Networking

BT Tops UK Broadband Performance Table
A new report has awarded the honours to BT, Virgin, Demon, AOL and Orange as being the UK’s top five consumer ADSL broadband services throughout the second quarter of 2006.
The new study by Customer Experience Management (CEM) firm Epitiro placed BT as the top dog of their overall ADSL index.
BT, along with Virgin and AOL, were the fastest services to actually connect to the Internet, while BT, Pipex and Orange were found to be up to four times faster than the industry average at delivering email.
Gavin Johns, Managing Director of Epitiro said, “Our consumer ADSL testing found that in terms of Internet performance, BT topped the overall rankings for the period April to June 2006. BT was also found to provide the fastest service as a percentage of its theoretical maximum.”
Solutions galore
Epitiro – a company very partial to using the word ‘solution’ in every other sentence – explained that they used their (ahem) “customer experience monitoring and competitor benchmarking solution, ISP-I” to monitor the ADSL broadband services by periodically connecting from ten key geographic locations around the UK from April to June 2006.
This information was compiled into Epitiro’s Consumer ADSL Internet Performance Index (IPI), which awarded a performance score of 1 to the best performer in each test throughout the period.
1 BT 2.78
2 Virgin 4.79
3 DEMON 5
4 AOL 5.22
5 Orange 5.23
With the ADSL industry’s average IPI score for Q2 2006 being 4.72, this shows that BT really are ahead of the game right now.
Epitiro
17 July, 2006
US Democratic Party Adopt Net Neutrality
The US Democratic party has adopted net-neutrality as a party-political issue following the rejection of a second pro-neutrality amendment in a vote late last week.
Previously we reported on the demise of the first pro-neutrality amendment as part of the ongoing review of US telecommunications law.
The Senate Commerce Committee were tied at 11 for and 11 against, with Republican members voting against the amendment and Democrats for it. A majority vote is necessary for a bill to pass. Afterwards, Republican Senator for Alaska, Ted Stevens, gave his reasons for voting against the bill as well as displaying his obviously comprehensive grasp of the technicalities of the Web, “It’s a series of tubes. And if you don’t understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.”
The Democratic party subsequently took up the issue with the slogan “Republicans: They sold the environment to Exxon, and sold the war to Halliburton. Now they want to sell the Internet to at&t.”
Former presidential candidate Senator John Kerry commented, “This vote was a gift to cable and telephone companies, and a slap in the face of every Internet user and consumer.” Another Democrat, Senator Ron Wyden, placed a ‘hold’ on the bill which temporarily stops further progress but a decision is inevitable and both sides are marshaling forces behind their cause.
Lawrence Lessig greeted news of Democratic support with caution, “Good for the Dems that they got it. Bad that the issue is now within the grips of party politics.” He acknowledged that, give the amount of money involved, political involvement was inevitable.
Many fear that the loss of net-neutrality will signal virtual civil war on the Internet and that commercial interests are having too much effect on the US Legislature. Jeannine Kenney, Senior Policy Analyst, Consumers Union offered a concise summary, “The network neutrality nondiscrimination principle, which protects competition, maximizes consumer choice, and guarantees fair market practices, is one step closer to being abandoned with the Senate Commerce Committee’s vote. This endangers the most important engine for economic growth and democratic communication in modern society. Nondiscrimination made possible the grand successes of the Internet. Its removal can take them away.”
6 July, 2006
YouTube Brookers Signs TV Deal
OK, you’re used to us breaking news here, but here’s one that slipped through without us noticing. We think it’s sufficiently important for us to swallow our pride and report it anyway.
In an inevitable move, an LA production company, Carson Daly Prods, has signed talent/development deal with Brooke “Brookers” Brodack, who has made quite a name for herself on YouTube. We’re sure you do, but just in case you don’t know what YouTube is, it’s a phenomenally popular Web site that holds videos watched at the rate of about 40m per day.
While it is predictable (yes, we’re surprised this type of deal hasn’t happened sooner too), it doesn’t make it any less significant. What was previously known as ‘the entertainment industry’ (music, films, tv, etc) has been very slow on the uptake to even notice that the ‘people’ have been madly creating their own entertainment and sharing it online. It finally looks like they’ve started to notice … and not only that, but guess what? It’s a pool of cheap talent to plunder, one without agents and prima-donna salaries and demands. That should get them listening.
Brookers, as she’s known as by tens of millions of YouTube viewers has been posting videos for about nine months, mostly featuring her doing pieces to camera, often miming to sound tracks.
The one that brought her to wide attention was her homage to Gary Brolsma’s Numa Numa.
It’s clear that Brookers has gone a number of steps beyond just plonking herself in front of her Web cam (as many homages do), they’re more of a production, using changing camera angles and locations.
