AfterDawn: Tech news

iPlayer is costing ISPs too much, says BT

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 12 Jun 2009 13:46 User comments (11)

iPlayer is costing ISPs too much, says BT Just last week, the BBC publicly accused ISP BT of throttling iPlayer streams, hindering user's ability to watch television online.
John Petter, managing director of BT Retail's consumer business, has shot right back today, accusing the BBC of getting a "free ride" on the back of ISPs.

"We can't give the content providers a completely free ride and continue to give customers the [service] they want at the price they expect,"
Petter said. He did note however that it wasn't only the BBC to blame, but all streaming video services.

A BT spokesperson said costs incurred by ISPs by streaming video services was very high. "Obviously we're a big business," said the spokesperson. "We're raising this issue publicly, so you can take it as read we're not talking small amounts of money."

The same spokesperson noted that the BBC and BT were currently partners in "Project Canvas", an IPTV deal. "It's a good example of how ISPs and content owners can sit down and agree on a cost," he noted.

The BBC however, does not agree that content holders should have to pay even another cent extra, as streaming video only takes up small portions of online traffic at any given time.

Says BBC technology editor Rory Cellan Jones: "I can not remember BT ever making such an forthright call for cash. So far the whole issue of net neutrality - the idea that the internet should not discriminate between different types of traffic - has not made much of an impact in Britain."

"Now Britain's biggest internet service provider is making it clear that, in a cut-throat broadband market, something is going to have to give - and net neutrality may have to be chucked overboard."

Previous Next  

11 user comments

112.6.2009 17:08

pre iPlayer BT's service was awful...I know, used to pay 45pm for "unlimted" 8MB package, only ever got 500kb/s and that was only after 11pm no matter how much I downloaded, I now have a 2MB connection with sky and its FREE, no speed caps and it will stream HD vids from iplayer easily, BT want to get a grip stop over charging and throttling no wonder there customers are leaving thick and fast

212.6.2009 18:19
pphoenix
Inactive

Whats BT's pay for UK freeview tv service over the web called again? throttle all competition??

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 12 Jun 2009 @ 18:19

314.6.2009 18:26

What a crock another ISP as bad as Virgin (mine) they should start upgrading more of the network and given the customers what they pay for move with the times and reinvest instead of living off fat ass salaries (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/15/bt_profits_flat/) What a biased story, actual combined profits of 8.2billion GBP that's ridiculous, flat where??? Upgrade your network with something better then 21CN 2mb FTH??? bollox let's get gig FTH and see how much it hurts your traffic network then? Estimated costs of 15billion to input FTH to 80ish% of the UK this is investement that should be done, end of discussion!!!

415.6.2009 8:55

There is software that will double to quadruple the bandwidth of cable. I guess they don't care to get it. They would rather beat on their users.

518.6.2009 8:33

I don't usually side with the big ISP's but in this case I have to agree with them. Why should they have to pay for a companies upgrade in service. I mean, I;ve had a netflix account for about 3 yrs now, about a year ago they started having movies available to download and watch in your browser. Who gets the short end of this stick, not netflix ( they get a new service for thier customers and only have to pay for thier hardware upgrades), not customers ( they get movies on demand type service for nothing), but the ISP's have to absorb the added traffic of the new video streams over thier network. Now add to that all the network TV stations that have added full tv shows on thier sites, you tube, porn sites.....etc. What is the only option for the ISP's....raise rates....then they get backlash from everyday joes who want cheap highspeed. Something has to give....I don't want them to go to a model of charging per gig like they are testing....kind of reminds me of the old AOL model (charge by the minute).

618.6.2009 9:09

That service is does not cost a big deal. Most of the cable ISP actually took bandwidth from the internet users to provide more bandwidth for HD TV.

I agree that both sides need to be resonable. My ISP has a public limit of 200g/mon which is really more like 50g. After the 50g a robot app starts messing with you so you never get to 200. It used to be 100g but now they have a new tier for an extra 20 bucks/mon they are playing hard ball. That is reasonable to me.

It is not reasonable to take bandwidth away and not give back.

718.6.2009 10:24

Originally posted by mightyzog:
I don't usually side with the big ISP's but in this case I have to agree with them. Why should they have to pay for a companies upgrade in service. I mean, I;ve had a netflix account for about 3 yrs now, about a year ago they started having movies available to download and watch in your browser. Who gets the short end of this stick, not netflix ( they get a new service for thier customers and only have to pay for thier hardware upgrades), not customers ( they get movies on demand type service for nothing), but the ISP's have to absorb the added traffic of the new video streams over thier network. Now add to that all the network TV stations that have added full tv shows on thier sites, you tube, porn sites.....etc. What is the only option for the ISP's....raise rates....then they get backlash from everyday joes who want cheap highspeed. Something has to give....I don't want them to go to a model of charging per gig like they are testing....kind of reminds me of the old AOL model (charge by the minute).
I signed up for an unlimited service of high speed broadband, I should receive that service, if they need to charge more I'm happy too. I used to pay 45 for 512kb If I have to pay that again for 20mb then I will.

but when they post massive profits and scrape on the service and don't pay for the upgrades than it's unfair to the consumer not the corps who upgraded the service!!!

818.6.2009 12:00

I am lucky I am in a "Comcast area" but Verizon FIOS (fiber) is moving into Comcast areas. They need to keep their customers a bit satisfed. Comcast is famous for its lack of customer service. I my area some woman went bizerk in a Comcast customer service area. She smashed all the monitors with a hammer. The judge made her pay for repairs and do community service. He let her off light because she was provoked. So we still have our problems.

918.6.2009 12:29

do sites that stream video NOT have to pay for anything? of course they do. it can't be that cheap for them either.

1018.6.2009 13:50

this bandwidth crap is really getting old. how about they not offer speeds higher than any home user needs. i would like to see the upload rate increase. i still have never understood why they won't increase the upload limit to something much better.

we could have installed fiber nation wide years ago but no, companies complained about ownership and wanted retarded prices to use the new infastructure.

consumers pay for internet and content providers pay for internet. providers usually pay a very high price tag. heck, a 1 meg connection for a small business is about double the cost of my home 5 meg service.

it is in no way our fault or content providers fault for idiotic ISP companies building networks to offer 5 meg, 10 meg, and as high as 120 meg service but only can offer max speed to 50-80% of its customers at full load.

i have 5 meg now, i think 10 meg is about all i would ever need. even now i can download a 3 dvd linux iso in no time. netflix streams just fine. i have 2 computers on the network and when both stream videos it still works just fine.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 18 Jun 2009 @ 13:52

1119.6.2009 7:38

Greedy bastards at BT. Always the last to drop their prices & always quick to complain about it. I'm sure if they just did their job (like talktalk) and got on with it they'd be a far bigger company, after all they had the monopoly on broadband in the UK but were so bloody greedy (and still are). Switch to talktalk, they're brilliant and tons cheaper than the greedy griping bastards at BT.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive