Category: Consumer Protection

A logo-driven certification program arrives for USB-C chargers

Article

USB-IF announces compliance for USB Type-C devices | Android Authority

From the horse’s mouth

USB Implementers Forum

Press Release (PDF) Certified USB Charger Logo and Compliance Program Infographic courtesy of USB Implementers Forum

My Comments

Previously, the USB standard has become effectively a “DC power supply” standard for smartphones and tablets. This has avoided the need to end up with a desk drawer full of power supplies and battery chargers with the associated question of which one works with which device. It has also led to various points of innovation like USB external battery packs and multiple-outlet USB “charging bars”. Similarly, gadgets like lights, fans and cup warmers have also appeared that can be powered from a computer’s USB port or a USB charger.

There was also the environmental view that we will see less chargers destined to landfill when devices are finally retired or less need to supply chargers with mobile phones. But a common reality is that most of these USB chargers end up being kept near or plugged into power outlets around the house more as a way of allowing “convenience charging” for our gadgets.

But the problem has surface where particular USB chargers don’t do the job properly when charging particular devices, especially high-end smartphones or tablets. Here, you need to be sure that you use something like a 2.1A charger for these devices and have them connected using a cable known to work.

The new USB Type-C standard is bring this concept as a low-profile connection for newer smartphones along with using the USB Power Delivery standard to extend this convenience to larger tablets and laptops. But there have been situations where substandard USB Type-C leads and chargers have been appearing on the market placing our new gadgets at risk of damage due to them being improperly powered.

Now the USB Implementers Forum have brought forward a certification program for USB Type-C chargers and leads with this program augmented by a logo. What will happen is that a charger or external battery pack will have to show this logo and state its power capacity in watts so you can be sure it will charge your Ultrabook or 2-in-1 as well as your smartphone.

What should be required is that the logo and the power output is stamped on the charger body itself and also a colour code is standardised for the power output. Having such a colour code could be useful when recognising which charger from a bunch of chargers could handle your gadget or which one is the right one to buy when you look at that display rack.

At least something is being done to make it easier to be sure we end up with the right USB Type-C power-supply device for that 2-in-1 Ultrabook or smartphone without the risk of the computer not charging or being damaged.

Certainty will arise regarding the cost of Internet service in Britain

Articles

AVM FRITZ!Box 3490 - Press photo courtesy AVM

You will be certain about the price quoted for that UK Internet offer that it does not contain hidden fees

ASA solves line rental crisis in broadband world | ThinkBroadband

We will end misleading broadband adverts, thunders ASA… | The Register

UK ad watchdog forces ISPs to simplify broadband pricing | Engadget

From the horse’s mouth

Advertising Standards Authority (UK)

Press Release

My Comments

A situation that has affected British Internet-service customers, especially those who purchase DSL-based Internet service has been the ability for telcos and ISPs to conceal the line rental associated with a voice telephone service. The line-rental issue won’t be an issue with customers who run a cable-modem service with Virgin Media or run an FTTP service with the likes of Hyperoptic, Gigaclear or B4RN. It also included issues like the minimum duration of a telecommunications-service contract and the upfront costs that a customer had to pay to get a service going.

Now the Advertising Standards Authority has laid down new guidelines that come in to effect regarding the advertising of Internet services in relationship to the prices, contract duration and other issues. These guidelines will take effect from 31 October 2016, also when BT Openreach are to offer a naked DSL service for the UK market.

The ASA along with Ofcom conducted customer research regarding the pricing of broadband and telecommunications services in the UK. From this research, they highlighted the confusion customers were facing with things like hidden line rentals, introductory offers and upfront costs, along with the contract duration.

Now the ads and tariff listings that ISPs and telcos publish have to provide better information for their current or potential customers. This includes:

  • the upfront and monthly costs for the service factoring, with the upfront costs to have greater prominence
  • the length of the contract for services based on minimum-length contracts
  • the prices that come in to effect after an introductory-offer period has lapsed

 

As far as minimum-length contract services are concerned, the industry and consumer-protection authorities need to work on a language that describes “month-by-month” services where a customer doesn’t face a long minimum contract period. This is more so with post-paid services where a customer can cease service at the end of the billing cycle which may benefit people who are in their location on a short-term basis like a long-term tourist or a person involved in project-based work. This is because of legal confusion about these services being marketed as “no-contract” services.

