De Vector

Belgian court bans Telenet’s use of ‘fiber’ for coax connections

The Antwerp Court of Appeal finds advertising misleading when a connection partly consists of coax without clear explanation.

Telenet may no longer use the terms ‘fiber’, ‘fibre’ or ‘glass fibre’ in Belgium without explanation for internet connections that partly consist of coax. The Antwerp Court of Appeal thereby largely upheld the ruling in a dispute with Proximus.

The ruling concerns how Telenet advertises its fixed internet connections. In Telenet’s historic network, glass fibre does not run all the way to the customer’s modem everywhere. For many connections, the final section consists of coaxial cable, a technology known in the telecoms sector as hybrid fibre coax, or HFC.

According to the court, the average consumer expects the word ‘fiber’ to mean that a connection consists entirely of glass fibre or at least has the same properties. Telenet may still use the term for products with a genuine fibre-to-the-home connection. A combination with a clear mention of coax or a hybrid network also remains possible.

Proximus brought the case because it believed the advertising misled consumers and businesses. The competitor is building a network in which glass fibre can run all the way to the home or modem. The court therefore considers the use of ‘fiber’ without clear context an unfair market practice when the connection does not consist entirely of glass fibre.

The ruling prohibits Telenet from using the terms concerned in product names, product descriptions, advertising and other information where no fully fibre-based network underpins them. The court imposes the same penalty payments as the enterprise court did earlier. These can rise to a ceiling of €1 million.

The ruling is less absolute than the earlier judgment. According to the court, the enterprise court imposed restrictions that went too far; a clarification in the same advertisement can still make use of the term possible. The difference between the two rulings therefore mainly concerns whether the consumer can see the technical limitation immediately and legibly.

For consumers, the ruling means that the word ‘fiber’ on its own offers less certainty than the name suggests. When comparing subscriptions, they will need to pay attention to the precise connection technology: FTTH means glass fibre all the way to the home, while HFC is a combination of glass fibre and coax.

For the Belgian telecoms market, the ruling makes the marketing battle between cable and fibre providers legally sharper. Advertising claims about speed and network type must not only be technically accurate, but also presented in a way that an average customer can understand the distinction. The case could therefore have consequences for other providers with hybrid networks.

Respond to this article

← Back to the edition