The UK government has provided a proposed piece of prosumer law legislation that is interesting, as illustrated by their case study - but is a backdoor for net neutrality!
"A consumer buys an e-book that she downloads onto her computer. When she opens the e-book she finds that the text is illegible. The provider confirms there is no fault with the original digital file that was sent and suggests that the consumer does not have the right hardware. The consumer confirms that she has downloaded another e-book of the same format which works well on her computer. She also checks with her internet service provider that there were no interruptions during the time of the download. The provider agrees (why would they??!!) that there may have been a problem with the download (which we refer to as a ‘related service’). We propose either: [a] the download should be provided with reasonable care and skill. In this case to get redress the consumer would still have to prove that the trader did not provide the download service with reasonable care and skill; OR [b] the digital content should be of satisfactory quality once the download has taken place. In this case the consumer would have to prove that the digital content was not of satisfactory quality and that the problem was not due to their internet connection or hardware. The trader would then have to provide the consumer with redress regardless of whether they had provided the related service with reasonable care and skill."How, pray, will the ISP satisfy everyone that it has provided an uninterrupted service at the point of download if it does any filtering or throttling at all? It's a net neutrality law! Graham Smith agrees:
Chris Marsden Has
#UKgov thought about #netneutrality implications of #prosumerlaw refunds for 'faulty' (jittery) downloads? #goodlaw is #regulatingcode
Well a quick wordsearch on the 225 page consultation document shows no hits for net neutrality ;-) http://discuss.bis.gov.uk/consumer-bill-of-rights/ministers-introduction/