Consumerist: BellSouth

Azureus: Other ISPs May Also Be Throttling BitTorrent

Meg Marco — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 10:49:33 EDT

Azureus has released data that suggests that Comcast may not be the only ISP throttling BitTorrent, says TorrentFreak:

A few months ago Azureus petitioned the FCC, which led to a FCC hearing in February. One of the complaints from the commission was that there is little data available on the scope of BitTorrent throttling, a gap Azureus now tries to fill by collecting data on the prevalence of TCP-resets among ISPs worldwide.

Last month Azureus published a plugin through which users can help distinguishing the good from the bad ISPs, and today we have a preview of some early findings. A massive 1,000,000 hours of data from over 8000 users has been collected over the past few weeks. The preliminary results again confirm that Comcast continues to use TCP-resets to manage BitTorrent traffic on their network, but they are not alone.

The data, which can be perused here (PDF), suggests that Cablevision, Cogeco, BellSouth and AOL are also messing with your file-sharing.

BitTorrent Throttling ISPs Exposed by Azureus [TorrentFreak via Digg]

AT&T Promises Nationwide Naked DSL By The End Of The Year

Meg Marco — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:11:06 EDT

Naked DSL, (DSL without the requirement to have a landline), will be available nationwide by the end of the year, according to statement made by AT&T to the Wall Street Journal.

AT&T Inc., the nation's largest phone company, isn't fighting the consumer shift, partly because its cellphone unit, which launched Apple Inc.'s iPhone this summer, is benefiting from the trend. Ralph de la Vega, AT&T's group president for regional telecommunications and entertainment, said in some parts of the country, the company is no longer requiring customers to buy land-line voice service in order to get a discounted rate on high-speed Internet access. He says: "Our point of view is, if you don't want it, we won't force you to buy it." The plan will be available nationwide by the end of the year.

AT&T is required to offer naked DSL as part of concessions made to the FCC in order to acquire BellSouth (and take control of Cingular), so this was expected. However, it is nice to hear they won't be burying naked DSL under untold layers of bullsh*t designed to keep customers from accessing it.

Companies Try to Teach Old Phones New Tricks (subscription) [WSJ] (Thanks, Steven!)
RELATED: AT&T Giving Consumers The Runaround Over Secret $10 DSL
AT&T Will Sell $20 "Naked" DSL

AT&T Swears $10 DSL Is Available, But Only If You Don't Follow Their Directions

Carey — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 17:25:47 EDT

AT&T gave St. Louis Post-Dispatch columnist Michael Sorkin step-by-step directions for signing up for their $10 DSL offer that did not work. Sorkin had joined in us reprimanding AT&T for hiding the $10 DSL package that will surely usher in the apocalypse if ever found by customers. AT&T told Sorkin the whole hiding the ultra-cheap internet service thing was just a big misunderstanding:

AT&T spokesman Kerry Hibbs says the company hears you and "We've changed our website to make our $10 DSL offer more prominent and easier to find."
So we tried again — and still couldn't get it to work.

What a surprise. Look, AT&T, if you are pretending to hear us, then do the following: Add a $10 DSL option on your homepage. Revolutionary, ain't it? We know web developers charge outrageous hourly rates, so we have taken the liberty to create a mockup for you:When Sorkin pointed out that AT&T's confusing directions again did not work, they sent him yet another set of directions:

"Go to www.att.com/.
"Click on 'View More Internet Services' in the middle of the home page.

"Click on 'DSL at even a lower price!' at the bottom right page." (He said there previously was no such header.)

If that doesn't work, don't try calling AT&T, according to Sorkin: "AT&T says it will not provide a phone number or e-mail for people who still need help getting the offer."

