BBC tells ISPs to get stuffed

somanyholes · Apr 04, 2008, 08:33:31

go the beeb

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 08:56:54

I noticed that. I wonder if they'll take the same attitude with paying for transmitters and satellites?

madasahatter · Apr 04, 2008, 12:16:47

the beeb actually speaks sense!!

Wow!

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 12:23:12

Also under discussion from a different angle here.

somanyholes · Apr 04, 2008, 12:24:04

nice linkage

Rik · Apr 04, 2008, 12:28:18

All my links are freshly oiled.

D-Dan · Apr 04, 2008, 21:57:56

I have to say - I don't care. If the beeb play hardball - my allegiance is to my ISP, who allow me to access worldwide content. If the BBC get restricted - then I will go elsewhere for my news (which is about all I use them for anyway).

So, IMO, the BBC will have to back down. They may have the best coverage in the world - but if they restrict it - they will lose market share (and my license fee).

madasahatter · Apr 04, 2008, 23:38:51

Tbh, I don't think the BBC have any need to back down. Remember, the BBC aren't the only ones doing this - theres 4OD, Sky by broadband etc etc - all pretty much using the same (p2p) technology.

I don't think the ISPs can force the Beeb to do anything, and imagine the problems they would face from their customers if they suddenly blocked iPlayer - don't think any of them is brave enough. 8)

Inactive · Apr 04, 2008, 23:42:15

Quote from: D-Dan on Apr 04, 2008, 21:57:56

So, IMO, the BBC will have to back down. They may have the best coverage in the world - but if they restrict it - they will lose market share (and my license fee).

I am not 100% sure on this, but I believe that any BBC content is restricted to UK ISP's.

Captain K · Apr 05, 2008, 12:29:23

Another example of how IDNet's business model makes so much sense both for IDNet and its customers!

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 12:31:24

Very true, Bruce. It will happily support use of the iPlayer.

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 13:20:20

Quote from: Captain K on Apr 05, 2008, 12:29:23
Another example of how IDNet's business model makes so much sense both for IDNet and its customers!

Indeed - proves my point that if an ISP charges the right amount, it can invest in infrastructure that is capable of actually providing the service that it offers - it's all good

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 13:21:04

The big problem may, of course, come from BT not investing enough in their infrastructure.

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 13:26:49

You could well be right there - if the basic backbone isn't up to the job, then all ISPs are going to have a major problem, but if some ISPs can provide a good service with the same BT infrastructure, then that tends to point the finger at the ISPs that can't for not investing enough.

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 13:28:25

Indeed it will. My concern is that BT won't have the capacity on the backhaul at exchanges.

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 13:31:44

If there is a problem with backhaul capacity, it is up to the ISPs to sort that out with BT - they provide a service to the ISPs just as much as the ISP provides a service to us, and whatever the cause, if we pay for a service, we are entitled to receive it.

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 14:39:21

Bear in mind, though, that BT don't have that much of an SLA when it comes to broadband. If your connection slows to 400k (from memory) that's all BT are contracted to supply.

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 14:41:54

I think your memory serves you well Rik.

That kind of figure was probably OK 10 years ago, but is just not good enough now. It's time that something was done about that.

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 14:52:21

Ofcom seems unable to think that clearly though.

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 14:54:12

Quote from: Rik on Apr 05, 2008, 14:52:21
Ofcom seems unable to think that clearly though.

Ofcom seems unable to even think

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 14:55:09

This, sadly, is true. But they do get paid awfully well not to do anything useful.

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 14:56:31

I'm in the wrong game Rik

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 15:00:58

Aren't we all. The CEO (or whatever) of Ofcom gets, I believe, £270K, and is worried about his legacy. Must be a relative of Bliar!

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 15:25:03

If he wants to leave a legacy, wouldn't it be a good idea for Ofcom to do something really big and positive?

