dslreports logo
 story category
CenturyLink is Imposing Usage Caps
150 GB for Slower than 1.5 Mbps, 250 GB Otherwise

An anonymous poster to our CenturyLink forums claims the company is preparing to impose usage caps on their DSL customers. According to a supposed memo posted by the user, the company is changing its terms of service to reflect the fact they will be putting a 150 GB cap on users with connections 1.5 Mbps or slower, and a 250 GB cap on users who have connections faster than 1.5 Mbps. While the user posted a memo claiming the TOS language is being changed this week, a page on the CenturyLink website (and this pdf FAQ) confirms the changes but states the actual caps won't be imposed until February.

Click for full size
According to the CenturyLink website, the caps won't be accompanied by the kind of per byte overages imposed by companies like AT&T -- at least for now. The company says that those who violate their cap will receive an e-mail, call or in-browser web message informing them they've crossed the cap, and advising them to upgrade to a faster residential or business-class tier.

"CenturyLink will weigh variables such as network health, congestion, availability of customer usage data, and the line speed purchased by the customer as factors when enforcing this policy," says the company -- adding that their EUP is "application neutral." "It only looks at the total usage (bytes transferred) over a defined period of time independent of protocols, applications, or the content that is generating the excessive usage," says CenturyLink.

General reaction in our forums is not particularly positive, with many users already paying a considerable amount of money for slow DSL -- now made even less attractive by usage limits. CenturyLink says they'll push users toward higher speeds if they cross the cap -- yet the company isn't capable of offering service any faster than 1.5 - 3 Mbps to many users. CenturyLink, which offers an IPTV platform that could benefit from such a heavy internet video deterrent, says that users that repeatedly cross the cap may have their service disconnected.

On the bright side -- if there is one -- this may be a slight improvement for Qwest users recently acquired by CenturyLink. As we've explored previously, Qwest had a history of kicking users off of the network for "excessive usage," without bothering to clearly tell customers precisely how much usage would bring down the hammer.
view:
topics flat nest 
page: 1 · 2 · next

jchambers28
Premium Member
join:2007-05-12
Peculiar, MO

jchambers28

Premium Member

OMFG this is BS.

I knew this was going to happen sooner than later.
firedrakes
join:2009-01-29
Arcadia, FL

1 edit

firedrakes

Member

Re: money

well dam. this is bs.
FastLearner
join:2003-09-14
Arvada, CO

FastLearner

Member

Re: money

Here is a link:
»qwest.centurylink.com/in ··· eup.html

Effective February 2012

letmoneytalk
@qwest.net

letmoneytalk

Anon

I figured

Centurylink is just following suit, and I can't blame them, as they must see the profits that other ISP's are making with these caps?

They can't blame me when I cancel their service either, as I'm just doing what I see others doing...
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina

Member

Re: I figured

I haven't read any numbers. How much are they making? Is this because folks upgrade to more expensive packages or because the provider's have overage charges?

For instance, Charter has 100GB cap but as I understand it, it's only used to warn excessive users and possibly take corrective action if they don't abide by the limits. I'm not aware of them stating what they would charge per unit over 100GB or if they would force a user into a higher priced package.

letmoneytalk
@qwest.net

letmoneytalk

Anon

Re: I figured

"How much are they making?"

I would say this move would help their bottom line overall, as it will scare users into wondering if it's ok to "click on that next Netflix/Youtube" video, or possibly face letters inquiring about usage and upgrade requests from their ISP(that alone would probably allow capacity upgrades to be postponed). I pay for 40/5mb service with CL, and for what I pay for and use each month, I don't want a "cap hanging over my head". Although I am not a "problem user", and may have hit 250Gb in a month once in a my time with this account(maybe), I just do not like the idea of throttling users or pushing users to upgrade accounts, when the ISP thinks* your using too much bandwidth - they are writing their own rules/speed limits. That being said, their will always be some users(losers) that leave bit torrents and other file shares open all month long and rack up crazy outgoing bandwidth, and I would appreciate it if those users were singled out by the ISP for this abuse and sent letters or "informed that excessive usage can lead to account termination", but leave the majority of us alone, and don't hold these caps over our heads. At the end of the day though, I feel that we are going backwards in our pursuit of technology, and think that limiting people to the amount of content, or their perception of the amount of content that can reach them monthly, is just wrong. In a world where we compete with each other on an intellectual basis, limiting a users access to rich content, is a sin.
Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom

Member

Re: I figured

With most connections having such pitiful upload capacity in the US excessive torrenting isn't even possible.
talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon, OH

talz13

Member

Re: I figured

It's perfectly possible. You get 5 users who actually have decent upload bandwidth, and the rest of them sponge off of them and each other. Torrenting worked fine back when 5/384 was the best they had.