AT&T says: You CAN get our $10 DSL Internet offer [St. Louis Post-Dispatch]

AT&T CEO: $10 DSL "Not A Product That Our Customers Have Clamored For"

Carey — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 09:46:23 EDT

AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that his customer just aren't interested in ultra-cheap internet service. AT&T is required to offer $10 DSL throughout 22 states, a concession made to the FTC as part of a deal to acquire BellSouth. AT&T has been accused of hiding the $10 DSL option, which, apparently, they did for the sake of their customers. From the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Randall Stephenson: We haven't made it difficult to find. To be honest with you, that's not a product that our customers have clamored for. We still have $15 offers out there in the marketplace, even $20 offers, for 1.5 megabit speeds. Those are really kind of the minimum speeds that give a good user experience. So I don't want to necessarily offer up a product where the user experience is not what I would consider really state of the art. That $10 product is kind of in that mode.

Um, Randall, 1.5 mbps is hardly "state of the art." If your customers don't want 768 kpbs for $10, they will buy the more expensive plan; but that is their choice to make, not yours. We understand that $10 DSL represents a monumental threat to your telecommunications empire, but that's the price you paid to gobble up BellSouth.

Q&A: AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson [Atlanta Journal Constitution]
(AP Photo/John Raoux)

AT&T Giving Consumers The Runaround Over Secret $10 DSL

Meg Marco — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:37:05 EDT

AT&T is required to offer a $10 DSL option to those consumers who are in AT&T's 22 state coverage area and who have not previously subscribed to AT&T DSL. This requirement is part of concessions made to the FTC so that AT&T could merge with BellSouth and take over Cingular.

Getting AT&T to actually sign you up for the plan, however, may be more difficult. We've been hearing that consumers who try to sign up for the plan are getting a sales pitch for a more expensive plan, hung up on, transferred to the switchboard, etc.

It helps if you know your rights and understand the conditions of the $10 DSL plan. The plan provides download speeds of up to 768 kilobits per second and upload speeds of up to 128 kbps, matching AT&T's basic plan. It will be available for 2 1/2 years and requires a 1 year contract. The modem is free. You can read about it here.

Consumerist requested more detailed information about the $10 DSL and the process by which consumers can purchase it. AT&T chose not to respond to our inquiry.

Consumers who are having difficulty with AT&T can file a complaint with the FTC, here. In addition, you may also want to file a complaint with the FCC, as they are the organization that authorized the merger.—MEGHANN MARCO

How To Get The AT&T Runaround [How To Split An Atom]

PREVIOUSLY: AT&T's Secret $10 DSL
(Photo: Peter Kaminski)

UPDATE: For those of you having trouble explaining the $10 DSL program to your AT&T CSR, you might enjoy reading them the following passage from the AT&T/BellSouth merger document:

2. AT&T/BellSouth will provide an ADSL modem without charge (except for shipping and handling) to residential subscribers within the Wireline Buildout Area who, between July 1, 2007, and June 30, 2008, replace their AT&T/BellSouth dial-up Internet access service with AT&T/BellSouth's ADSL service and elect a term plan for their ADSL service of twelve months or greater.
3. Within six months of the Merger Closing Date, and continuing for at least 30 months from the inception of the offer, AT&T/BellSouth will offer to retail consumers in the Wireline Buildout Area, who have not previously subscribed to AT&T's or BellSouth's ADSL service, a broadband Internet access service at a speed of up to 768 Kbps at a monthly rate (exclusive of any applicable taxes and regulatory fees) of $10 per month.

Despite the date of July 1, 2007 mentioned in the document, AT&T has confirmed to the Associated Press that they are offering the DSL plan now.

As far as we know the 22 "magic" DSL states are: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corporation Application for Transfer of Control (PDF) [FCC]

BellSouth's Site Tracks Your IP And Then They Telemarket You

Ben Popken — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:52:37 EST

Is a company allowed to call you up after you go to their website, even if you haven't even given them your phone number?

Claudia visited this pricing plan page on the BellSouth DSL site.

Within three hours, right after dinner, Bell South called Claudia, asking "to speak to the person interested in Bell South DSL."

