Uncapped must mean uncapped

[EcomMan]

Numerous ISPs are advertising uncapped ADSL services. But is it truly uncapped?

Over the last few weeks numerous Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have launched uncapped ADSL offerings. This followed a surprise move by MWEB which launched affordable uncapped ADSL services in mid-March.

But are these services really uncapped?

Many of the ISPs have ‘Fair Use Policies’, also known as Acceptable Use Policies, which put a limit on the amount of data which can be transferred. Other providers start to throttle subscribers after reaching a certain usage threshold.

No hard cap threshold acceptable

The Advertising Standards Authority of South Africa (ASA) has received complaints about uncapped advertisements in the past, and their rulings give a framework for what the authority considers fair advertising.

In late 2007 two consumers lodged complaints with the ASA about Solmatrix Internet’s advertisement promoting its DSL Xtreme packages. The advertisement states: “DSLXtreme packages provide uncapped data traffic, subject to our Uncapped Fair Usage Policy.”

The complainants argued that the advertisement is misleading as the word “uncapped” implies limitless access, but that the accounts do have a bandwidth limit [through its Fair Use Policy] and are therefore not uncapped.

At the time the Internet Service Providers’ Association of South Africa (ISPA) said that while some consumers might attach an incorrect interpretation to the term ‘uncapped’, the Fair Use practice related to uncapped accounts is common in the industry.

The ASA was however unconvinced, ruling that the advertisement is misleading, as it appears ex facie that the service is not ‘uncapped’ as claimed and understood by the hypothetical reasonable person.

Throttling seems more acceptable

In a related case in 2007 Openweb came under fire for its ‘Uncapped ADSL 384k for R999!’ advertising, with the complainant arguing that the advertisement is misleading as the word “uncapped” implies limitless access, but the service being offered is limited to specific threshold data usage.

Openweb retorted saying that no user, irrelevant of usage, will be disconnected from the network and left with no Internet connection. The connection is however throttled [has a speed limitation].

ISPA again weighed in on the issue, saying that the service offered by Openweb does not have a ‘cap’ on the volume of traffic a customer may transmit or receive, but there is a limitation imposed on the speed of the users connection once a certain traffic threshold is reached.

“Given the general understanding in the market of the terms ‘capped’ and ‘uncapped’, it is reasonable for Openweb to market this service as ‘uncapped’,” said ISPA. “Perhaps including the rate at which speed is throttled in the advertising would offer even more clarity on this issue for potential customers.”

The ASA agreed, ruling that Openweb’s uncapped service is distinctly different from models where a user is blocked entirely from accessing Internet content once a specific amount of traffic has been transmitted.

“The model used by Openweb does not seem to match the generally understood meaning of a ‘capped’ service, as the flow of information is never stopped. At worst, it is hampered when thresholds are reached, a fact that is clearly communicated to the consumer,” the ASA said.

The complaint against Openweb was subsequently dismissed.

Some ISPs at risk of false advertising

While many of the current ISPs advertising uncapped services have a model where users who exceed certain threshold values are throttled [limited to lower speeds], others have a set value after which a user’s service may be discontinued.

While advertising related to the new uncapped ADSL offerings will still have to be tested via an ASA ruling, previous rulings suggest that discontinuing the service of a user who exceeded a certain threshold will not be considered ‘uncapped’ by the ASA.