Just because you can't grab a finished torrent in under 10 minutes doesn't mean it's not possible... You just gotta have patience!
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina to letmoneytalk

Member

to letmoneytalk
I get the subjective reasons for why you don't like caps. I'm looking for some facts regarding how much these caps increase revenue or stall growth which thereby stretches capex upgrade cycles.

Right now my gut tells me wire line caps aren't as much about a revenue play as protecting other revenue streams. Granted, a definition is needed to gauge outliers but right now they don't seem to be monetizing like wireless. Maybe that's because they don't have good meters, yet, but rather than speculate, I was wondering if anyone has put this in numbers.
Fibre2
join:2011-06-11

Fibre2 to letmoneytalk

Member

to letmoneytalk
In the history of the Internet, there was no such thing for capping or throttling and enough with the 'growing users' as an excuse. Because as much as users grow, technology grows in order to support the load in their servers from users at full bandwidth. Browsing or Torrenting, ISP's need to mind their own business since it is just the service their giving and not regulating our usage, much less the neighbor ranting others habits and comparing their usages to others. If ISP's can't provide the support like they supposedly say which I doubt, then why not drop their speeds? Downgrade their service enough so that they could estimate a stable service if such amount of users connect at full load without problem. And now regular users are forced to upgrade to "business" accounts for true ethical unlimited service all because the family easily surpasses the 250GB cap from Netflixing, Youtubing and Gaming. Call this corrupt business practices for profit, control or greed.
timo17459
join:2012-01-26
Bloomsbury, NJ

timo17459

Member

Eh?

said by Fibre2:

In the history of the Internet, there was no such thing for capping or throttling and enough with the 'growing users' as an excuse. Because as much as users grow, technology grows in order to support the load in their servers from users at full bandwidth.

A lot has happened since the advent of the Internet. How exactly to you think providers continue to provide as demand grows and grows? Magic? And how is expanding a network and infrastructure to meet demand an "excuse" exactly? Yes, providers are trying to keep pace with customer demand--which is skyrocketing, by the way--and maintaining an ever-growing infrastructure to meet that demand costs....wait for it.....lots of money. Megabucks. Providers also base their rates/plans/caps around the "average" usage by a typical family. So, if your usage is far above that average, guess what....you're going to be paying more. And how does downgrading your internet service help you exactly? You want slower throughput at home--just so that you don't have to pay for a higher data cap?

I don't like it much either, but the days of the "all you can eat buffet" of unlimited internet access plans will soon be a thing of the past, and customers are actually gonna' be faced with paying for what they use. Like a car rental. Like a hotel stay. Like your electric bill, monthly wireless plan minutes....and pretty much everything else.
said by Fibre2:

Call this corrupt business practices for profit, control or greed.

That's actually a good summary of pretty much any capitalistic society. Capping usage to control costs and ensure equal service for all customers is not corrupt; it's called "doing business". If a company either imposes an unrealistic cap or raises their rates so that they are no longer competitive, then the market will adjust, they will lose customers and either go out of business or adjust their cap/rates again. And yes...it's ALL about greed; that's how companies makes money.
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray to letmoneytalk

Member

to letmoneytalk
said by letmoneytalk :

Centurylink is just following suit, and I can't blame them, as they must see the profits that other ISP's are making with these caps?

They can't blame me when I cancel their service either, as I'm just doing what I see others doing...

Utter nonsense.

They are not profiting with caps. As you suggest, cap threats alone, not enforcement, causes customers like you to head for the exit door. As populists claim bandwidth/consumption costs them "nothing", they're sacrificing pure profit as you leave.

