as they use the Internet – for example, its general type, such as email, Web or BitTorrent data, or (in the case of “deep” packet inspection) its specific content, such as particular music tracks being accessed or particular keywords in email messages. This technology can be used for benign purposes to manage network traffic and improve the behaviour of online services and applications; for example by identifying and allocating a higher level of service quality to VoIP calls (which require high, steady bandwith) than to email messages (which don’t). But packet inspection can also be used to track consumers’ online activity without their knowledge or consent and thereby infringe their privacy. CI member IDEC gives the example of the North American marketing company Phorm, which some Internet providers have allowed to surveil their users using packet inspection techniques: Its work consists in developing partnerships with Internet providers in order to, together, gain access to the users’ data, which will serve as raw material for the categorisation, profiling and commercialisation to third parties. The result of that may be from directed advertising to the simple revenues obtained from the segmented commercialisation of databases. In Brazil, the companies Oi and Telefônica have already confirmed the beginning of a partnership with Phorm. Both shall use the “Navigator”, software which is connected to the browser and captures navigation information from consumers in real time. According to the companies, the app has the function of personalising the pages visited by the user in order for him or her to find the contents that are of their interest. Moreover, the collected data shall serve as means to create differentiated databases for the offering of products and services adapted to each specific public. In practice, what happens is the tracking of all data, contents and places where the user accesses the Internet. Oi, through the Velox Internet service, has already put the Navigator to work in 2010. The service has brought criticism and serious accusations of privacy violation, having generated great repercussions in the press.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

After this ingress, Oi was notified by the Consumer Defense Protection Department (DPDC/MJ), and an administrative process has been established in order to inquire the possible privacy violation, in July 2010. Since then, the Navigator was apparently suspended from the market and is now going through a phase of being tested by the company.

IDEC goes on to describe, in similar terms, how Telefônica engaged in a similar rollout of the Phorm Navigator software without notice to its users. UK Internet providers BT, Virgin and Talk-Talk are also known to have trialled the service. Virgin also used packet inspection to monitor the downloading of copyrighted files by its users, without notice to them.47 The second area in which consumer privacy is affected directly by the behaviour of broadband service providers is through their data retention practices. Records of Internet traffic and transaction data are routinely kept by ISPs for legitimate technical purposes such as traffic management, and in some countries these records are also required by law to be preserved for law enforcement purposes.48 This data can include websites visited, email senders and recipients, and (particularly in the case of mobile devices) the consumer’s location. In a recent protest against the proposed extension of compulsory data retention requirements by ISPs in Australia, the online hacking group Anonymous began to publish 40GB of user data seized from an Australian ISP, AAPT.49 This highlights the importance for such ISPs, who are placed in a position of trust by consumers, to engage in data minimisation practices by limiting the amount of data that is collected in the first place to the minimum that is required by law and for their technical and administrative needs, storing it in a sufficiently secure way, and adhering to procedures for its permanent deletion when no longer required. This will reduce the risk of such data being illegally used for surveillance of the consumer’s behaviour online, by third party marketers, criminals, hackers or over-reaching law enforcement officers.

3.4.3

Malcolm and Noronha, Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone, p. 93. 47

Malcolm and Noronha, Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone, pp. 9192. 48

Claire Connelly. Anonymous hackers claim ISP user data stolen from AAPT. 2012. url: http://www.news.com. 49

au/technology/hacked- anonymoussteals- user- data- from- aussieisp/story-e6frfro0-1226435629217? from=public_rss.

Filtering and censorship

As with data retention rules, Internet filtering and censorship practices are mandated by law in some countries, covering a range of types of controversial content. Our Vietnamese member CUTS HRC shared that Facebook as well as other social networks are banned there because the Vietnamese government fears that the potential of anti-government content may spread and bring danger to the administration. Vietnam is one of a dozen countries listed as “Enemies of the Net” by NGO Reporters sans frontières (RSF),50 and was also amongst fifteen countries with “substantial censorship of political or social issues in 2009-2010” as assessed by Freedom House.51 This is an important problem for Internet users in such countries, but one that lies outside the scope of this book since

See http://en.rsf.org/Internet.

html.

Freedom House. Freedom on the Net 2011. 2011. url: http : / / www . 51

freedomhouse.org/sites/default/ files/FOTN2011.pdf.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

broadband providers in those countries have no choice but to obey the law. In other countries, such as Australia and the United Kingdom, a softer, self-regulatory or co-regulatory regime for Internet filtering is in place, in which ISPs themselves take on the responsibility of offering filtering services to customers, which is generally directed at pornography. For example British ISPs BT and Sky offer software that the user can download and install on their computer to perform filtering of adult content,52 as do Australian ISPs that participate in the Australian Internet Industry Association’s Family Friendly Program.53 Other ISPs such as the UK’s TalkTalk and Virgin block sites on their own network without the need of software on the user’s home computer. Whilst this is convenient, these ISPs can be held to account for the way in which they implement this filtering. It is important that they do in a transparent manner which offers consumers information and choice. Apart from political content and pornography, some ISPs have taken to restricting users’ access to unlicensed copyright material. This can be done by limiting access to file sharing protocols, or by ex post facto measures taken against users who are suspected of having downloaded copyright material without authorisation. Known as “graduated response” schemes, these measures require the ISP to warn users to discontinue accessing such material, or to report suspected infringements to copyright owners, or even to suspend or terminate the user’s broadband account.54 These schemes may be mandated by law as in France, South Korea, Taiwan and the United Kingdom,55 or they may be agreed within industry, such as in the case of a pending United States scheme.56 In Australia, where an industry graduated response scheme is still under negotiation, an important lawsuit on this topic was decided this year. The High Court of Australia determined that ISPs who fail to warn customers about their suspected infringement of copyright do not thereby become liable to the copyright owner for authorising such infringement.57 This principle is a good starting point for consumer advocates wishing to address the practice of compulsory filtering of suspected copyright-infringing files by ISPs. Consumers should not be subjected to such a practice unless it is mandated by law, or has been clearly disclosed and described to them before they choose to subscribe to that ISP’s service. A final type of content which is commonly filtered by broadband service providers is email, to reduce the incidence of email scams and unsolicited commercial messages known as spam. Of course few consumers will object to this, but it should still be disclosed to them by their ISP so that they know that it is happening. Broadband providers can also take direct action against those sending spam or other abusive emails from their networks. For example our Indonesian member YLKI reports that the Indonesian Internet Service Providers Association APJII has issued a set of rules that allow providers to disable a customer’s access to email, or to permanently

Darren Geere. Major ISPs pledge to make it easier for parents to block porn. 2011. url: http://www.wired.co.uk/ 52

news/archive/2011- 10/11/pornfilters. 53 See http://iia.net.au/iia_ family-friendly-progam.html.

Malcolm and Noronha, Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone, pp. 9293. 55 Consumers International. 2010 IP Watchlist. 2010. url: http : / / 54

a2knetwork . org / sites / default / files/IPWatchList- 2010- ENG.pdf,

p. 8. Ernesto. US "Six Strikes" Anti-Piracy Scheme Will Roll Out Gradually. 2012. url: http://torrentfreak.com/us56

six- strikes- antipiracy- schemewill-roll-out-gradually-120713/.

Roadshow Films Pty Ltd v iiNet Ltd [2012] HCA 16 (20 April 2012), http: 57

//www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/ HCA/2012/16.html.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

terminate the customer’s account, for sending emails that violate Indonesian laws or are “sensitive to ethnicity, religion and race, or pornography”.

3.4.4

Security

Broadband Internet services are particularly vulnerable to security attacks, because the connection is intended to be “always on”. This leaves a 24-hour window for computer viruses and spyware (collectively “malware”) to infiltrate the unsuspecting consumer’s home computer. The vectors used for such attacks are typically either security holes in the user’s software (such as a Web browser) which allow malware to be installed automatically without the user’s knowledge, or tricking the user into breaching their own security, for example by installing software that appears to be legitimate but which contains hidden functions (a “Trojan horse”). Once breached, the consumer’s computer may be controlled by a third party and used for illicit purposes such as sending spam or attacking third-party systems. Consumers can minimise this danger by: • Ensuring that their operating system and application software is fully and regularly updated with all available patches from the vendor. • Using their operating system’s built-in firewall capabilities, or installing a trusted third party firewall, which will shield the computer from certain kinds of intrusions. • Also installing and using virus scanning software, particularly if the computer is running Microsoft Windows, which is by far the most vulnerable to virus infection (in comparison to other operating systems such as Mac OS X, Linux and Android). The relevance of this issue to a consumer campaign on broadband, apart from raising consumer awareness of the above points, is that some broadband providers actively monitor signs that their customers’ computers may have been infected by a malware infestation, and will notify the customer if this appears to be the case.58 This is an industry best practice that ISPs should be encouraged to adopt more widely.

3.4.5

Network neutrality

As explained in section 3.1.5 on page 31, a common interpretation of network neutrality (or net neutrality) is the principle that ISPs should not discriminate between the applications, services and devices that they support on their networks. However, most ISPs engage in discriminatory traffic management for legitimate traffic management purposes, such as allowing different Internet services to co-exist on their networks with comparable quality of service as experienced by the end user.

See for example http://icode.net.

au/.

BROADBAND INTERNET AND THE CONSUMER

For example, American ISP Comcast was penalised by the FCC for interfering with BitTorrent sessions,59 but argued in response that it did this only to protect the performance of VoIP services that might otherwise have been disrupted by the high volume of BitTorrent downloads. This still takes place today; for example one of the Brazilian respondents to CI’s survey said:

Ben Jones. Comcast To Compensate Throttled BitTorrent Users. 2009. url: http : / / torrentfreak . com / 59

comcast- to- compensate- throttledbittorrent-users-091222/.

I downloaded the same content twice from [the same] connection, but the second time the content was encrypted. The first time the speed was reduced almost to the minimum, but in the second the connection remained high. I can only conclude that my provider uses some kind of packet inspection to regulate my use.

Whilst balancing competing uses of the network can be contentious in itself, much more problematic is where Internet services or applications are treated differently for commercial rather than technical reasons. An ISP may wish to give a competitive advantage to its own online content, or to a content provider with whom it has a commercial relationship. For example, some mobile Internet providers provide free access to Facebook, but require users to pay to access other social networks from their devices. This creates a situation where dominant content providers have an unfair advantage over smaller ones, including start-ups and non-commercial content providers. At minimum, broadband providers should be transparent about the rules that they apply that may privilege certain services, applications or devices over others. Our UK member Consumer Focus writes: The net neutrality debate has escalated in the UK with the introduction of the new EU regulatory framework for telecommunications known as the Telecoms Package. The new framework, which was adopted by the EU in December 2009, was transposed into UK law in May this year and it contains clauses on net neutrality. The legislation sets the new transparency rule that requires ISPs to inform consumers about the nature of the service to which they are subscribing. It includes traffic management techniques and their impact on service quality, as well as any other limitations (such as bandwidth caps or available connection speed). In addition the legislation grants the UK telecommunications regulator Ofcom the powers to set minimum quality levels for network transmission services. In line with the new law, ISPs – jointly with the Broadband Stakeholders Group (BSG) – have developed a voluntary transparency code of practice with the aim of improving the quality of information and of enabling consumers to make comparisons.60 This self-regulatory initiative has been welcomed by the Government as it fits into its policy on net neutrality emphasising competition and transparency as tools to safeguard net neutrality.

Other members may wish to consult the UK code of practice as a possible model to be followed in their own countries.

http://www.broadbanduk.org/ content/view/479/7/

4 Broadband advocacy campaigning suggestions

With the preceding two chapters as background, it should be possible for any CI member or likeminded NGO to plan their own national advocacy campaign on broadband issues for consumers. Members who participated in our 2011 member and consumer surveys on broadband will also be able to use the survey and research results that they completed to isolate the most pressing issues for consumers in their country. But to make things even easier, this chapter presents three suggested topics for a broadband advocacy campaign, along with some materials to support those activities: 1. Advocating for the adoption of a standard Broadband Disclosure Statement by ISPs. 2. Lobbying ISPs to reduce contractual and/or bundling lock-in, using the slogan Don’t Lock Me In! 3. Campaigning to introduce or improve independent dispute resolution mechanisms for broadband consumers. If your organisation’s resources are limited, consider basing your campaign around one or more of these issues. As well as getting a head start from the materials that CI has provided, you will also be able to share experiences with other CI members who are working on the same issues at the national level.

