Dear AG, I would love to respond to your subpoena but under FCC Section 222 of the communications act, which the FCC so clearly stated in double-negative in the Open Internet Order by saying "we decline to forbear from applying section 222 of the Act in the case of broadband Internet access service.”, we are restricted from disclosing any proprietary customer network information unless specifically authorized by the customer. Please contact the FCC and clarify your authority to collect the requested information and provide this information to our corporate council.
Or things I wish I could do…. Mark > On Oct 26, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMHO false advertising is better handled by state attorneys general or the > FTC, rather than the FCC. State AGs actually have a pretty good record of > combatting fraud, and it just takes a few states to put a whole industry on > notice. > > But I wonder if Schneiderman’s office understands the complexity of the > situation. It’s not as simple as Subway selling 11-inch footlong sandwiches, > or fish markets selling tilapia as red snapper. Yes, they understand the > interconnection situation. But as Mike says, it’s hard to believe that TWC, > Cablevision and Verizon aren’t delivering advertised speeds in NYC. > > In my area, we regularly see Frontier sell “up to 6 Mbps” service that can’t > reliably deliver 1 Mbps. So what the NY AG says is possible, just less > likely on cable or fiber service. > > Our most popular plans are 3/1 and 6/2, and we reliably deliver those, in > fact a little over just to make sure. But even at those fairly low speeds, > we get complaints due to customer WiFi problems, computer problems, > connection maxed out, speed plan insufficient for what they are trying to do, > and problems at the content provider end. One customer the other day finally > followed our recommendation after a year of complaining and updated the WiFi > drivers on her Toshiba laptop (with Intel AC 7260 card), and the WiFi > connection went from 5.5M to 300M. Suddenly, our service worked as > advertised. Of course, she didn’t have a single wired computer in the house. > That is getting pretty typical. > > I can’t imagine what it’s like offering 25M-100M or gigabit service, and > having people constantly run speed tests and complain they aren’t getting the > advertised speeds. I think it might be necessary to create a demarc with a > test jack on the outside like the telcos did. If you can get advertised > speed at the test jack, then it’s a customer network problem not a service > provider problem. > > I have no sympathy for the lying ISPs like Frontier, but like Mike, I wonder > how prevalent that is on major cable systems and in major metro areas. I > think the real liars are in rural areas and small towns where they can get > away with it. > > > > From: Mike Hammett <mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 10:11 AM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New York Attorney General Probes Broadband Speeds - WSJ > > I just read a report that US Cable companies deliver more than their > advertised performance most of the time. It's go nowhere investigations. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/> > > From: "Jaime Solorza" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > To: "Animal Farm" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 10:06:22 AM > Subject: [AFMUG] New York Attorney General Probes Broadband Speeds - WSJ > > http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-attorney-general-probes-broadband-speeds-1445870078 > > <http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-attorney-general-probes-broadband-speeds-1445870078> > Jaime Solorza
