Slashdot Mirror


Swedish Teleco Firms Looking Into Block VoIP Claiming Losses In Earnings

An anonymous reader writes "Telia, a Swedish telecommunications company, is now looking into possible solutions to block free VoIP services like Skype and Vibr, claiming the losses are beginning to take its toll on the total earnings. Critics are saying the companies have wrongly implemented outdated pricing models, and the act could threaten net transparency and Independence. A new report from regulators of the European phone market shows that more and more telecommunications companies will block their subscribers from using free services. The European Commission is investigating whether it is possible to prohibit the blocking of legal services online."

28 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. What the heck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is it that when companies managed to reach a nice cushioned position they complain when the rules of the game change? this does not make sense to me.
    You had all this time to profit and INNOVATE. Why not start your own VOIP service? instead, like some retarded dictator you want to block progress.

    Innovate or die.

    1. Re:What the heck? by Hentes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On one hand it's understandable that after giving their users nearly unlimited mobile net they feel tricked when noone is paying them for phone calls anymore. On the other hand if it's cheaper to make phone calls over Skype than it is in the traditional way that means that phone calls are hugely overpriced because Skype has strong security and much better sound quality than a phone call. In any case, they should have seen this coming and plan forward, transforming from telcos to mobile net companies.

    2. Re:What the heck? by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The biggest rumor about Skype is that there's an NSA/insert-government-here backdoor that lets them listen in on your Skype calls.

      That already exists in every modern phone and has for decades now, so you're not really losing anything in that respect. You are, however, gaining much better call quality for a fraction of the price.

    3. Re:What the heck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why do you assume he even has an account? Personally I find it better to let each post stand on it's own merit rather than let it be judged on the basis of my previous statements and opinions.

    4. Re:What the heck? by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's like this:

      In Europe most of us have flat-rate data for like, $10 a month. Some companies drop the speed after X megabytes but essentially there's no limits.

      Using VOIP we can talk 24/7 for the entire month for only $10. This makes it very popular, especially among foreigners who call home a lot.

      It's also very understandable that it makes the phone companies unhappy. They just gave you an Android smartphone for signing up, you're using their networks to make calls and they're only making $120 per year out of it.

      --
      No sig today...
    5. Re:What the heck? by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

      It may not be 100% secure but it's enough that even the NSA hasn't got the power to do mass snooping. They'll have to pick and choose who they can afford to dedicate computing time to. ...and it's unlikely that it will be DES these days. AES is no harder for a programmer to implement.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:What the heck? by MisterMidi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, this is exactly why. Here in The Netherlands pretty much all operators have stopped offering unlimited plans though. Also, it's against the TOS to use VOIP, at least with my operator. I wouldn't be surprised if some operators block VOIP here too.

    7. Re:What the heck? by CodeReign · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Honestly I find it amusing. My carrier (Rogers of Canada) is known for bad service. 3 years ago when I started with them they would proxy all voip communications from my smartphone (I don't know if they billed or just proxied for other reasons). 3 Weeks ago they rolled out a free VOIP service that requires using a computer (some proprietary front end) free to use for their customers (including free long distance and free texting from the computer to any line in Canada).

      As it turns out I no-longer think of Rogers as a shit eating dung. I'm impressed with the service and the initiative (all-be-it the UI could use some improvements). I don't think I will be switching providers any time soon simply because this free service of theirs is amazingly decent considering the level of technology dampening they have tried in the past.

      Some notes: The service allows me to call using my cell number (as the callerID) and I can switch between voip and my cell phone by dialling *11 on either device (that is during a call I can go from free use voip bill per minute cellphone). When I was looking at switching to a voip home-phone for long distance at the beginning of the school year these where two things I never thought possible. Now they are something I absolutely love.

