Latest news with #internetservice
ABC News
6 days ago
- ABC News
Busselton residents fear safety impacts of mobile signal shortfall
Residents in the West Australian tourism hub of Busselton say frequent dropouts in phone and internet service are an unacceptable impost on public safety and trade. The situation left a family in a life-threatening situation and unable to call triple-0 as a fire swept through their property earlier this year. Jane Bennett lives on a rural property within the City of Busselton, about 230 kilometres south of Perth and a 20-minute drive to Busselton's CBD. In January, her husband Owen Bennett was faced with the daunting task of battling a fire on his own, unable to call for help because of an unplanned outage of a nearby phone tower. "He's in direct line of sight to the tower, which is about a kilometre away, and he's calling triple-0 and it doesn't connect," Ms Bennett said. "He was in panic." Ms Bennett said her husband managed to find a signal on a neighbour's property and it was a "miracle" their house was saved when firefighters arrived an hour later. She said when they asked Telstra about the unplanned outage they were told it was caused by a severed fibre-optic cable at Bridgetown, 80 kilometres away. Telstra told the Bennetts the cable was "cut due to nearby third-party excavation works". As Australia's national operator of the triple-0 service, Telstra is required to have fail-safe systems and processes for emergencies. A Telstra spokesperson said residents were informed of outages on its website. "We are very saddened to hear of any damage or loss due to natural disasters," the spokesperson said. "In times of mobile outages, it's important that households have access to a second form of connectivity as a back-up — this could be fixed NBN, satellite or landline services." Businesses in the heart of Busselton said they wanted better telecommunications, saying it was important to cope with demand during peak holiday periods and the dropouts were a public safety issue. Busselton Chamber of Commerce chief executive Victoria Yuen said connectivity was a big issue hitting business bottom lines, particularly in the busy summer months when pressure on telecommunications was at its peak. "The main issues are dropouts of phones," she said. "Dropouts when people are trying to work from home. Payment systems not working. Ms Yuen said she had been pushing for improved telecommunications infrastructure in Busselton for years but the issue was largely overlooked. She said it was embarrassing that business owners had to walk to the end of their driveway to get a decent phone signal. "We can't just keep saying, 'Oh it's OK. This is what happens,'" Ms Yuen said. "No, that's not a decent enough excuse anymore." The City of Busselton is home to more than 40,000 people, according to the 2021 census, and is considered one of the fastest growing regional cities in WA. Busselton Mayor Phill Cronin said phone and internet coverage had diminished in the area over the past five years, which he believed was due to inadequate telecommunications infrastructure. "I've heard sometimes they [telecommunications companies] are unable to put towers up because they can't get the power to the towers," he said. "It's a whole-of-infrastructure issue that really does need to be addressed." Cr Cronin said the council had received a number of reports from concerned residents about the issue. "We've seen unfortunately during some recent fires where one of the towers was down, the DFES emergency warnings weren't being sent out and people weren't even able to make triple-0 calls," he said. "That is a major concern for our community." The mayor said he had reached out to federal Communications Minister Michelle Rowland about the issue. "Communications is predominantly the responsibility of the federal [government], but the infrastructure is a state responsibility," he said. "If the area is expected to grow, and it will continue to grow, we need the infrastructure here in place before that can occur." Last month, South West councils voted to ask the WA Local Government Association (WALGA) to lobby the state and federal governments for improved telecommunication infrastructure. A state government spokesperson told the ABC they had continued to co-invest in projects which increased capacity and strengthened the resilience of telecommunications in regional businesses and communities. Ms Rowland was contacted for comment.
Reuters
30-06-2025
- Business
- Reuters
US Supreme Court to review billion-dollar Cox Communications copyright case
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide a copyright dispute between Cox Communications [RIC:RIC: and a group of music labels following a judicial decision that threw out a $1 billion jury verdict against the internet service provider over alleged piracy of music by Cox customers. The justices took up Cox's appeal of the lower court's decision that it was still liable for copyright infringement by users of its internet service despite the decision to overturn the verdict. The justices also declined to hear an appeal by the labels - including Sony Music (6758.T), opens new tab, Universal Music Group ( opens new tab and Warner Music Group (WMG.O), opens new tab - of an aspect of the lower court's decision that would result in a new trial to determine the amount of damages Cox must pay. The court is expected to hear the case in its new term, which begins in October. More than 50 labels joined together to sue Cox in 2018. Their appeal to the Supreme Court sought to reinstate the $1 billion award. The labels accused Cox of doing to little to stop its users from illegally downloading pirated copies of their music through peer-to-peer (P2P) protocols like BitTorrent. They said Cox failed to address thousands of copyright infringement notices from the labels, to cut off access for repeat infringers and to take reasonable measures to deter piracy of the music. Major labels have brought similar lawsuits against other internet service providers including Charter Communications, Frontier Communications and Astound Broadband. A jury in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia decided in 2019 that Cox owed $1 billion in damages for violations by its internet service users of more than 10,000 music copyrights. The Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that the award could not stand, reversing part of the infringement verdict and remanding the case for a new trial on damages. The 4th Circuit also rejected Cox's request to escape the verdict entirely, finding that the company committed secondary copyright infringement by failing to address user piracy. Cox told the Supreme Court in its appeal that the 4th Circuit's decision had caused "confusion, disruption and chaos on the internet." Cox also said that holding it liable for user infringement would force it to cut off internet access for "entire households, coffee shops, hospitals, universities" and others "merely because some unidentified person was previously alleged to have used the connection to infringe." The labels appealed the 4th Circuit's decision that Cox did not have vicarious liability, a legal doctrine in which a party is found to have indirect liability for the actions of another party, in this case. The labels told the Supreme Court that the circuit court's decision was out of line with other decisions by federal appeals courts on vicarious liability. President Donald Trump's administration urged the Supreme Court in May to take up Cox's appeal and reject the petition by the labels.
CTV News
13-06-2025
- Business
- CTV News
Brookfield to buy internet provider Hotwire in about US$7 billion deal, sources say
Fibre optic cables are shown in New York in a March 20, 2013 file photo. The Canadian Press/AP/Mark Lennihan Brookfield Infrastructure Partners has struck a deal to buy internet service provider Hotwire Communications, valuing the company at around US$7 billion, including debt, people familiar with the matter said on Friday. Hotwire is being acquired from current owner Blackstone, which holds the investment across both its Infrastructure Partners and Tactical Opportunities arms. The people spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential information ahead of a formal announcement, which was expected shortly, per one of the sources. Blackstone and Brookfield both declined comment. The Wall Street Journal first reported the news, citing people familiar with the matter. Co-founded in 2000 by Michael Karp and Kristin Johnson, Hotwire provides fiber network internet service to consumers, with a focus on commercial and community-living customers, according to its website. Blackstone bought the company in 2021 for an undisclosed amount, and helped grow the business, including expanding its operations from its original four-state footprint in the U.S. Southeast. Hotwire now offers internet in nine states, including Texas, California and Pennsylvania. --- Reporting by Milana Vinn and David French in New York and Harshita Mary Varghese in Bengaluru; Editing by Maju Samuel and Chizu Nomiyama
CNET
10-06-2025
- Business
- CNET
I Tried AT&T Fiber: Here's Why I Won't Be Upgrading From the Slowest Plan Any Time Soon