What is really meant to happen with the sale of fixed-line telephony in the UK is that customers can choose between different providers for this service and pay the line rental (typically between GBP£11-16) to the provider of their choice. This is thanks to the availability of the unbundled local loop setup available for their telephony services. It can be risky with smaller and boutique DSL operators who can’t bundle with particular line-rental provider but can be easier for larger ISPs who can bundle with a line-rental provider, typically their fixed-line telephony service.

The trends likely to come forth are quoted package prices increasing along with telcos and ISPs offering “first-few-months-free” offers or providing “gifts” or “rewards” like a tablet computer or a large number of points to a loyalty program rather than the “18 months free broadband” offers.

The Brits will also benefit from the arrival of a naked DSL service where you don’t have to pay line-rental for a voice telephony service. Such a service was offered by some ISPs in Australia and New Zealand; and over the Channel in France, Germany, Denmark and Portugal. These services will be described as an SOGEA naked VDSL service that is offered in FTTC service areas and will require a mobile telephone or VoIP telephony service to satisfy voice telephony service needs.

The questions that will always be raised is whether there is real infrastructure competition in the UK or whether BT Openreach needs to be fully separated from BT in order to provide increased value for money for competing retail ISPs and their customers.

At least this will mean that anyone who is considering Internet and telecommunications services or changing their Internet service in the UK can see how much the offer that is being advertised will hit them in the hip pocket.

Google makes further efforts against unwanted software

Article – From the horse’s mouth

Google

Year one: progress in the fight against Unwanted Software

My Comments

What has become familiar for me after some computer-support tasks was dealing with unwanted software that uses fraud and deception to have computer users install the programs on their systems. Such software like TubeDimmer typically takes over one’s online experience by serving up ads typically for dodgy businesses, slowing down the user’s computer or sending off the user’s private computer-usage data to questionable entities. In some cases, the software pesters users to download other worthless software or pay for worthless IT services.

There have been some efforts in the computing industry to tackle this problem, most notably MalwareBytes Anti-Malware providing the ability to remove this kind of software. But Google has approached this problem in a multi-faceted manner.

Firstly, they have revised the Safe Browsing API used in Chrome, Android and other browsers and endpoint-security programs that exploit this API to detect the unwanted nuisance software. They also provided an online “cleanup tool” for Chrome to remove ad injectors and similar unwanted extensions from that browser.

On the AdSense and DoubleClick advertising-network front, Google have tuned their Bid Manager which is used for buying advertising space on these networks to filter out chargeable impressions that are generated by the unwanted ad injectors. Similarly, they are disabling ads which appear on these networks but are leading to unwanted-software downloads. These include the ads that show the “Download this” or “Play this” kind of text or artwork without referring to what you intend to download and is augmented by an unwanted-software policy that applies to any advertising that is about software delivery.

If you are “Googling” for software, the Google Search Results screen will highlight links that lead to the delivery of unwanted software or advertised software links.

These efforts have paid off for Google in the form of reduced user complaints about Chrome and other Google client software. There has been increased Safe Browsing alerts regarding unwanted software which has placed a roadblock against this software being installed. Chrome users and personal-IT support personnel have been able to get rid of the unwanted software very quickly and easily.

Now Uncle Sam has joined in the fight against unwanted software downloads

Now Uncle Sam has joined in the fight against unwanted software downloads

But there needs to be further action taking place beyond what is happening in Google’s or Malwarebyte’s offices. Uncle Sam has lent his weight behind this effort with the US Federal Trade Commission classing this unwanted software as a form of malware.

Microsoft could help with this effort by extending their security and software-cleanup tools that work with Windows, Office and Internet Explorer to provide a “one-click remove” option. Similarly Web browsers and endpoint-security software can be part of the effort to slow down the deployment of unwanted software, reduce its effect on the system or simplify its removal.