The funny thing is, Claudia never gave up her phone number or asked to be contacted. When Claudia's husband asked how this could be, the telemarketer responded, "Yes sir, no matter where you go or what you do, someone is watching you all the time."

Apparently, BellSouth (or it's third-party telemarketing center) connected Claudia's ip with her phone number. What probably happened is that at some point, Claudia entered her phone number somewhere online. It was connected to other personal information, like name, address, and/or email. The website recorded her ip. BellSouth bought her information from somewhere in a big batch and connected the ip on their site to the ip and phone number they had on the record they acquired.

Badda bing, badda boom, instant nuisance.

Here's the thing, is this legal? Read Claudia's letter and let us know what you think.

Claudia writes:

"Dear Ben, here is my experience with Bell South DSL telemarketing.

Apart from the obvious issues, I haven't figured out how they connected my IP number (I've broadband internet via Comcast/Roadrunner) to my home phone number). And no, I didn't give my number, click on anything other than the opening site that introduces the DSL price strategy or in any way indicate I wanted to be contacted via phone...

For your consideration: Having just finished dinner Monday night, we received a telemarketing call from Bell South. The young lady on the other end wanted to speak to the person who was interested in the Bell South DSL. My husband asked ?is someone here interested??

To which the young lady responded, "Yes, someone at your address
visited the Bell South website a few hours ago."

"Really?" my husband said.

"Yes," she replied in a tone he wasn't entirely in love with, "Yes sir, no matter where you go or what you do, someone is watching you all the time."

My husband told the young lady he was going to let her speak to the smart one in the family, that was me. Oh, well.

The dialogue repeated itself, pretty much as before. The telemarketer assured me all sites track visitors. Upon my interjection that no site I was familiar with phones back (during family time) to sell goods or services after a visit, she insisted this wasn't a sales call, just a follow-up to make sure the website hadn't "locked up or frozen up
while you were trying to acquire Bell South services, as sometimes might be the case."

Well, that certainly reassured me. Admission of such a possible glitch made me want the service even more. Then I asked her what led her to believe I was "trying to acquire?" Bell South DSL? This must have confused her as her until then aggressive, hard driving tone changed to one of uncertainty and disbelief.

Well, that ended it for me. We may be twenty-three years late, but if I'm going to be monitored, watched, tracked, detailed, listed, sorted, categorized, sliced, diced and measured in every possible way then I want it done by confident, hard driving closers and not some namby-pamby twit without a comeback.

So, I'm really still in shock and disbelief about the call, and would like to know or determine if this (along with the actual call to my home) is legal within current privacy laws regulating internet and commerce.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,
Claudia"

Ma Bell got the ill communication, indeed. — BEN POPKEN

Stephen Colbert Explains the Cingular/AT&T/BellSouth Merger

Meg Marco — Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:49:41 EST

So, this explains why we recently got a letter in the mail about our AT&T pension when we, in fact, never worked for AT&T. Thanks, Stephen! —MEGHANN MARCO

[via Gizmodo]

Verizon & BellSouth Back Away Nervously From Mystery DSL Fee

consumerist.com — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 06:30:06 EDT

Last year, the federal government finally eliminated a charge to DSL consumers that subsidized phone service in underdeveloped rural areas. Good. It was a silly, antiquated fee that has long since been irrelevant.

But Verizon and BellSouth raised a lot of ire when they immediately replaced the nixed fee with one of their own, for $1.20 to $2.70 a month... the exact same price as the old, government-mandated feed. They described it as a "regulatory cost recovery fee..." whatever the hell that is.

The FCC was not amused, lambasting Verizon and BellSouth for not complying with the "Truth-In-Billing" requirements and gouging customers with a phony fee that they hoped they could just slip by us.

The good news is that Verizon and BellSouth have canceled the fee. Their response is priceless, though: "We have listened to our customers." Sure you did, champ. Or, more likely, you ignored them and only listened to the massive government agency about to prosecute your sleazy asses.