4.1

Broadband Disclosure Statement

One of the problems outlined in chapter 3 was that Internet speeds are commonly misadvertised, with “up to” speeds being claimed that do not represent anything like the actual average speeds that users can expect to experience in practice. Consumers are also confused by download caps, fair usage policies and other terms and conditions that are disclosed only in the “small print” of their agreements with their ISPs, if at all.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

Even if a particular ISP provides all of this information in a fair and understandable manner, the consumer who is shopping around for a new broadband connection will need to be able to compare it with what other ISPs offer – but is $30 per month for an 8Gb ADSL plan with a 20Gb cap better or worse than 30c per day for a 3G plan with a 50Mb cap? The consumer is likely to have no idea. Problems of comparability in other areas have led to regulators imposing standard disclosure labels on industry, such as the American “truth in lending” regulations or the French imposition of price comparability in banking services in 2010. Recognising this, in 2010 America’s FCC wrote: Disclosure labels are among the most common tools used to ensure consumers have information about a product or service. They often come in two parts: a simple and clear standard “page 1” and a “page 2” listing more detail. The broadband digital label should take this concept and bring it to the online world.1

FCC, Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan, p. 46. 1

The broadband digital label proposed by the FCC is illustrated here (there are further simplified versions that would omit the “maximum speed” and/or the “typical uses” rows of the label, or perhaps even just show the stars). Any such label has to strike a balance between providing accurate information, and being simple enough for consumers to use. Arguably, the FCC’s proposed label errs on the side of simplicity; or at least, it needs to be supplemented by a more detailed “page 2”. Therefore, CI offers an alternative. Drawing upon work done by the New America Foundation (which proposed its own “broadband nutrition label” in 2009),2 we have developed a suggested template, which is illustrated in figure 4.2 on the facing page (showing data for a fictional ISP, iStall). Below the label’s components are explained section by section: Speed variation This shows download speed, upload speed and responsiveness, each illustrated with a spectrum showing a range of values. Running from right to left, the range of values for both “download speed” and “upload speed” show: • The maximum achievable (or “peak”) speed, which is typically the speed that the ISP advertises. It is the technical maximum throughput of the connection. • Two separate measures of average speed, taken during peak time (9pm to 1am) and off-peak time (all other times). If this is felt to be too complicated, a single average speed could be shown rather than a peak and off-peak speed. • If applicable, a minimum speed that the ISP guarantees at all times. If this guaranteed speed is not met then the “reliability” section of the label will specify what consequences flow. The third spectrum is for “Responsiveness”, otherwise known as latency or lag, which is a measurement in milliseconds of how

Figure 4.1: Example FCC broadband digital label See http://newamerica.net/ publications/policy/broadband_ truth_in_labeling. 2

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

Broadband Disclosure Statement Figure 4.2: Sample Broadband Disclosure Statement

iStall Home 8Mb Plan SPEED VARIATION Download speed (Mb/s) 2.0 Guaranteed

4.1 9pm-1am

5.8 other times

8.0 Maximum

Upload speed (Mb/s) 0.125 Guaranteed Reponsiveness (one-way latency in milliseconds)

0.5 9pm-1am

0.75 other times

300 150 Guaranteed 9pm-1am Note: 150ms or faster is recommended for online gaming or voice/video chat.

100 other times

1.0 Maximum

50 Fastest

RELIABILITY

Service level guarantee: 90% If service is not available or does not meet the guaranteed levels of service shown above at least 90% of the time, you are entitled to a pro rata service credit for the additional time when these levels are not met. Information on verification and redemption of service level claims is available at http://istall.net/lsa.

SERVICE LIMITS AND CONDITIONS

Usage cap (per month) 20 GB Limits when cap exceeded Service will be restricted to 0.125Mb/s maximum download and 0.065Mb/s maximum upload speed. Services that are restricted BitTorrent traďŹ&#x192;c is limited during peak hours to 0.25 MBs download and upload speed Products bundled with Hire purchase of ADSL modem is included this service

PRICING

Recurring (per month) Excess charge (per MB) Installation, cancellation any other fees

OTHER INFORMATION

Service technology Privacy policy URL Acceptable use policy URL About this form

$20 (promotional $10 per month for first three months) None $80 connection fee $80 early termination fee within one year

ADSL 2.0 http://istall.net/privacy http://istall.net/legal http://A2Knetwork.org/broadband

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

long it takes for data to travel between the user and a destination server. It is particularly important for VoIP and Internet gaming. According to the ITU, 150ms of one-way latency (corresponding to 300ms of round-trip latency) does not noticeably affect quality, but 400ms (800ms round-trip) should always be considered unacceptable.3 Other relevant values that could be added to the disclosure statement are jitter (the extent to which packets of data arrive out of order), and packet loss (how many such packets never arrive). These can also affect VoIP and Internet gaming, and streaming media services. However, for simplicity and brevity they have been omitted from the example here. Reliability Reliability gives a measure of availability of broadband services over the service period. Here we are asking ISPs to specify a minimum guaranteed service level, and to offer consumers a service credit if the specified level is not reached over the contract period. This section will briefly explain how this credit can be verified and claimed, including a link to more detailed criteria if necessary. If no service level guarantee is available then this section would simply say “Not guaranteed”, indicating that caveat emptor applies. Service limits and conditions Here is where a clear and standardised measure of download caps, bandwidth limits, network management practices such as prioritisation, filtered services, and other limits on the service are required to be stated. As the form states, any cap on data usage should be stated per month, to aid in comparability between ISPs. If this is different to the service period, the per month figure should be added in parentheses; for example “Usage cap (per day): 50MB (approx 15GB per month)”. Pricing Here ISPs should disclose full pricing information of a broadband service including the cost of a service after an introductory or promotional rate has expired. The ISP should also list any and all additional fees for a service that may be charged to a customer including items such as installation and equipment costs, fees for exceeding any usage caps, early termination fees, as well as the cost of any additional services that are bundled together with a broadband service. There should not be any hidden charges whatsoever. Once again, the cost should be given per month, converted from the actual contract period if required: for example “Recurring (per day): 30c (approx $9 per month)”. Other information Here is where any other disclosures should be made, including the service technology used (eg, ADSL or 3G), links to detailed privacy and acceptable use policies, and a link to more information about the form itself, which should ideally go not to the ISP’s website, but to a website covering all ISPs who use the same form, explaining how the particular values are calculated in your country. Depending on how usage of the