Wired caps are merely a defensive measure to protect the pay-tv product.
With the introduction of so-called "net neutrality", caps are one way to limit cable-tv defections to OTT/IPTV/streaming services without violating the rules.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

On the other hand

the caps are better than what Charter has on it's lower tiers which is 100 GB. Also 1.5 Mbps can only download 475 GB a month. So 150 GB would be 31.5%. Not bad compared to other ISPs. Once again Charter's caps are less than 3%.
Technicholas
Premium Member
join:2010-11-11
West Des Moines, IA

Technicholas

Premium Member

I've been a Qwest/Centurylink customer for over 10 years.

I've been a Qwest customer for over 10 years..... they shouldn't be enforcing this cap because I get close to the 250GB limit every month.... we have a house of 4 everyone uses the internet on YouTube and Netflix streaming at 7mbps. I think they are out there to reduce congestion. Wonder what they will do? Make us go to a business account or just cut us off hmm?
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

Skippy25

Member

Re: I've been a Qwest/Centurylink customer for over 10 years.

They wont cut you off.

Many people here and throughout the world are not aware of this... but when you move up to a higher service or just simply begin paying more then "congestion" suddenly disappears and all is good on the ISP's network.

It has something to do with some network physics that scientist are still trying to wrap their heads around. It is believed once these scientist/economist figure this out we will have enough bandwidth in the world to do anything we want.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5 to Technicholas

Premium Member

to Technicholas
said by Technicholas:

. we have a house of 4 everyone uses the internet on YouTube and Netflix streaming at 7mbps.

Then backoff on the quality. Most of the time you won't be able to tell the difference:

»account.netflix.com/HdToggle

Manage video quality
We know that some of you have Internet data caps and we want to make it easier for you to manage how much data you use.
We offer 3 video quality settings to help you manage your data usage. No matter what level you choose, your Netflix membership price will remain the same.

Good quality (up to 0.3 GB per hour)
Better quality (up to 0.7 GB per hour)
Best quality (up to 1 GB per hour, or up to 2.3 GB per hour for HD)
Save Cancel

Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom

Member

Re: I've been a Qwest/Centurylink customer for over 10 years.

There is no point in watching movies in sub-optimal quality. Certainly not worth paying for it--we aren't taking about pirated cam releases. And unless you have a severe eye disease you will notice. It's like reading CliffsNotes when you aren't in school (or dyslexic).

SpaethCo
Digital Plumber
MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

1 recommendation

SpaethCo

MVM

Re: I've been a Qwest/Centurylink customer for over 10 years.

said by Wilsdom:

There is no point in watching movies in sub-optimal quality.

I agree to a point, but you're not watching multiple streams all on 42"+ TVs, are you?

Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA

1 recommendation

Thaler to Wilsdom

Premium Member

to Wilsdom
said by Wilsdom:

There is no point in watching movies in sub-optimal quality.

Pretty sure I'm not missing anything when I watch a Twilight movie in "sub-optimal" quality.Also, I don't think seeing it in HD's going to fix the plot or actors.

Honestly, do you need HD to watch your "Crap movies I missed last year but want to say I saw them" list? An exception might be Michaelbaysplosion films, but that's because the only allure in those films is the visual eye candy.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
LOL, thanks TK.

Maybe next time you should just suggest they quit actually watching TV. No dont cancel the service, that would be bad for the company. Just stop watching through Netflix while you still pay them so that all the corporations benefit.

Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA

1 recommendation

Thaler

Premium Member

Re: I've been a Qwest/Centurylink customer for over 10 years.

Because Netflix is responsible for your crap internet service, clearly.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go yell at McDonalds as to why my Toyota Camry isn't as fast as a Ferrari.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

1 recommendation

dvd536 to Technicholas

Premium Member

to Technicholas
said by Technicholas:

I think they are out there to reduce congestion.

easier and cheaper than actually beefing up your network.
pooker314
join:2005-04-12
Brush Prairie, WA

pooker314

Member

I would LOVE to upgrade to a faster tier

but unfortunately, Centurylink's refusal to make any improvements to service in my area makes that impossible. Perhaps the only good thing about CL's craptacular service is that it is slow enough to keep most people from hitting the caps.

On my service level (nominally 1.5mpbs), I have managed to exceed 100GB a month twice in the past two years. Both times were in during Steam's annual Xmas sale, when I was downloading game files 24/7 for well over a week straight. But with video streaming not really being an option, I don't see how I could ever come close to hitting 150GB. Most months are well under 15GB.

Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY

Transmaster

Member

Re: I would LOVE to upgrade to a faster tier

I have the fastest tier avialable in Cheyenne. I was looking at my usage figures and most I have done in one month in the last year was somewhere around 86 gig's.

