Brit ISP's ads 'misleadingly implied' existence of 6G, says watchdog
- Reference: 1692261013
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/08/17/6g_internet_ads_misleadingly_implied/
- Source link:
In its own defence, [1]6G Internet Limited has insisted it was incorporated in England and Wales back in 2013 with the same name – and The Reg found the Companies House [2]listing [PDF] that attests to this.
And in a ruling handed down [3]yesterday , UK regulator the Advertising Standards Authority said it had noted the ads in question made references to "full fibre speed broadband only," but that customers might see it differently.
[4]Huawei claims it's ready to ship entire 5.5G networks – whatever they are – in 2024
[5]Vodafone's software-defined silicon bet signals a biz model shakeup
[6]UK MPs fume after Huawei posts open letter stating: 'Disrupting our involvement in the 5G rollout would do Britain a disservice'
[7]UK: From 5G in Tiree to the Isles of Ebony, carry me on the waves… Sail Huawei, sail Huawei, sail Huawei
[8]EE switches on 5G: Oi, where are your Mates? Yes, we mean the Huawei phones
The ASA said that it had:
... considered that there were hybrid broadband routers on the market that had a broadband connection that was backed up with a 4G or 5G connection and that therefore mobile technology and home broadband could not be entirely separated.
We also considered that consumers would have a limited understanding of broadband technology, and how it worked, and would likely understand that they would get a broadband connection using an innovative 6G mobile internet technology.
The Brit company said its internet services were delivered over networks operated by group companies "which had full fibre distribution and core networks and used the local access network with fixed wireless technology. They said that since 2019, the local access network used mast infrastructure in public footpaths." The company added that because 6G does not exist, and that it believes its webpages and ads made it clear that the offering related to home internet, they did not think that consumers would believe they were offering a future mobile network.
How soon is 6G? The 6G (sixth-generation wireless) mobile system standard is the successor to 5G, which is itself still under development. 3GPP, overseer of the work on 5G radio tech and other standards, has a system of parallel releases that provide network devs with a stable platform to implement features – and also allows for the addition of new functionality in subsequent releases. The latest work plan is [9]here . Currently, folks in the network world are coordinating on Release 18 – aka "5G-Advanced" – which Huawei is taking a bit of flak for calling [10]5.5G .
The UK, as we've [11]pointed out on these pages before, is still upgrading its networks to shift from 5G non standalone (NSA), where 5G radios piggy-back on 4G base stations and 4G core networks, to 5G Standalone (SA), with British carriers still working to make those updates – which require a Standalone 5G Core – in the wake of the government's rulings on Huawei. 5G SA is slated to bring more speed and reliability. To put this in perspective, the new 5G SA architecture was introduced in the second wave of the Release 15 standard in June 2018.
A recent workshop described current standards building in release 18 from 2024 as a "bridge to 6G," but the group has been clear that 6G mobile systems come later, estimating that "6G time-to-market [is] expected to be 2030."
As for 6G Internet the company, it mostly has positive ratings on Trustpilot, but at least one user calling themselves [12]Cusyomer commented yesterday: "6G Internet has not been even invented yet. Steer clear from this company."
We've asked 6G Internet for comment, including querying whether it plans to change its name.
[13]
Its sister company IX Wireless, which is building the fixed wireless broadband network on which the ISP retails services, has come [14]under fire from locals unhappy about the locations of its newly built mast and poles in the north of England, although it has told local papers the "placement of the poles is 100 percent compliant, and local councils are always aware of any work being undertaken." ®
Get our [15]Tech Resources
[1] https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08675607/filing-history
[2] https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08675607/filing-history/MzA4NDM0MTU4NGFkaXF6a2N4/document?format=pdf&download=0
[3] https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/6g-internet-ltd-a23-1190482-6g-internet-ltd.html
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/30/huawei_5point5_g_2024_boast/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/27/vodafone_software_defined_silicon/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/14/uk_conservative_mps_fume_after_huawei_open_letter/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2020/01/28/uk_says_yes_to_limited_huawei_non_core/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2019/05/22/ee_5g_rollout/
[9] https://www.3gpp.org/specifications-technologies/3gpp-work-plan
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/30/huawei_5point5_g_2024_boast/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/28/5_point_5_g_network/
[12] https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/64dcaffe30dbe100123a371e
[13] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZN3vyKjwH@vj9SQDbkO3TQAAAcc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[14] https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/massive-poles-popping-up-across-26530099
[15] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
But if you bought from a company called "ACME Full fibre (FTTP) internet provider", you'd be a tad miffed if you found out that they were selling basic DSL over POTS.
6G's name is intentionally misleading. They sell a wireless service too. It's dishonest.
To be fair though, only a fool would buy anything from the ACME Corporation. Have you not seen how their products performed for loyal customer Mr Wyle E. Coyote? Unreliable at best, a dangerous liability at worst.
I dunno man, I bought an ACME black hole and put it on my bin lid. Saved me a fortune in bin liners. Mind you the door I bought from them on sale is a bit of a pain in the ass...I put it on the bathroom and 3/10 times I shit myself before I go in because it sometimes opens into a railway tunnel.
It depends if you bought a full fibre service from them. The name of the company is less relevant than what is in the contract you sign.
Should we all be getting upset with Three as they turn off their 3G service?
But if you bought from a company called "ACME Full fibre (FTTP) internet provider", you'd be a tad miffed if you found out that they were selling basic DSL over POTS.
Ah no, that's absolutely fine and dandy according to the ASA. They [1]dismissed a complaint by FTTP providers against incumbents (advertising coax & VDSL as "Fibre") on the basis that customers know what they're getting and it was "not materially misleading" for ISPs to describe copper hybrid services as "fibre broadband". So there. [2]CityFibre sued them over that and sought judicial review... and lost .
And for what it's worth... I have one former colleague who insisted in 2014 that he had fibre. He still plugged the router into the phone socket, but insisted that it had been "upgraded from the exchange" without anyone drilling holes in his walls. Alchemists could have had quite the field day trying to tease out how copper had spontaneously transmuted into glass, but there we have it. The ASA have told us that people aren't confused.
6G's name is intentionally misleading. They sell a wireless service too. It's dishonest.
Is it also dishonest for Three to sell 4G and 5G services? What about voice-only plans with no data on them at all? They literally called themselves Three when 3G was launching. Is it dishonest for Virgin Media to sell services to people who aren't... okay, maybe we won't run down that train of thought.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2018/03/05/cityfibre_advertising_standards_authority_dispute/
[2] https://marketinglaw.osborneclarke.com/advertising-regulation/cityfibre-loses-long-battle-asa-fibre-claims/
Not just the name
The
Their argument here seems to revolve around the expectation that where a company name refers to a thing, then the service delivered by the company is expected to utilise that thing.
This feels like a shaky argument. For example I used to have a phone service provided by Mercury (for I am old) - this delivered communication via a telephone using a cable made of copper, and I never received any messages via the winged messenger of the gods or via a cable made of metal that's liquid at room temperature.