"unlimited" broadband case ruling

[woad]

Hi

Greets from a newcomer!

I'm interested in more details of the ASA ruling whereby ISPs could advertise a service as "unlimited" and yet still impose a cap and/or "fair usage" policy.

I know the gist of it - as above - but ideally I'd like details of the hearing and the decision together, if possible verbatim.

Why?

Having just left the ISP sector, I'm wondering if the deciding body were in full possession of the facts, esp relating to the true cost of providing broadband, and whether the plaintiffs mentioned one tiny but vital word...

[Conniff]

Can only find this about orange but it says it all:

Orange has been rapped on the knuckles yet again by the Advertising Standards Authority over its use of the word "unlimited".
In an adjudication published on Wednesday, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled that Orange had been wrong to publish a magazine advertisement for its home broadband service in which it offered "unlimited UK and international calls to 100 countries and unlimited downloads" without any reference to the provider's fair-use policies. In the case of calls, "unlimited" in fact meant up to 1,000 minutes per month, and downloads were limited to 40GB per month.
"We noted Orange's assertion that the omission of a reference to the fair-usage policy had been the result of an error and that their normal practice was to include a reference in the small print," the ASA's adjudication read. "However, we also noted Orange had omitted to include that reference on at least two other occasions and, on both those occasions, they had also claimed the omission was due to an error. We had received assurances from Orange on those occasions that they would ensure they included a reference to their fair-usage policy in their ads. We were concerned that Orange had failed to adhere to their assurances."

Seems that as long as they make reference to their 'fair use' policy then it is ok.

[woad]

Well, methinks it needs a legal challenge. ISPs cannot offer an unlimited bandwidth connection, as the bandwidth is limited in both senses of the word:

max bandwidth is limited by the line rate
max data transfer is limited by the line rate monthly bandwidth (approx 700MB on 2mb, 2.2TB on 8mb)


I'd really, really love to see 'unlimited' replaced by 'unrestricted'

Wish I had the pockets to drag ISPs into court, to epxlain how (in the above case) their definition of fair equates to using no more than TWO PERCENT of the service bandwidth...

hence why i really, really, really would love to see the court records (assuming it was a court) or the verbatim ASA finding of the original "unlimited does not mean unlimited" dispute.

[britesprite]

Hi woad,

Think this is what you're after:

Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd

Haven't read it but I hope its useful. From the sounds of Conniff's reply though it's probably like all those radio ads where they warble on about something nice and glossy and then garble "terms and conditions apply" at the end. If memory serves, one of the Joanna Lumley / Tiscali adverts out at the moment has a definition of "reliable" embedded in the gabble at the end!!

Oh what is the world coming to ... etc etc etc . Couldn't we just have a whip-round for Ms Lumley instead?