3 Recommendation G.114, http://www. itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.114-200305-I/ en.

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

statement is negotiated, this might be hosted on your own website, a regulator’s website, or even an ISP industry association website. There are a number of other criteria which could be included in a customised Broadband Disclosure Statement for your country, which have been omitted from the example above for brevity, but are available in an expanded version on our website:

Figure 4.3: Optional additions to the Broadband Disclosure Statement (detail)

• The pricing section could be fleshed out with more details of the terms and conditions that apply to bundles: for example, can any items be “de-bundled”, and how does this affect the total cost of the package? Are there items in the bundle that come with separate terms and conditions of use? • A separate summary of privacy terms and conditions could be required, covering the personal information collected, how the user can access it, with whom it is shared, and what happens in the case that there is a data breach. • Not shown in the figure, the ratio of the peak speed to the average speed could be specified, for both downloads and uploads. This ratio should be within the range of 10% to 20%. The larger this ratio is in percentage terms, the larger the false claim being made. Soft copies of the template Broadband Disclosure Statement are available from our website at http://A2Knetwork.org/broadband in both HTML and Adobe Illustrator formats, and you are free to customise them as you wish.

Measurement of speed variation The most contentious of all the items of the Broadband Disclosure Statement will be the measurement of average speed. Clearly, an

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

objective measurement has to be used. There are many free online speed measurement tools, but what many consumers do not realise is that these do not tend to provide a fair and accurate measurement unless the user is located nearby to the server which hosts the tool. For consumers who are already consumers of an ISP and wish to measure their own speed, there are various user-friendly online speed measurement tools available, at least one of which is likely to be conveniently located: • Brazil utilises the SIMET (Traffic Measurement System), a Web page with a Java applet and servers inside Brazilian Internet Exchange Points (IXP), with twenty IXPs spread throughout the country. The Java applet can measure delay, jitter, TCP and UDP bandwidth, packet loss, visible Wi-Fi channels, among other information. As the majority of Brazilian Internet Services providers exchange traffic directly with the networks in which SIMET servers are located, it is almost the same as having the test servers inside the provider’s network, giving the most accurate results (but without the potential for interference by the provider). The data collected is also used by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee to learn about the general quality of Brazil’s national Internet Providers based on ZIP code. The service is available at http://simet.nic.br/ and the QoS map produced with the results is at http://simet.nic.br/mapas/. • The New Zealand Broadband test at http://www.nzbt.org.nz/ has recently been launched in beta. It provides a user-friendly interface to an underlying network measurement service called Measurement Lab (M-Lab), which is a joint initiative of more than a dozen partners including Google and the New America Foundation. • Similarly, for the United States, the FCC provides a site at http: //www.broadband.gov/qualitytest/about/ which interfaces to M-Lab and also to a competing service, Ookla, which uses a different methodology. • The M-Lab and Ookla test networks are also accessible directly respectively from http://www.measurementlab.net and http: //www.speedtest.net/. In comparison to M-Lab, the Ookla testing infrastructure is available from more servers around the world, but the M-Lab servers run a more comprehensive test which collects more data and therefore takes a longer time. A number of more specialised tools are also available for use by experts, as shown in table 4.1 on the next page (M-Lab is also included in the table, because as well as its friendly consumer-level test, it also provides more detailed results for specialists and researchers). Any of the above measures can be used for purposes of assigning a figure representing an ISP’s average speed to the Broadband

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

Tool

Active / Passive

# Participants

Platform

Protocols

Notes Uses pcapdiff

Gemini

Active (?)

Bilateral

Bootable CD

Glasnost

Active

1.5 sided

Java applet

BitTorrent

ICSI Netalyzr

Active

1.5 sided

Java applet + some javascript

Firewall characteristics, HTTP proxies, DNS environment

ICSI IDS

Passive

0 sided (on the network)

IDS

Forged RSTs

Not code users can run

MeasurementLab

Active

2 sided

PlanetLab (server), Any (client)

Any

A server platform for others’ active testing software

NDT

Active

1.5 sided

Java applet/ native app

TCP performance

A sophisticated speed test

Disclosure Statement, however it is important that it is consistent (ie, the same tool is used to measure all ISPs), and that the server used to conduct the test is located as nearby to the ISPs as possible (preferably at a central peering point or IXP to which all ISPs are connected, as in the case of Brazil’s SIMET). This allows for the greatest comparability between results. In the (hopefully rare) case that no nearby server is available to take accurate speed measurements, then the consumer organisation wishing to use the Broadband Disclosure Statement has the option to set up its own testing server, ideally in cooperation with local ISPs or IXPs. As at the date of publication, M-Lab servers are located at 24 sites, and Ookla at over 600, but both services are seeking to expand.