Can anyone suggest a good useage meter. I have a D-link DIR-655 what can I get to work with it?
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL

Mr Matt

Member

Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism)

Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism) they want to limit subscribers usage so that they cannot stream many movies from Netflix and others without consequences. Must make subscribers use prism if they want to watch television.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism)

Streaming Netflix at 1.5 Mbps sucks anyways.

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Re: Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism)

said by 88615298:

Streaming Netflix at 1.5 Mbps sucks anyways.

CenturyLink DSL goes up to 10Mbps here.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism)

said by fifty nine:

said by 88615298:

Streaming Netflix at 1.5 Mbps sucks anyways.

CenturyLink DSL goes up to 10Mbps here.

Well your 250 GB cap is better than the 100 GB Charter has on it's 15 Mbps service.

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Re: Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism)

said by 88615298:

said by fifty nine:

said by 88615298:

Streaming Netflix at 1.5 Mbps sucks anyways.

CenturyLink DSL goes up to 10Mbps here.

Well your 250 GB cap is better than the 100 GB Charter has on it's 15 Mbps service.

I don't have centurylink. I have the cable company's internet and for my tier their cap is 350GB peak hours (5P-1A) only.
jcremin
join:2009-12-22
Siren, WI

jcremin

Member

Re: Now that CenturyLink has TV over internet (Prism)

said by fifty nine:

for my tier their cap is 350GB peak hours (5P-1A) only.

And I think that is where caps should be enforced. Peak hours only. That way customers have the option to move their traffic to off-peak hours, much the way I can make a call after 9pm if I don't want to use my cell minutes.

dks7
join:2004-05-31
Omak, WA

dks7

Member

monopoly

This is what happens when corps are allowed in America. There is zero competition, they make the decisions. Ma bell put herself back together and now she's mad as hell and has a french tickler, bend over.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK

Premium Member

Who still doesn't see the wrong way the US is heading...

... in practically every regard.

Ironic how reports about bandwidth costs dropping dramatically are equally matched by the latest ISP announcing caps and overages and moving towards UBB profiteering.

... and as for consumers voting with their wallets.... there's now not a single broadband ISP I can choose that isn't capping and charging more for usage. So much for the "free market."

Bring on Muni-Fi.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
ArizonaSteve
join:2004-01-31
Apache Junction, AZ

ArizonaSteve

Member

How Much Data Is In A Packet?

Since the modem records packets sent and received I don't see how they could enforce a limit of 250Gb. How many packets is that?
mlcarson
join:2001-09-20
Santa Maria, CA

mlcarson

Member

Re: How Much Data Is In A Packet?

Since the amount of data in a packet is variable and the type of packets vary -- it's not a set number.
Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

Joe12345678 to ArizonaSteve

Member

to ArizonaSteve
all over head, network ack, arp, resends, etc are part of your cap.
scooper
join:2000-07-11
Kansas City, KS

scooper

Member

Since I got a SamKnows router (with traffic meter)

We never exceeded the 100GB "softlimit " I put in the router.

This is 2 non- gameplay adults who don't do alot of You-Tube either.
Wilsdom
join:2009-08-06

Wilsdom

Member

Re: Since I got a SamKnows router (with traffic meter)

You should only have to pay like $10/month.

thedragonmas
Premium Member
join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
Netgear R6300 v2
ARRIS SB6180

thedragonmas to scooper

Premium Member

to scooper
yeah? i have the same router, it said i used 250GB's in one month, however the person i talked to with my isp said i used closer to 500GB's that month, so whos meter is right? and thus points out a flaw in any thing with a limit like this, who's setting the metrics the meters use.

edit: fat fingerd a 3 instead of 5

mdaddyrabbit
Premium Member
join:2004-02-05
Clinton, NC

mdaddyrabbit

Premium Member

Terrible Leadership to say the least

I can only speak for myself but how do you cap someone who has not gained any improvement in speeds for last 4 years. I mean come on people! Max we can get is 10M down and 768K up. Focus on bigger and better infrastructure and less on cutting your customer base back. The companies focus is heading in the wrong direction and customers can go away.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25

Member

Re: Terrible Leadership to say the least

Because they have not stopped overselling their network. Therefore they have added people that want to use bandwidth, but now need to try and create a scarcity to limit and monetize it.
bmat
Premium Member
join:2004-08-14
Bloomsbury, NJ

bmat

Premium Member

Contract

Does this mean I could leave my contract without an ETF?