    8. Re:What the heck? by spxZA · · Score: 5, Informative

      Once a year I do some calculations, to figure out which is cheaper for me: a data-only mobile contract and Skype; or a voice contract.
      Skype claims that a skype-to-skype call is at 3MB/min, while a skype-to-landline/mobile is at 1MB/min. Considering that most of the calls that are make are to people that don't have skype, I'll use the latter figure.
      I sometimes use up to 400 minutes, or less (no carry-over, which is illegal, but we are too scared to fight this). So 350 minutes equates to 350MB skype-to-skype calls. Let's call it 400MB including presence, contact information. I use around 350MB/month when away from my wifi networks. The most applicable data bundle is 1GB, at ZAR290. An "unlimited" package goes for 10x this amount. So, I'll be paying around ZAR320/month for the contract, including their lovely add-ons they always manage to squeeze in.
      Next is the cost of skype. If i choose the pay-per-minute option, I'll be paying ZAR0.177/minute, or roughly ZAR61.95/month. This brings my total monthly bill to ZAR381.95, rounding up for the unexpected - ZAR400/month.
      I pay ZAR350 for 350 minutes per month, plus a few other items (promotion fee (WTF is that???), itemized statement). The cost of the phone is included in all of that. Assuming I don't go over any of my bundles (350 minutes, 100 sms, 350 GB), then I pay ZAR637/month. And yes, I do often go over my bundles.
      So, a data-only contract (it's not data only, but rather the only bundle is data. Voice calls are paid at full rates - ZAR2.85) is 75% of a voice contract. Plus, i pay the same for local calls as I do for international calls when done through skype. ZAR400 vs ZAR637 is a massive difference, making it well-worth it. If I choose the skype route, I end up paying my mobile operator ~ZAR340/month instead of ~ZAR640/month. They will lose out ZAR300/month - or ZAR7,000 over a 24 month contract period.
      If I was a mobile operator, I would hate to lose half of my income from a number of my users. But, that's what they get for bending us over the coals, pulling down our pants, and...well...this is a family show. I've used the most expensive skype option, so the prices for monthly or annual subscriptions would only drop.
      The only issue is that of battery consumption of skype, and coverage. I spend 99.9% of my time in urban areas with semi-decent data coverage. For the times when I'm in rural/low coverage areas, then I would pay out my of ass to do voice calls. But I'm not too worried about that.
      So my point is, yes mobile operators are losing money to VOIP. Yes, they can do something about that. But, they have been dropping their prices in recent years due to consumer demand and dissatisfaction, so they are losing "potential" revenue regardless. I say stick it to "the man" until we collapse the economy with all these work-arounds.

    9. Re:What the heck? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      Or as much sense as carriage manufacturers forcing every automobile to be preceded by a man walking and waving a flag. Oh, wait, that one actually happened...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:What the heck? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The data for phone calls is more scarce on at least some mobile protocols because it is isochronous, whereas data sold as data just goes into the unused slots. That said, the mobile companies really ought to offer a SIPPOTS gateway and separate out the charge for data from the charge for termination. If they were really clever, they'd make sure that the SIP stuff worked from any network connection, so they could still charge you for calls when you make them over WiFi.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. We fixed this in NL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the Netherlands, the largest telco (KPN) was also going to do this... then parliament rushed through a net neutrality law that forbids deep packet inspection and blocking specific traffic and the telcos backed off quickly. Now they can only charge by amount of data and speed. Maybe the Swedish will get lucky too now.

  3. Will they ever learn? by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This sounds just like the music and movie business when they were trying to resist the changes in technology instead of embracing it.
    We know how that worked out.
    Maybe the telecom people should start reading the news?

    1. Re:Will they ever learn? by zandeez · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I know what you mean, but in the UK, BT were forced years ago to open their network to other providers, and on top of that the use of VoIP were eating into their traditional revenue streams. Are BT crying about it? No, they're implementing VoIP technology on their main network to reduce their running costs and are offering new, better and complimentary data, voice and management services to pick up an entirely new revenue stream.

  4. And so goes the takeover of human communication by ebusinessmedia1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These telecommunications companies are little more than parasites. They don't ENABLE anything on their own. First, they leverage all kinds of free subsidies (your tax dollars) to build their networks. Then, they wrangle out of taxes by taking business deductions, usually paying their worthless CEO's and other senior executives obscene amount of money for doing exactly what? Taking credit for the INternet and its associated benefits to technology, even as they choke off the benefits of those technologies.

    What's even more breathtaking is that its tax money (made from our tax dollars, earned by the sweat of our ever-longer work days) that actually *paid* for their infrastructure.

    Last, the thing that really amps me up about stuff like this is that telecommunications companies and ISPs, etc. are essentially using technology that they didn't invent, to leverage YOUR and my communicative assets!

    Communication was "free" until we began to find ways to increase it's speed, depth, and breadth. From the stone tablet, to the scribes, to the early offset printers (and print distributors), to the Internet and its multifarious ways of data and information transmission, certain folks have found a way to horde either the means to information production, or its transmission.

    Guess what? That model isn't going to work anymore, not if we want a sustainable information ecology that is as diverse as possible.

    Sorry, but these ISPs and telcos are little more than traitors to human advancement, masquerading as enablers. They want to suck us dry; they want all the benefits. They want tax breaks made by the policy makers that they buy every few years to build their infrastructures, and then they want us to pay them more, as if the tax breaks (which we ultimately pay for) and the infrastructure (which we also pay for), and the very source of communications that they leverage (you and me), isn't enough.

