Warning: Mweb will slow down heavy Internet users

MWEB will feel it IF enough people cancel.
R199 a person will add up eventually.
We should (as a matter of principal) all stand together against MWEB on this.
 
Why does the mention someone made about this happening after the MyBB piracy survey keep popping into my head. It sure as all poop seems very, very perfectly timed hey ..... anything you feel like sharing MyBB? I mean if Google ( *spit* ) can rule the roost here, why not Mweb/Naspers too ;)
 
Why does the mention someone made about this happening after the MyBB piracy survey keep popping into my head. It sure as all poop seems very, very perfectly timed hey ..... anything you feel like sharing MyBB? I mean if Google ( *spit* ) can rule the roost here, why not Mweb/Naspers too ;)

There is a lot of "interesting" stuff with this email. My feeling is the timing was great - do it after the 1st August so no one can cancel for defective 2 months. The whole thing stinks a bit.
 
I think it will make zero difference to Mweb - remember it's Naspers which enjoys (thanks to Tencent investment) huge amounts of cash. As such nothing will come out of it and you are right, SA consumers will remain complacent and not move. If Mweb was a UK or German company pulling a stunt like this, they would be already answering to a consumer council and face heavy fines. Something neither ICASA or ISPA will enforce in SA.

While I do agree with you, I want to add the following.

It will indeed not matter to Naspers / Mweb right now. But, if consumers do take a stand, it will definately matter in future.

In all of the US and European countries, consumers have the advantage of choosing between 5-10 main role players and hundreds smaller ones when it comes to Internet access. Here in SA we have only about 5-10 role players in total - which all of them are in any event working through one company (Telkom).

The day South African consumers take a stand, like in this case Mweb, report them to advertising authorities and cancelling contracts, this will change the whole industry in total.

A company like Mweb / Naspers are monitoring their different business activities on a daily basis. Some will be closed down or worked on when they do not perform well. Others may be added when they get new ideas to make money. No company in the world will want to run an activity, which does not generate an income and must be financed by other business activities.

If consumers decide to move away, Internet access services by Mweb will become more a liability and they will either close this line of business or change their s**t scamming practices and not do this again - offer better packages and services to get clients back.

But, at the end of the day it is all up to the consumer. As long as we are complacent, and accept these practices and still give money to these companies they will keep scamming.

I remember a successful businessman once make a statement, something in the line of : "While you have stupid people willing to part with their money - take as much as you can while it lasts".
 
Naspers pressure to prevent piracy on their own networks?

It very well may be, but if that is the case it would be a very 'African' way of doing it.

This is not the way to prevent piracy. It will only amount to a statement of: "We will allow you to pirate up to 1TB" after that we will attempt to reduce your Internet speeds in order to ensure that you do not pirate 'That Much' anymore.

The best way to fight and prevent piracy (and this is not even a guarantee you will succeed in it) is to monitor users reaching certain bandwidth limits. Spy on them and see what they are downloading. If it is music and videos, report them and all their personal identifiable information, as well as full disclosure of what when and how they downloaded the content to licensing companies and institutions such as SAFACT.

Criminal prosecution will not work in SA, but these companies can indeed institute civil actions, which will leave pirates with large losses of income, repossessed properties, huge fines and much more.

This will be a better route. Somehow, I do not think it has anything to do with piracy.
 
It very well may be, but if that is the case it would be a very 'African' way of doing it.

This is not the way to prevent piracy. It will only amount to a statement of: "We will allow you to pirate up to 1TB" after that we will attempt to reduce your Internet speeds in order to ensure that you do not pirate 'That Much' anymore.

The best way to fight and prevent piracy (and this is not even a guarantee you will succeed in it) is to monitor users reaching certain bandwidth limits. Spy on them and see what they are downloading. If it is music and videos, report them and all their personal identifiable information, as well as full disclosure of what when and how they downloaded the content to licensing companies and institutions such as SAFACT.

Criminal prosecution will not work in SA, but these companies can indeed institute civil actions, which will leave pirates with large losses of income, repossessed properties, huge fines and much more.

This will be a better route. Somehow, I do not think it has anything to do with piracy.

Idiocy of the month award.

What the hell are you smoking.
 
The best way to fight and prevent piracy (and this is not even a guarantee you will succeed in it) is to monitor users reaching certain bandwidth limits. Spy on them and see what they are downloading. If it is music and videos, report them and all their personal identifiable information, as well as full disclosure of what when and how they downloaded the content to licensing companies and institutions such as SAFACT.

Say hypothetically I was such a user... hitting a threshold.... and then my ISP decides to monitor exactly what content I download... and then pass on my details to SAFACT/whoever... who then file civil suits against me....

Oh, don't worry, I wouldn't be broke... because I'd be suing said ISP for a pretty penny - yes, I could, because they are not allowed to monitor what you download without a court order.
 
Idiocy of the month award.

What the hell are you smoking.

I was also a bit confused, must be a joke.

Say hypothetically I was such a user... hitting a threshold.... and then my ISP decides to monitor exactly what content I download... and then pass on my details to SAFACT/whoever... who then file civil suits against me....

Oh, don't worry, I wouldn't be broke... because I'd be suing said ISP for a pretty penny - yes, I could, because they are not allowed to monitor what you download without a court order.