Even since CL and Embarq merged, my service has gone to absolute crap.
shinji5
join:2003-11-27
Newburg, PA

shinji5

Member

Re: Contract

Not likely as it is also in the terms and conditions that they may change the conditions at any time. Most providers do that now.
EAQOCaA
join:2010-03-22
Littlestown, PA

EAQOCaA

Member

how much more is business class?

those who violate their cap will receive an e-mail, call or in-browser web message informing them they've crossed the cap, and advising them to upgrade to a faster residential or business-class tier.
Seems there is no upgrade if one crosses the 250GB cap unless one goes to 'business-class'.
I pay $50 for a 5M/768 naked dsl connection. How much would that cost me with business-class, or is that even possible? Would I need to pick up phone service?

I have stuck with sprint/embarq/centurylink dsl since I have never had to worry about caps. The speed has been fast enough.

CenturyLink is taking away the 1 reason why I have stayed with them.
So CenturyLink tell me, why should I stick with you when you will now have the same cap as Comcast and less then half the speed for the same price?

W7PSK
Just Me
Premium Member
join:2000-12-04
Everett, WA

W7PSK

Premium Member

More money for the Boards pockets

Just another money grab. We are going to see more and more companies putting on caps so they can charge ridiculous fees for going over. Until we consumers say STOP they wont.

WiseOldBear
Laissez les bons temps rouler!
Premium Member
join:2001-11-25
Litchfield Park, AZ
Motorola MB8600
Synology RT2600ac

WiseOldBear

Premium Member

Who Cares-Still Sh***y Service

Since they are making no moves to upgrade their decades old copper in Phoenix or elsewhere, and their speeds are super sucko unless you are down the street from the CO, what difference if they cap. I used to love Qwest and DSL(still have my Cisco routers) but Cox and even Charter are better service providers.

•••

Saw it
@twtelecom.net

Saw it

Anon

bad

Qwest is dead long live Century link??????????????????

It looks like a desperate move to pay back big debt. Qwest was only worth 10b when sold. Another 10b of debt was taken over by Centurylink. The way they are racking up debt I believe bankruptcy is in their future. Going the way of regular postal mail are we.

danawhitaker
Space...The Final Frontier
Premium Member
join:2002-03-02
Thorndale, ON

danawhitaker

Premium Member

I was hoping CenturyLink would upgrade speeds in my area...

...and now I find that I don't even care. This is no better than the cable company I'm with now, which has a soft cap of around 250 gigs. I was looking to get away from even having a soft cap if they increased speeds beyond 1.5mbit in my neighborhood, but apparently that's just not going to be an option. It's not that I even come close to hitting the cap, I just dislike them on principle, and I don't want to give my money to a company that caps if I can avoid it.
FastLearner
join:2003-09-14
Arvada, CO

FastLearner

Member

This sucks

I am with Qwest/CenturyLink BECAUSE there are no caps. I have the 40meg down 5meg up and it works great! I avoided Comcast because my roommates and I will easily use up 250GB per month with just Netflix and Hulu alone.

NOCMan
MadMacHatter
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO

NOCMan

Premium Member

Duopoly Caps

Comcast 250G
Century 250G

Wish they would of at least overshot Comcast in some attempt at competition. Neither company has any impetus to raise their caps.
catnapped
join:2010-11-22
Elizabethtown, PA

catnapped

Member

Re: Duopoly Caps

said by NOCMan:

Comcast 250G
Century 250G

Wish they would of at least overshot Comcast in some attempt at competition. Neither company has any impetus to raise their caps.

Of course not! If anything I'd expect many will lower those caps over time and charge (or push up) overage fees knowing many of their subscribers have no choice ("really, where you gonna go?")

herb77
join:2005-02-23
Fort Myers, FL

herb77

Member

Time to Occupy Centurylink

Occupy Centurylink
Rob_
Premium Member
join:2008-07-16
Mary Esther, FL

Rob_

Premium Member

Re: Time to Occupy Centurylink

Come and check out the FB page here: »www.facebook.com/CenturyLink look at ALL the complaints! Seesh
page: 1 · 2 · next