4.1.1

Campaign targets

There are several options for how to drive adoption of the Broadband Disclosure Statement, and the most suitable option is left to you as a consumer activist to research and decide upon, based on the advocacy methods described in chapter 2. But in general terms, you may consider: • Arranging a multi-stakeholder workshop to discuss the adoption of a Broadband Disclosure Statement as a voluntary industry best practice. Invite your local ISPs and telephone companies, any representatives of local or regional Internet industry associations, and government regulators. Explain the motivations for the development of the Broadband Disclosure Statement as a way to improve communication to consumers and comparability between ISPs, and seek their commitment to support its adoption. If they agree to this, ISPs can also be asked to selfpublish their own Broadband Disclosure Statements for all of the broadband services that they offer. • If industry does not react positively, then it will be time to approach the regulator directly and ask for a private meeting

Table 4.1: Known ISP Testing Software

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

with its highest staff concerning this issue. Find out from them whether a Broadband Disclosure Statement could be mandated by it as part of its existing regulation of the industry. If this is not already within the regulator’s power, what instruments would have to be amended to make this possible? Who do you have to lobby to get them amended? Consider involving not only your country’s communications ministry, but also its consumer protection ministry, as the Broadband Disclosure Statement likely cuts across both portfolios. • If neither the regulator nor the industry shows interest in adoption of the Broadband Disclosure Statement, then you can still push it forward as a grassroots initiative, in which your organisation, or Internet users mobilised by you, contribute their own data. In this case, it may be more appropriate to collect the data for multiple ISPs in a table or database, rather than in separate Broadband Disclosure Statements. The disadvantage of this approach is that it means more work for you, and more responsibility to ensure that the information is correct. But if successful, it may inspire a change of heart by the ISPs concerned, who will see the demand for such a resource and the public relations benefits of supporting it.

4.1.2

Advocacy materials

In addition to the Broadband Disclosure Statement template itself, CI has put together a range of advocacy materials that you can use in your campaigns on this issue. At the end of this section are some sample designs for posters or postcards that you can use to promote the idea that greater transparency and comparability of broadband services is required. You can download high resolution source files for these designs from our campaign website at http: //A2Knetwork.org/broadband. The themes of the campaign are also promoted via social media through the voice of an imaginary ISP called iStall (which you may have noticed as the fictional ISP profiled in the sample Broadband Disclosure Statement). iStall has a website (http://www.istall. net), a Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/istall.net) and a Twitter account (@iStallnet), all of which feature sound-bites designed to draw attention to our campaign aims, by making fun of the way that most ISPs fail to disclose information to their customers in a transparent and comparable form. Although iStall’s social media presence is just a parody, those who click through to read more information will be redirected to the campaign website at http://A2Knetwork.org/broadband where they can read more about the Broadband Disclosure Statement and find a link to their local consumer organisation who is working on broadband issues. You are encouraged to link directly to iStall’s website or social media accounts, and to participate in its conversations with its

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

“users” by retweeting its tweets, commenting and using the Facebook “Like” button. You are also welcome to copy the idea to create your own localised version of iStall (we would be glad to help you with this by providing the necessary templates and materials, and sharing our istall.net domain).

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

4.2

Don’t Lock Me In!

Aside from the lack of reliable and comparable information about broadband services, that the Broadband Disclosure Statement would address, another problem revealed by our 2011 broadband survey was that many consumers perceive that they are “locked in” to a contract with their broadband provider. Lock-in was found to be particularly common in markets that were otherwise more competitive, with several broadband providers offering similar services.4 Our survey found that consumers can be locked in to their broadband contracts in two ways: • Very often a broadband contract has a minimum term of between 18 months and 2 years. It is also common that such a contract will roll over automatically and be extended for another similar term, so that a consumer who is not mindful can be locked in to the same provider for many years. In some cases, the lock-in period is essentially used for paying off a “free” device or “free” installation. But many consumers, if offered the choice, would rather bear those up-front costs in exchange for the freedom to switch providers on a month’s notice. Too often, they do not have this choice. • As described previously at 3.3.4 on page 46, providers will often bundle several products together, sometimes for a “discount” rate. The consumer who is unhappy with one of the components of that bundle may find themselves stuck with it, because they do not wish to lose other bundled items. For example, cable television providers often bundle Internet service into a single monthly bill – but the service they offer is especially prone to slowing down during peak periods. Despite such problems, many users think twice about switching ISPs because it means losing the discount they receive on their TV + Internet bundle. These concerns could be raised with broadband providers using the advocacy theme, “Don’t Lock Me In!”. The message from such a campaign is that consumers are best served by a competitive market for Internet services, and that forcing consumers into long term contracts or to accept an inflexible bundle of products can distort that market, giving them a poorer deal. Consumer groups should therefore advocate for a maximum contract term of 12 months, and that the components of service bundles should be separable without significant financial penalty. As with the Broadband Disclosure Statement, the appropriate targets of such a campaign are broadband consumers (with the intent that they will raise their concerns directly with their own providers), broadband providers, and regulators. However, you should go through the steps outlined in chapter 2 to make sure that your campaign is directed at the most appropriate targets

Malcolm and Corless, “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”, p. 81. 4

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

depending on the market conditions prevailing in your country or region. Also as with the Broadband Disclosure Statement, CI has put together some graphical materials for organisations that wish to campaign on this theme, as well as highlighting the issues through social media using the voice of our mock ISP, iStall. Sample poster and postcard images follow at the end of this section, with high resolution source files available for download from our website. You can edit these to create your own versions containing your name and logo alongside CI’s – you can even translate the text into your local language. Then follow the links from iStall’s fake website at http://www. istall.net/ to discover its thoughts on locking in broadband consumers – of course, it is all in favour of doing so! By mocking this attitude, we hope to drive consumers to the CI website at http://A2Knetwork.org/broadband where they will learn how to take action against lock-in through their local consumer organisation. Please join in by linking to and commenting on these social media sites, and let us know if you would like to create your own localised version with CI’s assistance. Finally, we also include below an example of a short open letter that could be published to encourage a local ISP to reduce its long contractual lock-in terms. An open letter is addressed to a particular individual, but is intended to be read by others also in order to achieve greater impact; as such, it’s something like a cross between a letter and an opinion article. You might for example publish it on the Web or in your own newsletter or magazine, or even as a paid advertisement in a trade publication or newspaper. This letter is an example only, but may prove useful in sparking some ideas for your own local campaigns.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

1 October 2012 Mr R Slick Managing Director iStall Inc 15 Network Drive Largetown 5000 Dear Sir, As one of Largetown’s largest and most successful ISPs, iStall has benefited from the loyalty of thousands of Largetown consumers over the years. But loyalty is something that a company earns from providing good service at fair prices. It should not be something that it forces upon its customers, by limiting them to take up two-year contracts that automatically roll over. By offering your services only on two year contracts, iStall is scaring away consumers who haven’t used the Internet before, and who may want to try for a shorter period before they settle on a service that is right for them. You are also restricting healthy competition in the marketplace for Internet services in Largetown, by preventing consumers who legitimately wish to switch ISPs from doing so – and other ISPs are doing the same. Whilst this is an understandable short-term tactic, we truly believe that iStall’s services should stand on their own merits. We call upon you to stop locking iStall customers in to two year contracts – one year is absolutely long enough. Set an example for other ISPs by showing that you are not afraid to let consumers make their own choice about which ISP is best for them. By doing this, you will be proving that iStall has its customers’ best interests at heart – and they in turn will be able to demonstrate their true loyalty to you. Yours sincerely, ...

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

4.3

Internet dispute resolution

According to CI’s 2011 research, a majority of consumers who complain to their ISPs about speed issues, connection problems or billing disputes are unsatisfied with the handling of their complaint. Many of them also don’t know where to turn next; complaining that there are “no redress avenues, one reaches a dead end”.5 As outlined at section 3.3.5 on page 47, a number of countries do have mechanisms for the independent resolution of complaints, with varying levels of effectiveness. However some of those mechanisms are just general alternative dispute resolution providers that are not specific to Internet or telecommunications, and these are not always very effective or efficient at resolving complaints about Internet services. Others are busy government regulators, without the time or resources to handle the thousands of complaints about telecommunications services that consumers in their countries raise each year. Still others do provide a good service, but consumers don’t know about their existence. So in all these cases, more work remains to be done by consumer advocates. The top priorities suggested for the consumer organisation wishing to campaign in this area are:

Malcolm and Corless, “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”, p. 83. 5

• If one does not already exist, convincing the government regulator or self-regulatory body for the Internet industry to establish a dedicated dispute resolution service for Internet service complaints, either as a stand-alone body or as a specialised subdivision of an existing consumer dispute resolution provider. • If such a dispute resolution body does already exist, how can it be improved? Does it operate transparently, releasing statistics of the outcomes of the complaints that it receives? Is it funded by a levy on the industry, so that consumers are able to bring complaints at no (or nominal) cost? Are consumers, as well as industry representatives, represented on its governing board?6

Gross, Lewis and Southwood, Consumer Best Practices in the Telecoms Sector, p. 5. 6

• If such a body does exist and is functioning well, then make sure that consumers know about it and are able to take recourse to it. The best way to ensure this is by requiring broadband providers themselves to communicate with their customers about independent redress options. A South African study on consumer protection in telecommunications suggests: With the majority of consumers being mobile subscribers, the use of mandatory SMS messages from service providers to carry the campaign should be investigated. Also worth considering is mandatory point-of-sale provision of consumer protection information with starter packs and recharge vouchers.7

A good case study of an effective dispute resolution service for the telecommunications industry is Australia’s Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman (TIO). Although briefly mentioned earlier,

Charley Lewis and Russell Southwood. Empowering Regulators to Protect Consumer Rights in the ICT Sector. LINK Centre. 2011. url: http: 7

//link.wits.ac.za/papers/LewisSouthwood- 2011- CRREA- ResearchReport-Final.pdf, p. 4.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

it is worth setting out some more details of this body here as a possible model of good practice for those wishing to campaign on the issue of Internet dispute resolution. The TIO is an independent not-for-profit company established under legislation to resolve telecommunications complaints for residential consumers and small businesses. It is headed by a Council which provides policy advice to the Ombudsman, constituted by five representatives from service providers and five consumer representatives, all elected by their constituents. There is also a Board of Directors which is responsible for financial management and oversight. The TIO draws its funding by charging service providers for complaints received from their customers, and the longer a complaint takes to resolve, the higher those fees are – ranging from AUD$32 to AUD$2,900. Therefore, there is a natural incentive for service providers to be flexible and settle disputes quickly. Service providers also contribute to the TIO’s operating and capital expenses in the proportion that their customers’ complaints bear to the total complaints received by the TIO. Complaints are only accepted by the TIO after the consumer has attempted, and failed, to resolve the dispute directly with the service provider. It offers both conciliation and arbitration services. In arbitration, it is empowered to render decisions that are binding on the provider of up to AUD$50,000 value, and recommendations of up to AUD$100,000 value. No appeal is possible. It also uses its experience in complaint resolution to analyse systemic problems for the industry, and to report and make recommendations about these. In the first quarter of 2012, the TIO received over 50,000 complaints. The three top areas for complaint over that period were respectively customer service (24%), billing and payments (21%) and faults (18%). For every five complaints received, about three of them concerned mobile phone services, one landline services, and the other Internet services.8 One of the trending topics of complaint is that of unexpectedly high bills, which the TIO puts down to the lack of tools available for consumers to track and manage the charges they incur. As a campaign for improved mechanisms for Internet dispute resolution would be mainly focussed on the regulator or industry body rather than on consumers or retail ISPs, it is less appropriate to rely on media such as posters, postcards or online social media than in the case of the other campaign suggestions. Other tactics can be considered, such as writing a briefing paper for the regulator or industry body containing local statistics about Internet complaints and suggesting concrete policy options to address the problem. You can then follow up with a request for a personal meeting with policy makers to present and discuss your proposals. At the appropriate point, a news release could also be considered to raise the heat on the regulator. Below is a short sample news release which publicises a consumer organisation’s call for

See http://www.tio.com.au/ publications/statistics. 8

BROADBAND ADVOCACY CAMPAIGNING SUGGESTIONS

the establishment of a local Internet industry ombudsman. A news release is written in an independent voice, so that it can be picked up by a news organisation and released as a story with little editing required. The statistics used are just examples, so if a press release such as this was actually used it would be necessary to source accurate figures from research, such as that conducted by CI members in 2011.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