When I moved to a house that was serviceable for fiber internet, I jumped at the chance to ditch cable for fiber. My roommates and I had spent the past three years with Spectrum, often frustrated by the occasional price increases and internet outages in our area. Switching to fiber internet meant symmetrical download and upload speeds and better reliability for roughly the same price I'd been paying Spectrum. I'll level with you: $55 for 300 megabits per second download speed is not the best internet deal in the industry. There are plenty of better internet deals, like Frontier Fiber's 500Mbps for $30 monthly or even Spectrum's 500Mbps for $50 monthly. But if you want to switch to fiber internet and have limited internet options like me, AT&T's lowest tier is worth a try. Although I work 100% remotely, I'd consider my internet usage below average. According to the latest data from OpenVault, the average household uses around 564Mbps in download speed. There are a maximum of two smart devices in my house, and usually only one or two devices are online at a time, making 300Mbps plenty of speed to go around. However, if you and the members of your household have higher-than-average internet usage habits, 300Mbps will likely not be enough. If you have gamers, more than one remote worker and a decent line-up of smart devices, 300Mbps simply won't get you very far. But if you're trying to stick to a budget and your internet use is on the lighter end, AT&T's FIber 300 plan might just work for you. Here's everything you need to know. How does AT&T Fiber 300 stack up to similar options cost-wise? Before signing up for AT&T, I knew I wanted to keep my monthly internet costs below $60 monthly. The average monthly cost of internet is around $63, not including hidden fees or equipment costs, and I didn't want to exceed that amount. Locating local internet providers The cheapest internet plan from any provider typically offers the lowest available speeds for the highest cost per Mbps, making it one of the least cost-efficient options despite the low monthly fees. AT&T's Fiber 300 plan is no exception. Even though it's the provider's cheapest internet plan, it has a cost per Mbps of around 18 cents. That's the highest speed/price ratio of any AT&T Fiber plan. It is also higher than entry-level plans from other leading internet service providers, including Spectrum and Quantum Fiber, which both offer speeds up to 500Mbps starting at $50 a month. Those plans are $5 cheaper than AT&T Fiber 300 and offer almost double the speed. Still, the AT&T Fiber 300 plan is a solid choice for home internet, especially if you're limited on high-speed internet options and trying to stick to a budget. In my case, I wanted to avoid paying $80 monthly for AT&T's 1-gig plan -- a speed I was sure would go to waste in my house. The next speed tier up, AT&T Fiber 500, was also a viable option at $65 monthly, but I had a feeling 500Mbps would be too much speed for my internet usage, too. Smart devices can be sneaky bandwidth hogs. Take stock of your home's connected devices to determine how much internet speed you really need. Getty Images While AT&T Fiber 300 is not as cheap or fast as entry plans from some providers, AT&T adds value in other ways. Let's take a closer look at the plan's terms of service. AT&T Fiber 300: No data caps, contracts or equipment fees The speed and reliability of a fiber internet connection outpace offerings from cable internet, and I've definitely noticed the difference. Although Spectrum offers 500Mbps in download speed, upload speeds max out at 20Mbps. As a remote worker, I rely on fast upload speeds for video calls, sharing/uploading documents and doing research. Since making the switch to fiber internet, my video call quality has increased and I'm not experiencing any of the usual network congestion during peak usage times. I've stressed the cost and speed value of the AT&T Fiber 300 plan so far, and for a good reason, but what else is there to the plan and AT&T service, in general? AT&T Fiber plans come with unlimited data, meaning I don't have to monitor my monthly data usage to avoid throttled speeds or overage fees. There are also no contract requirements and no added monthly equipment fees. Overall, I pay a flat rate of $55 monthly: there are no extra costs for renting a router (unlike Spectrum's $10 router charge for its 500Mbps plan) or charges for going over a data limit. That's a good deal, considering the speeds I get. Speaking of which, let's take a look at what 300Mbps looks like in my house. Is 300Mbps a good speed? I used Speedtest by Ookla to gauge my internet connectivity at different hours of the day. Screenshot by Cierra Noffke/CNET When you sign up for an internet plan, your internet provider only guarantees speeds "up to" the value of the plan. So, although I'm paying for 300Mbps, I don't always get that speed consistently. My speeds have dipped as low as 273Mbps, but I've also seen them as high as 350Mbps. Still, the speeds I see overall are much more consistent than what I got with a cable internet connection.. According to the Federal Communications Commission, 300Mbps should be more than enough speed to game online, stream in HD or 4K and simultaneously take Zoom calls on multiple devices. The official recommendation from the FCC is a minimum speed of 4Mbps for online multiplayer games, 25Mbps for streaming in 4K and 6Mbps for HD videoconferencing, all well below 300Mbps. Additionally, while speeds of 300Mbps can support numerous devices at once (10 or more depending on the activity on each), each