British Mobile marriages and the power of four

British telecoms: Mobile marriages | The Economist: "In a group of four, the smallest operator is often the one that tries to shake things up. In Britain, for instance, Three has kept its prices low and did not charge extra for using 4G, the latest wireless technology. In America, after plans to merge with Sprint came to naught, T-Mobile USA has started a price war and introduced new products. Most recently, it launched a programme called “Smartphone Equality” which allows even customers without a good credit score to get a cheap contract.

By contrast, in markets where regulators have allowed the number of independent mobile networks to drop to three, such maverick operators are generally lacking—with the result that prices go up and the range of offerings is reduced. In Austria, for instance, where Hutchison Whampoa also acquired a competitor, prices jumped by about 10% after the merger, according to the OECD." 'via Blog this'

CRTC bans Bell from subsidizing data usage for mobile TV app

Net neutrality: CRTC bans Bell from subsidizing data usage for mobile TV app - The Globe and Mail: "Canada’s telecom regulator has ruled against a billing practice by cellphone providers that exempts certain television content streamed on wireless devices from customers’ monthly data caps.

 The decision, which applies specifically to mobile television apps offered by Bell Mobility Inc. and Videotron Ltd., sets a new limit on how companies that own both media and communications businesses can use television and sports content to bolster their wireless or Internet divisions.

 It also has implications for the Canadian approach to net neutrality, the principle that telecom providers should treat all content that flows through their networks equally, and not give any type of preference to content they own." 'via Blog this'

EBU on net neutrality: a clear chance to lobby

Council of Ministers to mull the Telecoms Single Market bill: a clear chance to lobby | TelecomTV: "EBU brings up a crucial point that is often missing from the argument. Anti neutrality rhetoric usually conflates higher or specialised services with upstream charging as if the commercial  involvement of a specific upstream provider were the only way to deliver ‘better than best effort’.

In fact there is nothing to prevent mobile operators from continuing to offer users better classes of service or, as the EBU points out,  “specialised services” or internet access packages with different speeds and volumes as long such services were non-discriminatory to upstream providers." 'via Blog this'

Netherlands: KPN and Vodafone fined for violation of net neutrality

Fines imposed on Dutch telecom companies KPN and Vodafone for violation of net neutrality regulations | ACM.nl: "With regard to its free Wi-Fi hotspots, KPN blocked various services including several internet calling services. As a result, consumers were unable to use these services. Internet providers are prohibited from deciding what their customers can and cannot do online.

Vodafone offered plans with which customers were able to watch pay-tv channel HBO using an app without charging these customers the data used for watching HBO. That way, Vodafone influenced its customers’ online behavior, which is not allowed either. Regulations require internet providers not to influence consumer behavior through blockades or tariffs.

Henk Don, Member of the Board of ACM, adds: “Internet providers are not allowed to decide for consumers what they can do on the Internet, and they are not allowed to influence their behavior either. All data must be transmitted under the same conditions. That is the idea behind net neutrality, and that is what we are enforcing in these cases. ACM thus prevents consumers from having less freedom of choice online.”" 'via Blog this'

The splinternet - GE Look Ahead

The splinternet - | GE Look Ahead | The Economist: "Mr Steimle doesn’t see ISPs “actively throttling bandwidth for Internet publishers they disagree with, [as] it would cause a massive backlash”. But the influence could be more subtle. Mr Drossos, Mr Shapiro and others hold a dystopic view wherein large ISPs could wield a disproportionate amount of influence over who gets access to them and what their customers view and read. Proprietary apps, partner services and other contributors to what The Economist has called “mega-sites” could shape cultural and political information, for example.

 This, of course, is the more dystopic view. And it might not occur at all: Services might switch stream altogether and focus on machine-to-machine (M2M) apps for the Industrial Internet and Internet of Things. In an “ubernet”, world, bandwidth providers might exercise most of their differentiated pricing on M2M data flows, which raise perhaps fewer ethical issues." 'via Blog this'

Slovenia: regulator forced by Electronic Communications Council to find Telekom Slovenije and Si.mobil in breach of net neutrality

Competitive Analysis & Foresight: Telekom Slovenije and Si.mobil found in breach of net neutrality: "Both operators confirmed to have received the decisions ordering them within 60 days to stop discriminating against internet traffic by music streaming service Deezer (Telekom Slovenije) and cloud storage service Hanger Mapa (Si.mobil). The decisions are final and only an administrative dispute or extraordinary judicial review are allowed.  

Several investigations of compliance with net neutrality provisions of the Electronic Communications Act were started on the initiative of the Electronic Communications Council of the Republic Slovenia. 

The council examined unfair, deceptive, abusive or otherwise prohibited business practices in the mobile industry. As AKOS whose senior officials regularly attended the council’s meetings had not started the investigation on its own initiative, the council filed a complaint in July 2014." 'via Blog this'

Brazilian Telecoms Leader Fined over Phorm ‘Trials’ - now for China?

Daily Research News Online no. 19515 - Brazilian Telecoms Leader Fined over Phorm ‘Trials’: "More than six years ago, Phorm came to public attention when UK ‘phone giant BT was charged with the abuse of users’ privacy. The UK provider admitted using business customers’ data without permission, in a trial run for Phorm’s ‘Webwise’ software.

Since then the massively indebted ad personalisation company has tried its hand in Korea, Brazil, Romania, Turkey and now China, but its 2013 turnover of $280k represents a speck beside its accumulated deficit of $256.6 million. CEO Kent Ertugrul (pictured) continues to persuade investors and must have some very convincing arguments - one of them could be the MoU which makes Phorm China Telecom’s ‘preferred strategic partner’ for big data technology and ad operations." 'via Blog this'