Of course it’s not all about TV deals, realising the size of her audience, she’s recently posted an entry asking for people to donate to her car fund. Very cheeky.
How many people will continue to be able to show their talent like this in the future isn’t clear as various music industry voices have been talking about stopping ‘their music’ in personal videos. Strange – we thought it actually promoted the music.
Variety cover the story
5 July, 2006
Net Neutrality Matters
Imagine a world where Internet performance is controlled by the company who owns the cables and where speed is sold to the highest bidder. Imagine a world where some Web sites load faster than others, where some sites aren’t even visible and where search engines pay a tax to make sure their services perform at an acceptable speed. That’s the world US Telecommunications companies (telcos) such as AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner are trying to create.
The debate centres around the ongoing review of the US Telecommunications Act and the concept of network neutrality (net-neutrality). The telcos have been lobbying congress to allow them to introduce priority services ensuring that the fastest data transfers and best download speeds are sold at a premium rate. The telcos position is widely seen to be in conflict with the most fundamental assumptions about what the Internet actually is.
To the lay person, it may seem like a laughable proposition. As Cory Doctorow (FreePress) put it, “It’s a dumb idea to put the plumbers who laid a pipe in charge of who gets to use it.” And yet the US congress is swaying towards the view of the telcos, so what’s going on?
The debate was kick-started in November 2005 when AT&T CEO, Ed Whitacre commented, “Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain’t going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there’s going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they’re using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?”
Whitacre’s argument boils down to the assumption that services such as Google and Yahoo are somehow freeloading on the infrastructure owned by the telcos. Cory Doctorow points out a fundamental flaw in his reasoning, “Internet companies already are paying for bandwidth from their providers, often the same companies that want to charge them yet again under their new proposals.”
As Doctorow and other commentators have observed, Internet users and businesses already pay proportionally for their use of the net, allowing the owners of the infrastructure to take a further cut distorts the market in favour of those with the deepest pockets and threatens innovation and the development of new services.
Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, weighed in to the argument saying “Net neutrality is this: If I pay to connect to the Net with a certain quality of service, and you pay to connect with that or greater quality of service, then we can communicate at that level. That’s all. Its up to the ISPs to make sure they interoperate so that that happens.”
The debate in the US is split largely along partisan lines with Republicans favouring the telcos and Democrats siding with the pro-neutrality lobby. Since Whitacre started the debate, the telcos have promoted their case heavily using extensive television advertising and lobby groups. The pro-neutrality group (comprising the bulk of the industry) has organised itself with activist Websites such as save the internet and has signed up over a million individuals to its petition, but the campaign is not going well. On May 8th the House of Representatives passed the “Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006,” or COPE Act while defeating an amendment (the so-called Internet Platform for Innovation Act of 2006) that would have provided protection for neutrality. The next opportunity for progress comes this week when the Senate votes on Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006 which also carries a neutrality friendly amendment.
Today, the legal Website Outlaw reported that two US Attorney Generals (Eliot Spitzer and Bill Lockyer) have backed the pro-neutrality cause. Spitzer wrote a letter stating that “Congress must not permit the ongoing consolidation of the telecommunications industry to work radical and perhaps irrevocable change in the free and neutral nature of the Internet”.
Whatever Spitzer and Lockyer’s influence, many commentators believe this kind of corporate influence on communications can only lead to economic censorship. As law professor and copyright activist Lawrence Lessig said in 2004 “The Internet was designed to allow competition and let the best products and content rise to the top. Without a policy of network neutrality, some of those products could be blocked by broadband providers”.
28 June, 2006
BBC World Cup Website Scores!
When it comes to World Cup football Web coverage in the UK, the BBC isn’t just dribbling past its rivals – it’s positively crushing past them, according to figures released by Nielsen NetRatings.
England’s dull-as-ditchwater victory over Ecuador in the first knock-out round pulled in the biggest UK audience to sports and gambling sites of all the matches so far, with one million users pushing the weekly audience to over 3 million for the first time.
Of that figure, the BBC Sport website attracted 1.58 million unique visitors overall last week, recording an average viewing time of 11 minutes.
This amounts to a hefty 58 per cent share of the weekly sports and gambling audience, with the official Yahoo FIFA World Cup Website coming over like a bunch of Third Division cloggers, managing only a fifth of that traffic.
The Beeb’s closest rival was Sky Sports, which managed 423,000 unique visitors, each hanging about for an average of five minutes each, followed by Premium TV (419,400), FIFA World Cup (298,000), Sporting Life (209,360) and Yahoo Sports (187,000).
Interestingly, the Sporting Life site proved the ‘stickiest’ with punters spending the longest time on the site (an average of 36 mins each).
Overall, the World Cup has seen a 51% growth in online punters visiting sports and gambling websites in the UK over the last four weeks.