connected device will consume its share of bandwidth. The more devices you connect, the slower your actual speeds will likely be on each. Since I work remotely and my partner doesn't, typically, throughout the day, there are as few as two devices working at a time. Neither of us games online, and we only have one smart TV; 300Mbps is plenty to go around for our internet usage. I tried a few easy steps to optimize that 300Mbps, like placing my router in a central, raised location in my office and taking a few speed tests to gauge the connection in different rooms. Since my router is in my office, a room near the back of the house, I initially worried that my smart TV wouldn't get consistent speeds. AT&T does offer smart Wi-Fi extenders, which I briefly considered, but for the cost of $10 monthly, it would be more efficient to upgrade to the next tier and pay $65 monthly for 500Mbps. I don't foresee myself making that upgrade yet. Surprisingly, when I tested my internet connection speed with Ookla's Speedtest, I found that the speeds in my living room (315Mbps) were slightly faster than those in my office (298Mbps). (Disclosure: Ookla is owned by the same parent company as CNET, Ziff Davis.) Although my smart TV does see the occasional lag, it doesn't happen often, and my work days are uninterrupted with a smooth Wi-Fi connection. Speedtest will record download and upload speeds so you can track your internet speed fluctuation. Screenshot by Cierra Noffke/CNET Larger households with bandwidth-hungry devices like smart TVs, video game consoles, smartphones and tablets may require more speed to accommodate everyone's needs, especially if more than one user is online at a time. If that's the case, and you want to stick with AT&T, consider upgrading to the AT&T Fiber 500 plan for an additional $10 per month or to AT&T Fiber 1000, which starts at $80 per month. So is AT&T Fiber 300 fast enough? It should be for most households. According to the average tested residential download speed in the US for November 2024 was 262Mbps, so you'll potentially get speeds higher than the national average with AT&T Fiber 300. Again, a constant speed of 300Mbps is unlikely with AT&T Fiber 300, especially when using a Wi-Fi connection but I've seen consistent speeds since signing up for the service. Still, the plan is likely to offer plenty of speed for the average user or handful of users and most, if not all, of their devices. AT&T Fiber 300 FAQs Where is AT&T Fiber available? AT&T Fiber internet service is available to around 11% of US households. Serviceability is highest in the South and Midwest and parts of California and Nevada. Fiber service, including that of AT&T Fiber, is often only available in cities or suburban areas with a high population density. How much is AT&T Fiber 300? AT&T Fiber 300 starts at $55 per month, plus taxes and fees. This price includes a $5 discount for enrolling in autopay, so be sure to do so when signing up.
CNET
04-06-2025
- Business
- CNET
Want Starlink? Get Ready to Pay a Lot More If You Live in These 2 States
Thinking about subscribing to SpaceX's satellite internet service provider, Starlink? Be warned: The company appears to have quietly jacked up a demand-based fee in certain states. Redditors first began noticing the change this week while trying to get Starlink service in the Pacific Northwest, PCMag reported, finding that the "demand fee" at checkout was $500. The outlet noted that this fee was previously set at $250 in April for areas where the service was nearing a preset customer limit. That $250 fee was itself increased from $100, back when it was known as the "congestion fee." That's all on top of the $350 price tag for the Starlink dish on its own. A representative for Starlink did not immediately respond to a request for comment. According to Starlink, the demand fee is charged in areas where its service is in high demand, and will be refunded if service is canceled within 30 days. Locating local internet providers "In areas with high demand, there is an additional one-time charge to purchase Starlink services," the company site says. "The additional charge depends on the location of your service address, the service plan you choose, and/or the Starlink kit you select. This charge will only apply if you are purchasing or activating a new service plan. If you change your service address or service plan at a later date, you may be charged the demand surcharge." For now, it appears that the increase is active only in Oregon and Washington, particularly around the Portland and Seattle metropolitan areas. And for some customers, they may have no choice but to pay it. "My house just happens to be on a road where the two options are either DSL or another company who refuses to extend their service to my address, even though they service the house across my street," one Reddit user wrote in a post. "What gives? $500 is INSANE! Seems like a ridiculous charge to take advantage of those who don't have other options." Starlink first launched in 2019 and provides internet service to customers via 7,000 satellites in low-Earth orbit. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Elon Musk's SpaceX.