For immediate release Fed up with unresolved complaints, consumers call for an Internet referee • Internet providers can’t resolve customers’ complaints • Consumer group proposes a new Internet ombudsman Martha Smith, 36 of Largetown was shocked when she received a bill for over $3,000 for wireless Internet usage in January this year. She insists that she was on holiday for most of the previous month, and hadn’t been using the Internet at all. Martha complained to her Internet provider about the bill, but was told that there had been no mistake and that she would simply have to pay it. Escalating the issue to the complaints department got her nowhere. “It was like I had hit a brick wall,” Martha said. “I didn’t know where else to turn.” Martha’s story is a familiar one for hundreds of other Largetown Internet users, who also complain to their Internet providers about issues like dropped connections and slow speeds. But whilst some providers are willing to negotiate payment extensions, few of them will waive payment altogether. Phil Jones of the Largetown Consumers Association (LCA) said: Many consumers come to us complaining that their Internet provider simply won’t listen to them. But there is not much we can do. What is needed is an ombudsman for the Internet industry, with power to force providers to sit down at the table and offer real solutions.

The decision to create such an Internet industry ombudsman lies with the Largetown Telecommunications Authority, but it has been reluctant to act, instead hoping for an industry-led solution. However, for now industry seems content to continue to handle its own complaints. Meanwhile Martha, who received advice from the LCA and has taken out a loan to pay her debt, hopes other consumers in a similar position will speak out. “Maybe if enough of us get together,” she said, “the government will finally get the message and provide a better way to resolve complaints like mine.”

Bibliography ACMA. Reconnecting the Consumer. 2011. url: http://www.acma. gov.au/webwr/_assets/main/lib310013/rtc_final_report.pdf.

Anderson, Nate. Just two Chinese ISPs serve 20% of world broadband users. 2010. url: http://arstechnica.com/tech- policy/2010/ 07/just- two- chineseisps- serve- 20- of- world- broadbandusers/.

British Broadcasting Corporation. Four in Five Regard Internet Access as a Fundamental Right: Global Poll. 2010. url: http://news.bbc. co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08 _ 03 _ 10 _ BBC _ internet _ poll. pdf.

Broadband Commission for Digital Development. A 2010 Leadership Imperative: The Future Built on Broadband. 2010. url: http://www. broadbandcommission.org/Reports/Report_1.pdf. – Broadband for the Global Good. 2012. url: http://www.broadbandcommission. org/Documents/BD-BBLS-report-2012.pdf. Budde, Paul. US Telecoms Market Further Deteriorating. 2012. url: http : / / www . circleid . com / posts / 20120217 _ us _ telecoms _ market_further_deteriorating/.

Connelly, Claire. Anonymous hackers claim ISP user data stolen from AAPT. 2012. url: http://www.news.com.au/technology/hackedanonymous - steals - user - data - from - aussie - isp / story e6frfro0-1226435629217?from=public_rss.

Consumers International. 2010 IP Watchlist. 2010. url: http : / / a2knetwork . org / sites / default / files / IPWatchList - 2010 ENG.pdf.

Council of Europe. Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the management of the Internet protocol address resources in the public interest. 2010. url: https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id= 1678299. Doran, George T. “There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives”. In: Management Review 70 (11 1981), pp. 35–36. Ernesto. US "Six Strikes" Anti-Piracy Scheme Will Roll Out Gradually. 2012. url: http://torrentfreak.com/us- six- strikes- antipiracy-scheme-will-roll-out-gradually-120713/. Ernst & Young and FICCI. Enabling the next wave of telecom growth in India. 2011. url: http : / / emergingmarkets . ey . com / wp content/plugins/download-monitor/download.php?id=69.

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

European Commission. E-Communications Household Survey. 2011. url: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_ 362_en.pdf. FCC. Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. 2010. url: http://download.broadband.gov/plan/national- broadbandplan.pdf. Fisher, Roger and William Ury. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1983. Ford, George S, Thomas M Koutsky and Lawrence J Spiwak. The Demographic and Economic Drivers of Broadband Adoption in the United States. Phoenix Center Policy Paper No. 31. 2007. url: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1093005http://ssrn.com/abstract= 1093005.

Freedom House. Freedom on the Net 2011. 2011. url: http://www. freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FOTN2011.pdf. Geere, Darren. Major ISPs pledge to make it easier for parents to block porn. 2011. url: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201110/11/porn-filters. Gross, Isabelle, Charley Lewis and Russell Southwood. Consumer Best Practices in the Telecoms Sector. LINK Centre. 2011. url: http: //link.wits.ac.za/papers/Gross-et-al-2011-Consumer-BestPractice.pdf. ITU. Key statistical highlights: ITU data release June 2012. 2012. url: http://www.itu.int/ITU- D/ict/statistics/material/pdf/ 2011%20Statistical%20highlights_June_2012.pdf.

Jones, Ben. Comcast To Compensate Throttled BitTorrent Users. 2009. url: http : / / torrentfreak . com / comcast - to - compensate throttled-bittorrent-users-091222/. Lehr, William et al. Assessing Broadband Reliability: Measurement and Policy Challenges. 2011. url: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ document/view.action?id=7021705978. Lewis, Charley and Russell Southwood. Empowering Regulators to Protect Consumer Rights in the ICT Sector. LINK Centre. 2011. url: http://link.wits.ac .za/papers/Lewis - Southwood- 2011CRREA-Research-Report-Final.pdf. Lucchi, N. “Access to Network Services and Protection of Constitutional Rights: Recognizing the Essential Role of Internet Access for the Freedom of Expression”. In: Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law (JICL) 19.3 (2011). url: http: //www.cjicl.com/uploads/2/9/5/9/2959791/cjicl _ 19.3 _ lucchi_article.pdf.