Match by match analysis
Breaking the figures down to individual games, the report shows that the first match against Paraguay attracted an online audience of 979,000 users with the BBC grabbing 51% of that total, followed by Trinidad & Tobago (885,000 users, BBC with 51%), Sweden (936,000, 47%) and Ecuador (1,016,000, 47%).
The BBC added that when the worldwide traffic was added to the total, its overall sports traffic as high as three million unique users.
Nielsen
BBC World Cup
28 June, 2006
BT Home Hub Examined
To date, most ADSL equipment that BT has put out has been pretty …. functional … or put another way, ugly. Their ethernet routers have been transposed from office equipment, and their USB kit, the Frog as it was known … well don’t get us started on that*.
This has all changed with their latest packaging of broadband. Released alongside this, the newly-announced BT WiFi Home Hub has been designed to seduce people into pulling their router out from it previous position in the study or under the stairs, and putting it in to their living space.
Why would they care about that? Well it’s important for the success of products like BT Vision, their autumn-release IPTV service, as the connection between the Home Hub and the BT Vision box currently has to be wired ethernet. Given most people don’t have their house cabled for ethernet, the Home Hub has to be located close to the main TV in the house, normally in the lounge. It also doesn’t hurt to have their new wireless-DECT VoIP phone handsets sitting in the main room in the house either.
It’s a looker
BT have clearly had the industrial designers on the case and what they’ve turned out is a bit of a looker.
Being white, you can’t but fail to be reminded of Apple (being that they own the colour white). It’s like a cross between a small, white, upstanding PS2 and an iPod, but lacking the curves of the iPod.
The BT VoIP handset, or BT Broadband Talk handset as they call it (sssh, don’t mentioned VoIP), sits in an integrated docking unit that is slots in the front of the base of the Home Hub.
What can you connect to it?
Apart from the 802.11G/B wireless connectivity, there’s six physical connectors tucked away at the back of the Home Hub.
There’s the connector that runs between the phone line and the box, a slot for you POTS phone, two ethernet connectors (one of these will be used for BT Vision) and two USB connectors.
One of these USB ports is intended for computers that don’t have ethernet ports on them (are there any of these still in circulation?) and the other is for an as-yet unannounced use.
One trick I feel they’ve missed is using the Hub as a print server, but discussing this with BT’s, they suggest that this is something that could be introduced later, via a software update.
Disco lights may drive you mad
The only issue we raised after spending a brief time with it was the usage indicator lights that sit at the top of the unit, which flicker whenever data passes through the box. Sadly, as yet, these can’t be turned off.
We’d imagine that while having these beauties flickering away may be a novelty initially, but long term, people are going to find it _really_ annoying, as they catch them out of the corner of their eye. Expect either the addition of some masking tape over them or a software update giving the option to kill them.
Over broadband software updates
Keeping equipment up to date is a expensive and risky business, especially if you need to get the customer involved.
Like their video phone handsets, the Home Hub can be updated remotely by BT over the broadband connection. This gives them a chance to provide new features in the future, or to fix an problems that they might find, without having to bother the subscriber.
Do you need a Home Hub?
If you want to carry on using the Internet as you have previously, then the short answer is no, _but_ if you want to use any of the new BT services like BT Vision or BT Homesafe, their home security system (more on this soon), then yes.
For BT Vision to work, the STB that comes with it has to be able to control the flow of data over the broadband connection, because frankly, getting TV to run over a 2Mb DSL connection is asking a lot of it. If little Johnny is sitting in the bedroom downloading goodness knows what, he’s going to have to have his connection throttled, which Dad is watching the Football on Saturday night.
* Thank the gods of USB that BT have finally dumped the USB-connected Frog that used to ship in previous version of their broadband offering. We found this an odious move purposely designed to limit the number of computers that connect to one. In our book, this was detrimental to the wider adoption of broadband in the UK.
23 June, 2006
BT Include OpenZone WiFi Minutes with Broadband Package Shakeup
BT have released a shake up of their home broadband offering.
As well as reducing the number of options available, they’re also boosting the packages to try and both get people to switch to them, as well as attempting to induce their current subscribers not to switch away.
Mirroring their phone call plans, BT have gone for the Option 1, 2 & 3.
250 minutes of BT OpenZone WiFi
Most of the offering isn’t that different – OK, they’re bundling Norton Antivirus and firewall – the big innovation is the inclusion of 250 minutes of BT OpenZone WiFi.
BT have done a clever thing here in providing WiFi minutes. People will come to realise that they can use WiFi when out and about … near a BT roaming point only of course.
This is of course only averaging 8 minutes a day – and we all know how quickly time on the Internet can disappear.
Once they get used to that behaviour, people will start to run out of the 250 minutes that are available over the month – and start to pay BT for extra minutes.
This is a very clear indication that the convergence of network access is now well underway.