Legally, if an ISP identifies someone committing an offence on their networks they have a legal obligation to report it to authorities. Go read your contracts and you will find more than enough clauses where you agree to them reporting your activities and dishing out your personal identifiable information to the relevant authorities. You have no leg to stand on if this happens and will not be able to sue anything or one.

This is a very real possibility and a practical one as well. I know it has happened before. I know of almost all SP's who at some point reported suspicious activities to police, but in very few were police able to act.
 
Legally, if an ISP identifies someone committing an offence on their networks they have a legal obligation to report it to authorities. Go read your contracts and you will find more than enough clauses where you agree to them reporting your activities and dishing out your personal identifiable information to the relevant authorities.

This is a very real possibility and a practical one as well. I know it has happened before. I know of almost all SP's who at some point reported suspicious activities to police, but in very few where police able to act.

The only best way to prevent piracy is to make content easily available at reasonable prices. End of story.
 
Legally, if an ISP identifies someone committing an offence on their networks they have a legal obligation to report it to authorities. Go read your contracts and you will find more than enough clauses where you agree to them reporting your activities and dishing out your personal identifiable information to the relevant authorities. You have no leg to stand on if this happens and will not be able to sue anything or one.

This is a very real possibility and a practical one as well. I know it has happened before. I know of almost all SP's who at some point reported suspicious activities to police, but in very few were police able to act.

Yes, fair enough, but they'd have to prove it.
They cannot prove it without monitoring exactly what I download/upload.
They cannot, legally, do that, without a court order.

If they do it, then report me, the case will get thrown out because the evidence was obtained illegally.
 
The only best way to prevent piracy is to make content easily available at reasonable prices. End of story.

I don't quite agree.

But, we should be realistic, this will never happen here in SA.

As example, a Macdonald's worker in the US gets around $15 per hour. Let's say an 8 hour day @ 30 days and this person gets around $3600 per month.

In South Africa the pay is around R6000 per month.

Let's look at a simple mini series: On average, we pay around R340-R400 for new series season at stores.

So, a South African should be able to buy around 15-17 series seasons with his whole payceck.

In the US, the American would pay around $20 - $40 for a series. This would be around 90 - 180 series seasons with a paycheck.

So, things like movies and music, etc. is affordable in the US, even for low-pay individuals. Here in SA everything these things are not affordable and will never be. So, it will not work here.
 
Yes, fair enough, but they'd have to prove it.
They cannot prove it without monitoring exactly what I download/upload.
They cannot, legally, do that, without a court order.

If they do it, then report me, the case will get thrown out because the evidence was obtained illegally.

I think you should get that contract out again. They have full rights to monitor any activity that occurs on their network. They have your permission for that.
 
I think you should get that contract out again. They have full rights to monitor any activity that occurs on their network. They have your permission for that.

You should acquaint yourself with the Interception of Telecommunications Act. Unless there is a court order, the customer needs to allow them in writing, for each occasion on which they intend to intercept (monitor) any activity.

I'm not with Mweb, but will quote their paragraph:
MWEB has no obligation to monitor content of any materials distributed or accessed using the IP Services. However, MWEB may monitor content of any such materials as necessary to comply with applicable laws, regulations or other governmental or judicial requests; or to protect the MWEB network and its customers.

As above, they require a court order. A company's "legal policy" cannot go against what the law says.

I also checked out that "contract" that you sign with Mweb... and no, nothing of any sort is being agreed to.
 
You should acquaint yourself with the Interception of Telecommunications Act. Unless there is a court order, the customer needs to allow them in writing, for each occasion on which they intend to intercept (monitor) any activity.

I'm not with Mweb, but will quote their paragraph:


As above, they require a court order. A company's "legal policy" cannot go against what the law says.

I also checked out that "contract" that you sign with Mweb... and no, nothing of any sort is being agreed to.

Just a quick word of advice.

When reading a contract, never, ever look at one paragraph and think you have it all. A contract, in all instances, consists of what you see, but also references to other acts and even more contractual documents.

The Regulation of Interception and Provision of Communication-related Information Act 70 of 2003 legally enforce all ISPs to intercept and store data - no court orders required. Only if a third party requires access to the information do they need a court order to gain access.
 

Oh really? WTF did I get a letter then?

Sheesh, for a bunch of guys who should know better there sure are a lot of people who like to moan. Uncapped has been defined as not true uncapped by all the ISPs long ago, so it is a bit silly moaning when a few users who obviously BURN bandwidth get slapped on the wrist.

Personally I stream a lot of content every day using a lot of data, no issues for me from MWEB. I am guessing the main reason is I don't try to max my line out with torrents 24/7. If you do the same on the IS backed lines, Telkom or Afrihost you are going to get the same treatment. I think the biggest issue is this

In that case the ISP should indicate the acceptable usage limit. This will assist the user to make an informed decision.

Even if it is a soft line at least it gives you an idea on when you are getting to the point of causing a problem on cheap home accounts.

For all the rest of you who want to moan realise the way you get good rates is buy ISPs sharing expensive dedicated links, you have a simple equation of speed vs utilisation, I don't burn a TB per month, but if too many people do on MWEB then either I am going to end up paying more or my link is going to get slower. That or MWEB is going to go out of business. The same goes for all the other ISPs. Be fair, there are now well priced "business" packages from people like Afrihost which should afford you better limits. Use them and stop moaning when you abuse a home link ruining my experience.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X