As well, there needs to be efforts taking place within the online advertising industry to clean up its act.This may involve issues like:

  1. managing the availability of low-risk high-return advertising products like “cost-per-click-only” products that appeal to “fly-by-night” operators;
  2. management and supervision of advertisers, publishers and campaigns;
  3. advertising through client-side software rather than Webpages;
  4. advertising campaigns that lead to software downloads, amongst other issues.

Such issues may have to be dealt with via establishing an industry-wide code of practice and/or use of a “seal-of-approval”. Here, this is to make sure that online advertising has the same level of respect as traditional advertising has amongst advertisers; publishers, broadcasters and advertising-surface providers; and the general public.

Digitally-delivered content now has the same level of consumer protection as other products

ArticleHouses Of Westminster - copy Parliament UK

UK consumer rights laws now cover digital downloads | Engadget

Consumer Rights Act 2015 Could Aid Clarity on Broadband Prices | ISPReview.co.uk

From the horse’s mouth

UK Government – Department of Business, Innovation & Skills

Press Release

Consumer Rights Act 2015 (UK)

Chapter 3 (covers digital content)

My Comments

Software delivered via app stores now under the same consumer-protection remit as physical goods

Software delivered via app stores now under the same consumer-protection remit as physical goods

A consumer-affairs issue that often crops up when it comes to goods and services that are digitally-delivered is how customers are protected if things go awry with these goods. This is because software, books and other content are increasingly being delivered “over the wire” from the supplier to the user such as through app stores rather than as a physical package. As well, an increasing amount of computer software including games that are sold through “bricks and mortar” retail stores are being delivered as a “physical+digital” form. This is typically a box containing a CD or USB stick with a download client or a software-entitlement card with a product key number but the full installation requires you to download the software on to your computer.

.. as movies and games delivered to games consoles and set-top devices via the Internet

.. as movies and games delivered to games consoles and set-top devices via the Internet

But a lot of jurisdictions tend to place different standards of consumer protection on the digitally-delivered goods and services compared to physically-delivered goods and services like refrigerators, computer and home-network hardware, books or Blu-Ray Discs.They seem to allow for balky downloads or for a digital-content supplier to implement digital-rights-management technologies to protect their content. Typically this has shown up as electronically-supplied goods being covered under a separate statute with lesser “teeth” while other goods are covered under the main consumer-protection statutes. This also applied to services like broadband Internet, landline and mobile telephony, and Webhosting-type services.

The UK have tackled this issue by amalgamating digitally-delivered goods and services under the same consumer-protection law as regular goods and services when they enacted the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Here, there are legal rights of remediation if the digital items came through faulty like a bug-ridden game, including situations where a feature in that program and was part of the description doesn’t work. This even encompasses situations that may come about if the host device crashed due to a buggy program; as well as assurance of access continuity if the service provider’s equipment went AWOL.

There needs to be a similar level of protection for small businesses and community organisations when it comes to the supply of technology so that these users have the same level of protection as the ordinary consumer. This is because these kind of users will purchase goods in the same manner as the ordinary consumer, including purchasing “residential-rated” goods due to the limited know-how of their staff / volunteers and their budget. As well, they don’t have continual access to legal resources in the same manner that a big business would have, so they wouldn’t be in a position to have supply contracts properly assessed. This also applies to people who are running “micro-businesses” from their home for such activities like blogging / small-time journalism, Web-site development, cleaning services and the like.

Another issue that has to be raised is supply of these goods and services across national borders, which is something that is very common with digitally-supplied goods and services. What would happen if a piece of downloaded software that was bought from an American supplier by a Briton failed or if a British software developer supplied a balky WordPress theme to an Australian blogger?

What I see of this law is for a major jurisdiction to bring the spirit of proper consumer protection normally enjoyed with physical goods to digitally-supplied goods and encompass it under one statute. Jurisdictions that work to the Westminster style of government, like most of the British Commonwealth countries, may find this legislation easier to implement with very few changes.