Broadband issues in this country

B0rG

As far as I can see this thing is going to be pretty damn nasty.

A number of people had complain on the Board on Netsource service. I've been waiting for a number of years for a decent broadband service to come to this country, and now I'd hate to see it ruined just because one side is trying to see how far it can go without getting slapped. And if we're going to just stay away and watch something bad will happen. I beg your pardon for an extra pathos, but this is what I think:

1. Cap Introduction: currently netsource web page says "no downloading limit". I wonder if we can make a snapshot of that that will be admissable as an evidence i.e. datestamped. Knowing that any digital evidence are just begging to be tamped with - that would be difficult. For me the introduction of "Cap" to the service introduced as "uncapped" is a major change to the product on offer. In my opinion the company that introduce such a change is _required_ to notify it's customers _in_full_detail_ about it prior to introduce the cap.

1.1 If there is a cap then would it not be better to make it a "hard cap" because 10% of heavy users doesn't really count for some very quite month when everybody just downloads nothing, and you'll end up capped for 10 megs (which is roughly an hour browsing). Still this is all hearsay, because I have not seen the T&C nor the detailed description of the product on offer.

2. I don't know how the "contract law" works in this country but from the term I would presume "the contract" is something that both sides sign up and agree. As far as I remember I didn't receive nor sign any contract with them. All I get in fact was a 2 pager with connection details. So I don't know how the company may notify about breach in T&C and treaten to charge money for that, if there were no contract no T&C signed?

3. There is precendetial law system in America, meaning they can make a law in the congress, but unless there was a ruling in the court in favor of that law, that law is inadmissable. I wonder how the Irish Court system works. Meaning if there is a court case ppl vs Netsource, it will be good for people to win it, to create a precedent over it.

4. Despite of 3. I would recommend to stay calm to both parties. Things can get very ugly very fast if one side will start to threaten the other with courts or major money penalties. We after all want a better broadband in this country, and now that the opportunity came it's very easy to screw it up and the only alternative will be Eircom. And we all know how bad it is. So if we are to use this service we may as well try to make it better.

5. Regarding of privacy and copyrighted material issues. I've read recently (in the Sharereactor guy interview: http://slyck.com/news.php?story=231): "spreading of partial files is as of yet not illegal, it is hard to define who is the source of the file. Also you could be downloading something called 'my holiday pictures' while the actual file is the latest hardcore porno. So you have a lot of traps in the system already that make it hard to spot people, and to prosecute them."

5.1 All the major P2P software (apart from Kazaa) have some sort of security built in to protect users: IP hiding etc. Of course it's easy to get the recipient IP using other methods, but that's entirely different matter. There is a difference if you dowload something like
http://www.hardcoreporn.com/latestflick.avi
and if you're downloading parts of it from different sources. I don't think it's that easy to say that a specific packet came from P2P network.

6. If there is going to be a fight over it I would rather be prepared. So if somebody have an ambitious young lawer friend who would be interested to consult us on the matter, please don't hesitate to bring him/her in. Also all the major newspapers contacts are very good too.

7. Now exuse my terrible lack of knowlege, but I don't have any idea what are the customer rights systems available in Ireland and how they work. If someone could post something on it please.

8. After all our weapons ready it will be nice to bring in somebody from Netsource who has to decision making power for negotiation. And hope that the cituation resolves for the best.

Jonnie_Onion

Meh, I'm moving to Irish Broadband if I can get it, or just upgrading to the SME package. Better value for my money than €66 p/m for 192/128

talla

I don't know how the "contract law" works in this country but from the term I would presume "the contract" is something that both sides sign up and agree. As far as I remember I didn't receive nor sign any contract with them. All I get in fact was a 2 pager with connection details. So I don't know how the company may notify about breach in T&C and treaten to charge money for that, if there were no contract no T&C signed?

At the very bottom of the SOHO order form is the following line:

Please sign to indicate acceptance of our Terms and Conditions (Enclosed)

Signed: __________________________ Date: ________________

Now if you claim you didnt receive the terms and conditions doc from Netsource, then more fool to you for actually signing a contract without reading the Terms and conditions. For the record, like the majority of Netsource customers I think they've handled the situation very badly with regards to the throttling of users and as for the prove you have not violated copyright, thats just plain stupid of them. But its ridiculous the amount of people posting here stating things without actually having read the contracts they signed in the first place or again only when something goes wrong to have then read the actual terms and conditions.

B0rG

Now,
if T&C on the site was changed some time after the purchase? Does that claim stand a chance?

Also there was no T&C and Contract on the paper only on the website, and AFAIK Irish courts will not accept electronic evidence.

Also if the service is being advertised as "no download limits" does the introduction of "throttling" means the breach of contract from the company part?

From the common sense the phrase "The company can change the service without prior notice" clause is just an ass covering exercise - everybody writes it in the contract, but nobody I've heard of pursuing it. And isn't it a good business to notify your customers of the major change in service?

That's why I was for somebody with legal background, since I (with my techie one) can only look at things from the POV of common sense.

Or else we could just pack our bags and leave.

talla

I was emailed a document like almost every other user called Netsource Terms and conditions.doc along with SOHO order form, domain name order form etc. There were no Terms and Conditions on the Website and there still are no Terms and conditions on the website. If you say you never received this document along with your order forms, when you were filling the order forms in and you saw that you had to sign to agree to terms and conditions, why did you sign? Why not ask for the terms and conditions to be sent before signing? Now if you need a solicitor to tell you what your rights are when you sign to say you agree to the terms and conditions of a service when you have not read the same terms and conditions, theres no hope for you

B0rG

oops, silly me
Have to give up doing 2 different things at once.


But still if it says
2.2 The Customer agrees to be bound by the monthly download allowance attaching to its chosen NETSOURCE DSL product.

and on the website it says "no download limit"

doesn't this two contradict each other?

talla

I agree totally with you Borg on that point, maybe the first step is to get onto the advertising standards authority, although i cant really see anything being done as i think there is some technicality about it not being considered advertising if its on their own website. Anyway even if it was they wouldnt even get a slap on the wrist, check out the Ireland Offline forum to see the judgements passed down on Eircom and the murder they got away with:mad: