Verizon, Cablevision and Time Warner Cable are facing questions from the New York Attorney General about whether they are duping consumers by delivering slower-than-advertised broadband
service.
"This Office is concerned that for reasons substantially within Cablevision’s control, consumers may not be experiencing the speeds advertised," senior enforcement counsel Tim
Wu writes to Cablevision in a letter sent Friday.
Wu, who coined the phrase "net neutrality," sent similar letters to Verizon and Time Warner.
Wu adds that the Attorney General is
concerned that the companies aren't delivering "proportional increases" in speed to consumers who pay extra for premium service tiers.
The Internet service providers all tell MediaPost that
they will cooperate with the Attorney General's office, and that they deliver the speeds they promise.
The letters appear to be the first public move by Wu since he was lured to the Attorney General's office last month. A prominent open Internet advocate, Wu made
broadband access a central focus of his recent run for New York Lieutenant
Governor.
In his letters, Wu flags the recent disputes about how the Internet service providers handle traffic as it "interconnects" between their networks and those operated by backbone
companies, like Level 3 or Cogent.
"We are specifically concerned about disruptions to the consumer experience caused by interconnection disputes, and also the possibility that interconnection
arrangements may in some instances render irrelevant any benefit of paying for a 'premium' option," Wu writes.
The letters ask for detailed information the companies' interconnection
agreements, as well as documents about complaints by customers about their broadband speeds.
Wu is hardly the first one to raise questions about how interconnection deals affect consumers.
Last year, many Netflix subscribers -- including Federal Communications Commission Chairman
Tom Wheeler -- experienced problems when trying to stream videos from the service.
Last year, Netflix was able to stem the complaints by forging "peering" deals with Time Warner, Comcast, AT&T and Verizon. Those
deals allow the streaming video company to interconnect directly with the broadband providers' networks.
The precise terms were never publicly revealed, but the deals generally call
for Netflix to pay extra fees to ISPs in order to connect directly with their servers, as opposed to sending data through an intermediary like Cogent or Level 3.
Since then, the
Federal Communications Commission passed net neutrality rules that could affect interconnection disputes in the future. The new regulations prohibit broadband providers from engaging in activity that
hinders consumers from accessing content.
But the net neutrality rules might not hold up in court, in which case the FCC wouldn't be in any position to police the disputes.
Even if that happens, however, regulators like the New York Attorney General still could take action if broadband providers violate state consumer protection laws. Wu raises that prospect
in his letters.
"The Attorney General has the authority to commence legal action to enjoin deceptive, fraudulent or illegal business practices, and to obtain restitution, penalties
and costs whenever a business is engaged in deception, fraud or illegality," Wu writes. "We are gathering information to enable us to make a determination of what action, if any, is warranted."