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 15:25:44

... and right!

madasahatter · Apr 05, 2008, 15:27:35

A lot of flying pigs seem to appear round these parts when discussing those in some sort of authority

Rik · Apr 05, 2008, 15:28:28

I know, it makes you wonder why, doesn't it. If MI6 are watching this forum, we're in serious trouble.

madasahatter · Apr 09, 2008, 08:25:25

Update here

Highfield does seem to speak a lot of sense imo - including the point he makes about the cheap ISPs basing their pricing model on peeps doing a bit of surfing and the odd e-mail. In this day and age, that's just not enough, and it's time the ISPs woke up and realised that peeps want more out of their broadband. In a way, they are a bit like the recording industry - they have had it far too easy for far too long, and they don't like letting go of the good times, blaming anyone and everyone else for their failure to move with the times instead of realising that the answer lies with themselves.

Captain K · Apr 09, 2008, 08:54:37

Interesting. I thought this quote was particularly relevant:

Quote"The iPlayer has come along and made downloading a legal and mass market activity," said Michael Phillips, from broadband comparison service broadbandchoices.co.uk.

He said he believed ISPs were partly to blame for the bandwidth problems they now face.

"They have priced themselves as cheaply as possible on the assumption that people were just going to use e-mail and do a bit of web surfing," he said.

ISPs needed to stop using the term 'unlimited' to describe their services and make it clear that if people wanted to watch hours of downloaded video content they would have to pay a higher tariff, he added.

The "unlimited" Phillips refers to is the key to the problem. If ISP's were all to adopt pricing models with various bandwidth strata, they would solve their problems overnight, and wouldn't need to bleat at the BBC. I suspect it would also ease the pressure on ISP's to do something about P2P file sharing, once the big downloaders had to pay more money for using a large chunk of available capacity.

As it is, the "unlimited" flag is used to flog BB to the uninformed masses. If ISP want to sell their product like this, they can't complain that some of the services customers can access will require investment in their backhaul network. Classic case of having cake and eating it, IMHO.

somanyholes · Apr 09, 2008, 08:56:51

both spot on views imo, its the usual case of hoping people don't use what they pay for, and then moaning about it when they do..

Rik · Apr 09, 2008, 09:46:33

OTOH, I can still see the iPlayer having an impact on ISPs like IDNet, not in their business model, but with the BT backhaul. If this does occur, people are going to blame the ISPs for something which is beyond their control. The only sensible way forward, imo, is for the Govt to lay down minimum acceptable standards for broadband, and impose them on BT as a USO.

Gary · Apr 09, 2008, 09:52:20

Quote from: Rik on Apr 09, 2008, 09:46:33
OTOH, I can still see the iPlayer having an impact on ISPs like IDNet, not in their business model, but with the BT backhaul. If this does occur, people are going to blame the ISPs for something which is beyond their control. The only sensible way forward, imo, is for the Govt to lay down minimum acceptable standards for broadband, and impose them on BT as a USO.

I cannot see that happening Rik, considering the governments lack of understanding of the internet as it is, but it would be the answer

Rik · Apr 09, 2008, 09:55:33

I did say sensible way, Gary, so that immediately rules out any Govt doing it.

Gary · Apr 09, 2008, 10:10:38

Quote from: Rik on Apr 09, 2008, 09:55:33
I did say sensible way, Gary, so that immediately rules out any Govt doing it.

Captain K · Apr 09, 2008, 10:20:43

Quote from: Rik on Apr 09, 2008, 09:55:33
I did say sensible way, Gary, so that immediately rules out any Govt doing it.

[Tongue in cheek]

I've got an idea. Think about how the privatised railways work. Numerous different franchise holders with a centralised independent company running the infrastructure. Translate that to the internet. What if the government were to set up a central, profit-making (or no captain of industry would go near it) company to run the infrastructure, that is to ISP's what Network Rail is to the rail companies. I've even got a name for it...perhaps Telecoms Britain, or TB for short?

