FCC Gives T-Mobile A Talking To For Exempting Speedtests From Caps, Preventing Users From Seeing They'd Been Throttled

from the just-deliver-our-bits-and-get-out-of-the-way dept

While T-Mobile has been doing a lot of consumer friendly things lately, we've noted repeatedly that many of these behaviors are somewhat superficial, despite oodles of press adoration for the company's admittedly highly entertaining CEO John Legere. Under the surface, some of what T-Mobile is up to isn't that different from the companies T-Mobile ridicules (AT&T, Verizon). Not only has the company not really been eager to compete on price, it has shown repeatedly that it doesn't think much of net neutrality or Title II reclassification, despite being a self-professed consumer BFF.

In addition to not understanding (or not caring) how the company's Music Freedom plan sets a horrible precedent, T-Mobile found itself under fire earlier this year for its decision to exempt speedtests from the company's arbitrary usage caps. Why? Unlike the overage fees charged by AT&T and Verizon, T-Mobile throttles users to 64 or 128 kbps after users reach their monthly allotments. Groups like Public Knowledge complained back in July that by exempting speedtests from T-Mobile caps, throttled customers weren't able to tell that they were throttled:

"By exempting speed tests from the throttling, T-Mobile is effectively preventing consumers from learning exactly how slow their throttled connections are. Under the new policy, T-Mobile customers who exceed their data caps will not be able to gauge the actual speeds available to them for the vast majority of their daily usage."

T-Mobile responded by claiming that the carrier was only trying to help consumers by making speedtests (which don't use much data to begin with) cap exempt. But that logic is a slippery slope and a cop out. If you're setting arbitrary caps and then exempting music services and speedtests, why not Techdirt podcasts? Why not TurboTax? Why not city municipal services? Government websites? Again, it sets a bad precedent for a wireless carrier to erect artificial, arbitrary barriers, then begin fiddling with what specific services can (or can't) more easily bypass these hurdles.

The FCC appears to have heard Public Knowledge's concerns, and this week announced (pdf) that the agency had worked with T-Mobile on an agreement requiring the carrier to clarify its throttling practices. According to the FCC, T-Mobile has sixty days to clarify throttling practices on its websites, provide access to speedtests that show a user's throttled state, and begin sending clear text messages to consumers alerting them when they've reached their monthly data allotments. Says the FCC:

"The FCC is committed to ensuring that broadband providers are transparent to consumers. I’m grateful T-Mobile has worked with the FCC to ensure that its customers are better informed about the speeds they are experiencing," said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. “Consumers need this information to fully understand what they are getting with their broadband service."

Of course, ensuring companies are "transparent" is one thing, and protecting the integrity of a neutral network is something else entirely. The FCC has made it repeatedly clear they see efforts like T-Mobile's Music Freedom and AT&T's Sponsored Data as "pricing creativity" during the neutrality rulemaking process, which should concern anybody interested in a healthy Internet. Meanwhile, T-Mobile wants to be seen as the ultra-hip, fun cousin of the telecom scene, but it apparently hopes nobody will notice that many of its behaviors aren't all that different from its dodgy, drunk uncles, AT&T and Verizon. If T-Mobile really wants to be seen as truly consumer friendly? Just deliver our bits and get the hell out of the way.

Filed Under: broadband caps, data caps, exemptions, fcc, net neutrality, open internet, speedtest
Companies: t-mobile

AT&T Has To Walk Back Its Empty Bluff About Freezing Fiber Deployment Because Of Title II

from the please-whatever-you-do-don't-check-our-math dept

When the President last month voiced his surprising and clear support for reclassifying ISPs under Title II, AT&T engaged in some very AT&T-esque pouting, proclaiming that the company would be freezing expansion of its next-generation "Gigapower" fiber deployments:

"We can't go out and invest that kind of money deploying fiber to 100 cities not knowing under what rules those investments will be governed...We think it is prudent to just pause and make sure we have line of sight and understanding as to what those rules would look like," added the CEO."

Except, as I noted at the time, AT&T's deployment promises were a bluff to begin with (what I like to call fiber to the press release). AT&T's been bumping speeds for a few high-end developments in cities around the country where fiber was already in the ground, then pretending that the deployments are much larger than they actually are. The goal is to save face in the age of Google Fiber, and give the mostly-bogus impression that AT&T's seriously competing. In reality, AT&T had again cut its fixed-line CAPEX by about $3 billion -- three days before the President's announcement -- and it's backing away from millions of DSL users it doesn't want to upgrade.

This is nothing new to AT&T. The company has a very long and proud history of using broadband deployment as a carrot on a stick to get what it wants from regulators (whether that's buying BellSouth, buying T-Mobile, buying DirecTV, or pushing for deregulation). AT&T's numbers are frequently distorted or outright fabricated, and regulators historically don't question them. This time, AT&T's bluff didn't work so well -- because somebody in government decided to actually pay attention.

Jamillia Ferris, a former Justice Department antitrust lawyer aiding the FCC in reviewing AT&T's DirecTV acquisition plans sent a letter to the FCC asking AT&T to detail the company's fiber deployments. In a response (pdf) letter to the FCC, AT&T insists that the FCC had the company all wrong. You see, AT&T claims, the company wasn't threatening to freeze ongoing fiber deployment, it was threatening to freeze fiber deployment beyond existing promises (though Stephenson's statement very clearly doesn't say that):

"The premise of the Commission’s November 14 Letter is incorrect. AT&T is not limiting our FTTP deployment to 2 million homes. To the contrary, AT&T still plans to complete the major initiative we announced in April to expand our ultra-fast GigaPower fiber network in 25 major metropolitan areas nationwide, including 21 new major metropolitan areas."

The majority of the document is of course redacted, and you'd be hard pressed to get the government to conduct a proper audit of either AT&T's real broadband deployment numbers or the billions in subsidies received over the years to help fund them. While it's amusing to see regulators call AT&T's bluff for once, the telco will surely return to using the same old phantom-broadband-carrot-on-a-stick routine a few months down the road.

Filed Under: buildout, fcc, gigapower, net neutrality, randall stephenson, title ii
Companies: at&t