Ziggo remains the term ‘glasvezelkabelnetwerk’ to use his network to describe, even after the company by the Advertising Code Commission on the fingers is crazy. Because the network is mostly fiber exists, that description is justified, enables Ziggo.
The board of Appeal the Advertising Code Committee has Ziggo instructed to stop the use of the term ‘private glasvezelkabelnetwerk’, after the Commission the provider to do so earlier had called. Ziggo explains the judgment that is not binding is, however, partly next to him, with the let spokesman Erik van Doeselaar know; the provider will use the term ‘glasvezelkabelnetwerk still continue to use.
Reggefiber, a company that fiber networks to build, had at the Advertising Code Commission complained because Ziggo in advertising campaigns the impression this did also Ziggo a fibre optic network. To anger of Reggefiber used Ziggo terms such as ‘own glasvezelkabelnetwerk’ to the network of Ziggo to describe and ‘a second fibre-optic network,” when was talked about the network of Reggefiber, while that of Ziggo of the wijkkast to the user from rf cables.
Ziggo states that the term ‘glasvezelkabelnetwerk” are permitted. “It is, in fact, for hybrid fiber-coax,” said Ziggo spokesman Van Doeselaar. In such a network is the backbone of the network is made of fiberglass, although the last part of the traffic via the old coax cable will be sent. According to Ziggo, which is “unpleasantly surprised” about the judgment, is 98 percent of its network fiber.
The board of Appeal wrote in its opinion that her network ‘own glasvezelkabelnetwerk to call and by the other statements in the flyer’, the impression ‘that the Reggefiber to lay fiber to the home network, in essence, not differ from its network for a portion of coax exists.”
The board of Appeal also finds other parts of the advertising campaigns is misleading. As claimed Ziggo that the arrival of a fibre optic network is ‘superfluous’, and that the choice was limited, because many glasvezelproviders dochterproviders of KPN. Also suggested Ziggo that are network higher speeds than the fibre-optic network, but that complaint, the Commission has rejected. About the rest of the advice of the College bends Ziggo still, let the provider know.
Ziggo claimed that the advertising campaign of Reggefiber was misleading, because the glasvezelaar suggested that the fiber to the home network something fundamentally different than the network of Ziggo. The campaign of Ziggo was meant as a counterweight to that advertising campaign, the kabelaar. Reggefiber has disappointed responded, but still can’t say whether or not the additional steps to take.