Malcolm, Jeremy and Elyse Corless. “Global Consumer Survey on Broadband”. In: Consumers in the Information Society: Access, Fairness and Representation. Ed. by Jeremy Malcolm. Consumers International, 2012, pp. 75–90. Malcolm, Jeremy and Frederick Noronha. Access to Knowledge: A Guide for Everyone. Ed. by Jeremy Malcolm and Frederick Noronha. Consumers International, 2010.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

NORAD. The Logical Framework Approach: Handbook for objectivesoriented planning. Fourth edition. 1999. Ofcom. UK fixed-line broadband performance, May 2011: Research report. 2011. url: http : / / stakeholders . ofcom . org . uk / binaries / research / telecoms - research / bbspeeds2011 / bb - speeds may2011.pdf. Pandit, Nirmala S. “Advocacy: A Tool for Social change”. In: Consumer Network 2.4 (1995). Pitt, Jillian. Broadband minded? Overcoming consumers’ barriers to internet access. 2010. url: http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/ files/2010/10/Broadband-minded.pdf. Save the Children. Working for Change in Education: A handbook for planning advocacy. 2000. url: http://www.savethechildren.org. uk/sites/default/files/docs/WORKING%20FOR%20CHANGE%20IN% 20EDUCATION.pdf.

Singh, Shalini. “Government spares telecos, penalises Internet users”. In: The Hindu 5 July (2012). url: http://www.thehindu. com/news/national/article3603231.ece. Souter, David. “Global Information Society Watch 2008”. In: ed. by Alan Finlay. Uruguay: APC and Hivos, 2008. Chap. Institutional Overview, p. 37. Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman. Resilient Consumers Report. 2011. url: http://www.tio.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0020/9434/Resilient-Consumers-Report-Aug-2011.pdf. The Economist. “Let Mexico’s moguls battle”. In: The Economist 4 February (2012), pp. 52–53. url: http://www.economist.com/ node/21546028. Wyatt, Edward. F.C.C. Plans to Overhaul Telecom Fund to Focus on Expanding Broadband. 2011. url: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/ 10/07/business/fcc- plans- an- overhaul- of- the- universalservice-fund.html?_r=3.

Index

3G, 7, 27, 29, 60, 62 Accessibility, 38, 40 ADSL, 7, 27, 43, 60, 62 Advertising, 43, 53, 59 Advocacy and campaigning budgetting, 13 definition, 9 goals, 10, 11 knowledge base, 12, 23 BitTorrent, 31, 53, 57 Broadband access devices, 7, 28 adoption, 36 cost, 37, 38 definition, 7, 27 latency, 60 reliability, 51, 62 speed, 43, 60, 63 Coalitions, 12, 14 Communications, 10, 17–21 media releases, 17, 19, 76 Competition, 42, 72 Complaint handling, 47, 75 Computers, 29, 39, 40, 56 Consumer protection, 5, 41–51 Contracts billing, 46, 62 bundling, 46 lock-in, 70

quotas, 43, 45, 62 roll-over, 70 unfair, 45 Copyright, 54, 55

ISOC, 23 ISPs, 24, 27, 42, 43, 45, 47, 52, 55, 56 ITU, 5, 36, 62 Logical framework, 11

Data retention, 54 Digital literacy, 35, 39 Email, 32, 39, 53, 54 spam, 55 European Commission, 37 Evaluation, 21 Facebook, 7, 20, 31, 32, 54, 57 FCC, 32, 57, 64 Google, 7, 31, 64 Human rights, 32, 51 IETF, 32 Internet access, see also Universal service applications, 31 bundles, 30 censorship, 54 content, 7, 31, 54 plans, 30 protocols, 31, 55 services, 31 statistics, 5 user groups, 23 ISO, 46

Malware, 56 Mobile phones, 30, 32 Monitoring, see Evaluation Multilingualism, 41 Negotiation, 16 Network neutrality, 32, 56 Packet inspection, 53 Politics, 14, 19, 24 Privacy, 53, 62 Regulators, 23, 65 Security, 56 Standards, 31 Television, 7, 27, 31, 47, 70 TIO, 48–50, 76 Universal service, 35 VoIP, 31, 32, 45, 53, 57, 62 WiFi, 7, 27, 29 World Wide Web, 31, 39, 53, 54

Acknowledgements Chapter 2 was principally drafted in collaboration by Consumers Information Network (CIN) and Youth Education Network (YEN), both CI members from Kenya, with portions reproduced and adapted from the following works: Advocacy Tools and Guidelines: Promoting Policy Change. Copyright © 2001 Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere, Inc. (CARE). Used by permission. Advocacy and Lobbying training manual. Copyright © 2006 Secretariat of the African Decade of Persons with Disabilities. Used by permission.

Chapter 3 was principally drafted by Consumer Education and Research Centre (CERC) of India, with portions reproduced and adapted from the following works: National Broadband Network: A Guide for Consumers. Copyright © 2010 Internet Society of Australia (ISOC-AU) and the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Australia License. Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. Federal Communications Commission, 2010. Public domain, available at http: //www.broadband.gov/.

These chapters were edited, and the remainder of the book was written, by Jeremy Malcolm who takes responsibility for any remaining errors in the text. The following CI members (and one non-member partner, shown in italics) contributed to the broadband research conducted during 2011 that is referenced in this book: • Australian Communication Consumers Action Network • Association pour la Défense de l’Environnement et des Consommateurs (ADEC, Senegal) • Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication • Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco (CEJ, Mexico) • Consumer Awareness Organization (CAO, Nigeria) • Consumer Council of Fiji • Consumer Council of Zimbabwe

HOLDING BROADBAND PROVIDERS TO ACCOUNT

• Consumer Focus (United Kingdom) • Consumers Korea • Consumers Union (United States) • Consumidores Argentinos • CUTS HRC (Vietnam) • CUTS India • Federation of Malaysian Consumer Associations (FOMCA) • Instituto Brasileiro de Defesa do Consumidor (IDEC) • Kenya Consumers Organization • Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios de Chile (ODECU) • SEWA (Nepal) • Union de Consumidores de Argentina • VINASTAS (Vietnam) • Yayasan Lembaga Konsumen Indonesia (YLKI) The interior was laid out and typeset using the open source LATEX typesetting system. The text is set in Palatino at 10 points on a 14 point leading, and the headings in Iwona.