Verizon Jouns BellSouth in Retreat From Unexplained New DSL Fee [Consumer Affairs]

Verizon Drops Baseless DSL Fee After FCC Pressure

Ben Popken — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:24:21 EDT

Nine days after installing a new "supplier surcharge" fee to essentially replace one government regulators dropped, Verizon DSL decided to stop levying the fee. Verizon came under heat from customers and received a letter from the FCC asking it to explain its actions. BellSouth, which also received a FCC letter, announced it would drop a similar charge.

In a statement FCC chairman Kevin Martin said, "I am pleased that both Verizon and BellSouth have eliminated fees recently imposed on their DSL customers. Consumers should receive the benefits of the commission's action last summer to remove regulations imposed on DSL service."

Previously: Verizon DSL, A Fee By Any Other Name... (Thanks to AcilletaM and Chris!)

The News: Now, 100% Dolphin Safe!

popkin — Tue, 06 Jun 2006 10:34:16 EDT

• ACLU wants FCC to review hold AT&T's acquisition of BellSouth until the baby bell's complicity in handing customer records to the NSA without warrant can be reviewed. Mmm, name soup. [NYT]
• Powell's Books has such fierce customer loyalty that some customers want their ashes interred there. Just open up a nursery and they'll have the book market cornered, from cradle to grave.[LAT]
• Consumer Reports says that due to high levels of mercury, pregnant women should not eat tuna. Plus, those dolphin bits can get stuck in the baby's umbilical cord. [CT]

Qwest CEO Nacchio to NSA: "Go Screw."

consumerist.com — Mon, 15 May 2006 06:54:12 EDT

Although doubtlessly guilty of insider trading, former Qwest CEO Joe Nacchio has one moral feather tucked beneath the diamond-encrusted ribbon of his Mr. Moneybags-style top hat: when the NSA approached Nacchio and demanded Qwest phone records to stave off the terrorist threat, Nacchio told them to go fuck themselves. This is while executives at companies like Verizon, AT&T and Bell South gleefully capitulated to what amounts to an illegal and unconstitutional request.

What this means that, thanks to Nacchio, Qwest customers are practically the only people in the country who aren't currently in the NSA's massive database of phone records.

Why'd Nacchio do it? It probably wasn't any real concern over his customers' privacy. Actually, it looked like he did it because the legal department warned him it would open Qwest up to a massive class-action lawsuit. Of course, that legal quibble might have been unfounded, if the DoJ gets their way in dismissing lawsuits against these companies simply by stamping the court papers with a big, blocky TOP SECRET stamp.

Nod to Nacchio for "no" to NSA [Denver Post] (Thanks, Brandon!)

'Broadband Scandal': How the Phone Companies Screwed Us All

consumerist.com — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:33:36 EST

A new book called The $200 Billion Broadband Scandal claims to detail the variety of tax breaks and compensations offered to the Bell-spawned phone companies to build out our nation's fiber-optic network—a network designed to bring 45-megabit per second connections into every home. We don't know about you, but we are sending this text via a rickety old copper line, using the best 1-megabitish DSL connection Verizon has to offer.

Muni Wireless has read an advance copy and offers up an overview. Most interesting is the per-household figure of $2,000—the amount we as citizens paid for through the various government-sanctioned breaks for the phone companies.

This news is especially enlightening as all the Baby Bells continue to merge back into Ma Bell 2.0.

From Muni Wireless's report:

• The phone companies pulled a bait and switch. In order to offer DSL over copper, it was not necessary to have state regulation changed. Their plan was to get rid of regulations and enter long distance.

• The Bell mergers resulted in the death of the state plans for fiber optic broadband. Over 26 states had fiber optic projects closed when the mergers of SBC and Verizon were completed. That affected almost 80% of all phone customers in the US.