    We need to start finding ways (I don't have the answers, just posing the possibility) to once and for all RID this world of these gatekeepers, because they are interested in keeping only one thing sustainable - their bank accounts. They could give a damn about whether the world is better serves by more transparent and facile communications technology. The Telco and ISP sector are, again, traitors to human growth and development. We need to find another way.

  5. Re:NOTHING WORSE THAN ANGRY SWEDES !! by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2, Informative

    FUN FACT: Sweden has the 30th highest suicide rate, below both New Zealand and Switzerland. The worst country in the world (for which we have statistics) is Lithuania, apparently.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  6. Also in Finland by Gaygirlie · · Score: 4, Informative

    TeliaSonera is a telco that actually operates both in Finland and in Sweden, and they're planning to block people from using Skype for free on the Finnish side of things, too. Their plan is to allow you to buy Skype talk-time that then allows the service through until the time is up. Do notice that this is in *addition* to what one already has to pay for Skype credits, so this has understandably created quite some negative commentary here and there.

    The funny thing is that it's only TeliaSonera contemplating on doing this, all the others are more than fine with the situation as it is, and are even actively promoting unrestricted mobile broadbands.

  7. Not yet... by thrill12 · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...while the parliament voted on this (in favor) already, the Senate ("Eerste Kamer") can still vote it down. Although chances are slim, the (indirectly elected) Senate in the Netherlands proved in the past that their view of the country is sometimes substantially different from that of the directly elected representatives. Officially the Senate can only regard the law against the constitution, but recent developments made the senate a more political institute. Because currently there are critical negotiations going on to keep the government in office, there is no saying what will be decided in that meeting room that affects ongoing legislation, including any Senate decisions. ( https://www.bof.nl/2012/03/05/stemming-eerste-kamer-telecommunicatiewet-uitgesteld/ in Dutch and https://www.bof.nl/2011/06/22/press-release-%E2%80%93-the-netherlands-first-country-in-europe-to-launch-net-neutrality/ on the original law in English)

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:Not yet... by pieterbos · · Score: 4, Informative

      Regardless of the law being accepted or not, the combination of the resistance amongst the public and the politicians agains the telco plans and the proposal of this law had a significant effect: the telco's withdrew their plans. And they are slowly switching to a different pricing model, where data is the main component. And in one case, already the new phone subsidy has changed into a phone lease, for which you pay separately if you want it.

      This does mean that the price of data becomes a significant amount of the price of your monthly phone bill. It doesn't magically mean that data is now free and unlimited, and not even that things like price differences within and outside of your data limit will disappear. You will not suddenly pay less in all cases, telephone companies still need to make money. But it does force them into a more fair pricing plan.

    2. Re:Not yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I ended up paying more due to my data usage, possibly as a result of the net neutrality law, but.. I wouldn't want it any other way. I'd rather pay more (or use a bit less) in the short term and ensure that we have net neutrality, rather than keeping my 'unlimited' data subscription but ending up paying extra for certain services in the long term.

      I was very happy to see people & politics care about the net neutrality issue, I hope the senate won't screw up it

  8. Why prohibit? by Bromskloss · · Score: 2

    Why don't we just choose the provider that gives us the best offer - for example the one that let's us use audio-over-the-internet, maybe at a higher prize?

    Let providers be free to make whatever offers they want and let others be free to accept or decline.

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    1. Re:Why prohibit? by eddy · · Score: 2

      Because they collude and no telco will offer the service that people want at a reasonable price, that's why. Also, telcos and ISPs shouldn't be allowed to interfere with traffic in any way shape or form beyond what's necessary to make sure it's delivered to its proper destination.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    2. Re:Why prohibit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You seems to think that the telecommunication industry is a free market. It is not. It provides vital infrastructure which means that it's, and should be, heavily subsidized and regulated.

  9. Telia-Sonera exec wants to do the same thing by gl4ss · · Score: 2

    he gave comments (i think during mwc) that they'll want a cut of skype/voip done on their networks. how they planned to do it he didn't mention, maybe he believes in some uber packet inspection. if they'll start doing that they'll be thoroughly fucked as their customers can just pick up and leave - which is why they're desperately trying to tie them in with device partial payment plans & other shit they've copied from at&t, for some reason they think that's the company to copy. you would think they'd have learnt from losing a shitload of customers back in the day when they were the only operator around these parts which didn't offer unlimited data(along with stupid stupid comments from an exec they had then who had previously been burnt by offering all-your-patrons-can-drink soda deals at another company). lucky for us finns our networks all work on the same tech!

    Doesn't surprise at all, since T-S has been majorly fucking up their pr since they were formed and they're totally out of touch of the concept of selling data and what that means. they're also a dinosaur that got used to well paying clients just being given to them because they're telia-sonera(gov&etc).