[/Tongue in cheek]

Rik · Apr 09, 2008, 10:36:29

Actually, I agree with the concept, Bruce. It works for trains, mains electricity, gas and TV/Radio transmitters. We're half way there with Openreach, the solution, to me, is to take the latter into public ownership and to invest the required money in the infrastructure. BT, ISPs etc can all rent the service they want.

madasahatter · Apr 09, 2008, 12:18:18

Quote from: Rik on Apr 09, 2008, 09:46:33
OTOH, I can still see the iPlayer having an impact on ISPs like IDNet, not in their business model, but with the BT backhaul. If this does occur, people are going to blame the ISPs for something which is beyond their control. The only sensible way forward, imo, is for the Govt to lay down minimum acceptable standards for broadband, and impose them on BT as a USO.

Totally agree with that - but that is up to ISPs as BTs customers to put pressure on BT to provide the service they are paying them for - just as we would pressure the ISP to provide the service we are paying them for. If that means that the Government has to step in, then they should do - and sooner rather than later. the internet is big business, and I'm sure that a few ISPs applying pressure in the right places would get a result.

madasahatter · Apr 09, 2008, 12:19:04

Quote from: somanyholes on Apr 09, 2008, 08:56:51
its the usual case of hoping people don't use what they pay for, and then moaning about it when they do..

Well said that mouse

Niall · Apr 09, 2008, 20:22:49

Quote from: Captain K on Apr 09, 2008, 08:54:37
Interesting. I thought this quote was particularly relevant:

The "unlimited" Phillips refers to is the key to the problem. If ISP's were all to adopt pricing models with various bandwidth strata, they would solve their problems overnight, and wouldn't need to bleat at the BBC. I suspect it would also ease the pressure on ISP's to do something about P2P file sharing, once the big downloaders had to pay more money for using a large chunk of available capacity.

As it is, the "unlimited" flag is used to flog BB to the uninformed masses. If ISP want to sell their product like this, they can't complain that some of the services customers can access will require investment in their backhaul network. Classic case of having cake and eating it, IMHO.

I had to laugh when I read this in work. The fact that Tiscali have been selling products claiming to be unlimited (even if it means a person can only get 2mb) for £6.49 and now SHOCKER, they can't afford the bandwidth for the people using their service that they advertise. Ignoring the unlimited thing completely, if they are now saying they're going to have to throttle iPlayer use because their network can't cope, who's fault is it? It's certainly NOT the fault of the BBC.

Personally I think they've been digging their own grave for years, and they've destroyed a LOT of ISPs in buyouts, and now they can't afford it. Boo f*****g hoo.

For once I'd back the BBC to display a "blacklist" of ISPs that are throttling iPlayer usage.

I actually used iPlayer for the first time last weekend when I missed Dr Who

madasahatter · Apr 10, 2008, 00:40:56

Quote from: Niall on Apr 09, 2008, 20:22:49
I had to laugh when I read this in work. The fact that Tiscali have been selling products claiming to be unlimited (even if it means a person can only get 2mb) for £6.49 and now SHOCKER, they can't afford the bandwidth for the people using their service that they advertise. Ignoring the unlimited thing completely, if they are now saying they're going to have to throttle iPlayer use because their network can't cope, who's fault is it? It's certainly NOT the fault of the BBC.

Personally I think they've been digging their own grave for years, and they've destroyed a LOT of ISPs in buyouts, and now they can't afford it. Boo f*****g hoo.

For once I'd back the BBC to display a "blacklist" of ISPs that are throttling iPlayer usage.

yeah - go Niall

madasahatter · Apr 10, 2008, 12:40:33

Tiscali - leading internet supplier

According to this they are anyway:

more argumenst

Niall · Apr 10, 2008, 19:57:08

Aww the big bully of ISPs isn't getting it's own way. Such a shame. I hope they go under, the profiteering morons.

One other thing I think is amazing about all this is that they are really trying to play this card, when they must have known, SURELY, that people will eventually be using the network to it's capacity as the internet moves on to bigger and better things. It's not like we were going to go back to spectrums now is it? The whole sorry state that Virgin media is in, is a prime example of over selling your network.