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  10. Re:NOTHING WORSE THAN ANGRY SWEDES !! by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not really angry, more like depressed. The winters are long, cold, and dark.

    It is not helped by the fact that Swedes are notoriously uncommitted in their relationships, resulting in one of the highest, if not the highest percentage of 1-person households and single-parent families on the planet. Stockholm is littered with foreigners who married Swedes, moved here, then got dumped a few years later ("Ah well, this is our third argument this year, it's too much trouble to work out, I'm just divorcing you instead"--I shit you not, this actually happened to a friend of mine) and they wind up staying on so they can see their kids. And many of these ex-pats seem to spend most of their time, when not at work or visiting the kids, getting drunk and/or drug-fucked.

    Don't get me wrong, I've lived here for nearly 5 years. As a resident and as a worker, I've been treated extremely well, and I'm very grateful for this. But I am really glad I met someone who's also not from here, instead of trying to hook up with a Swedish girl.

    And it can be a beautiful country (especially in the summer, when it never really gets dark), and some Swedes are actually quite warm and friendly. But it's also true that about 20% of my neighbours in this building are single, live alone, don't go out much, and seem to have few if any visitors.

    It's a bit sad. And if you are at all prone to depression, it can be a real struggle to make it through the winter here. This comes from one who knows all too well.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  11. This happened in Belize by rebelwarlock · · Score: 2

    Belize Telecommunications Limited, which is essentially a monopoly in Belize (there is another cell phone provider and some cable companies provide internet, but BTL owns all the infrastructure pretty much), charges an already poor nation ridiculously high prices. International calls to and from the country are incredibly high, sometimes measured in dollars (!!!) per minute. On top of that, they bought censorship software from China in order to block VOIP traffic. Their justification for this was so that they could maintain low (?) prices on their phone rates. When this happened, it broke a lot of things, most notably MMOs.

    I left the country three years ago, and things have improved slightly since then, but at the time, a 128k DSL line cost a total of about $85usd a month, when all the charges were added up. This is in a country where minimum wage is around $1.50usd. There are about 350,000 people in the whole country, and if I'm not mistaken, BTL reported a net profit of $13.5mil USD last year. So I'm going to have a hard time with ISPs attempting to justify this sort of thing.

  12. Re:NOTHING WORSE THAN ANGRY SWEDES !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hi, while I'm glad you have liked your stay (so far), I'd like to point out that Stockholm (Göteborg and Malmö) have extraordinary divorce rates, all of them about 50% higher than any "normal" region, secondly swedes born in Sweden (married to another swede) are less likely to get get a divorce than other couples in other regions of the world (hard to make a fair comparison tbh since these figures are compared to very large regions such as EU27, EU except EU 27, Africa, North America etc.) - it is speculated (by the fine gents at SCB (Statistics Sweden) that Stockholm et al. had that high ratios because 22-30% immigrants live there (than other regions) and some minorities, like africans, divorce twice as often (as the mean).

    So, please don't call swedes "uncommitted", if you think we're all lovable sex-maniacs at least say so :P

  13. game changed by Tom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Disclaimer: I used to work for a telco, and was close to the C-level, so some actual business insight might be included, as long as supplies last, some assembly required.

    The problem the telcos are trying to solve is twofold, especially for the old and large (often ex-government) ones.

    The economic problem is that they have massive amounts of hardware, space and other investments tied up into POTS systems. Putting up the whole IP infrastructure wasn't cheap either, and now one of them is destroying the other. That's like having two cars and then your wife leaves - there's simply too much hardware in your garage you don't need. If you can't get rid of it, you will find yourself trying to use both, convincing yourself that one is better for city driving while the other is better for hauling stuff or long-distance or whatever. But the simple fact is that you simply don't like going perfectly good stuff to waste.

    The other problem is pricing. Internet access was initially sold as an add-on, to gain more customers. The price point was designed for that case. Also, after privatisation, many countries in Europe entered a price-war amongst the telcos, driving prices down to a level that only few could sustain for long. Now they are at that point, usage patterns have long since changed with IP traffic being orders of magnitude higher, but they can't raise the prices because that would mean losing customers to the competition. And customers mean everything, because this is one of the businesses where the big honcho monkeys believe that only the top players can compete in the long run, so losing customers is the direct route for the CEO to lose his job. Not because of any actual facts, even if he keeps the company profitable, but because the big shareholders have all subscribed to a mantra that is accepted at face value.

    All the throttling and filtering and bla that is being discussed is because during the land-grab phase of getting as many customers as possible, and Internet access being one big weapon in that, they basically allowed marketing to dig them into a very deep hole with its promises of unlimited high-speed access for almost no money.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org