Free VoIP calls to UK Landlines
All of the packages provide free evening and weekend calls to UK landline, and until Jan 07, free video calls. International calls are not discounted – at all, which we thought a bit shocking.
This is not just calls using the PC softphone, but using the new Hi Def phone handset. We’ll cover this in more detail soon.
As well as the Hi Def phones and BT softphone, calls can be made to other BT VoIP handsets, like the now available BT Broadband Talk Videophone 1000 and soon to be available 1000 video phones.
We specifically asked about linking to other VoIP services. With no shock, we heard that this wasn’t going to be supported ‘at launch’, and we suspect ever. Locking people in to the BT handsets will be a way to attempt to increase their subscribers, with BT subscribers encouraging their family and friends into having a compatible, ie BT handset.
Equipment
In an effort to try and get you to step up to the highest subscription, BT are using an increasing amount of equipment to induce you to be tempted every increasing monthly fees. They’re leveraging their ability to buy huge amounts of equipment and the discounts that brings to them.
The entry-level Option 1 customers will be provided, free of charge, with a BT Wired router; Option 2 brings the white BT Home Hub; Option 3 includes the Home Hub and VoIP/DECT handset, that they label the Hi-Def handset.
If you persist in opting for Option 1, you’re able to purchase the Home Hub at the additional cost of £30 – £25 if done online.
Costs
There’s a promotional offer on each of the packages of a reduced cost for the first six months of subscription.
Option 1 – £9.95 for six months, then £17.99/month
Option 2 – £14.99, then £22.99/month
Option 3 – £22.99, then £26.99/month
Learning a trick or two from the mobile business, contract length for the entry Option 1 is 18 months. The others are a more expected 12. Do you get the impression that they really don’t want you to go for the Option 1?
Options 2 & 3 are pretty much the same, except for the amount of data that can be downloaded by the subscriber – option 2 give 6Gb usage per month, Option 3 a more generous 40Gb. It’s unclear if BT Vision is used if this will be included in the usage.
23 June, 2006
Nokia Trials Mobile TV With TeliaSonera Sweden
Nokia has announced a partnership with TeliaSonera Sweden to trial a complete DVB-H system, using Nokia’s Nordic know-how, their Mobile Broadcast System 3.0 and Nokia N92 mobile TV devices.
Currently being wired up by teams of studious, white-coated boffins at the Nokia facility in Kista, Stockholm, the system will be hosted and managed by the Nokia team and will allow TeliaSonera Sweden to serve up a veritable feast of mobile television.
The test system is set to debut over Gothenburg and Stockholm from early August until the end of the year.
“Nokia is very pleased to be working so closely with TeliaSonera Sweden in this new area of DVB-H based mobile TV. We believe strongly in the capability of this technology as well as in the mobile TV service, and we are looking forward to verify the full potential of mobile TV together with TeliaSonera Sweden,” purred Jan Lindgren, Vice President, Networks, Nokia.
Anders Bruse, Senior VP, Products and Services at TeliaSonera, joined in the PR love-in, adding that the DVB-H technology trial should “give them a better understanding of their customers’ expectations.”
About the technology
DVB-H lets punters on the move download high quality terrestrial digital broadcasts on their mobiles, and also offers tempting business opportunities for mobile service providers, content and broadcast companies, infrastructure and handset manufacturers.
Feedback from several mobile TV pilots has proved promising, with a trial last year in Oxford, England finding that 83% of the pilot participants were chuffed with the service provided.
Nokia
19 June, 2006
HowTo: Stop BBC World Cup Football
Auntie Beeb has been very nice and decided to make all of the World Cup matches it broadcasts simultaneously available through the wonderful Interweb thang.
This sounds like good news, as companies no longer have to worry about employees calling in sick or mysteriously disappearing for meetings (in the pub). Everyone can watch the matches on their PC’s while pretending to do some work.
All sounds too good to be true, morale is high, productivity goes up and everyone is happy.
Well, unfortunately not everyone is happy.
Bandwidth, bandwidth and more bandwidth
Unless the company has a special arrangement with the BBC (or another provider of streaming services) each PC that views a live stream is sucking the bandwidth out of the company’s shared Internet connection. For a large company with lots of employees, that can add up to a lot of bandwidth, so much bandwidth, that other services may just stop working (like email).
Many companies will be using broadband, which is mainly ADSL (Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line), meaning more bandwidth down to the company than from the company to their ISP. Great for streaming, but without clever equipment, those streams will even stop upstream traffic working properly. It’s entirely feasible that all the companies bandwidth will be hogged by employees streaming.
Morale high, but for those that do want to do some work, or maybe even telework, forget it – all the bandwidth’s gone.
Licensing – How they’ll track you down
Even though you’re getting the match over the Internet, it still originates from a broadcast signal, meaning you need a TV license to receive that broadcast. More precisely, the company that the PC is situated in needs a TV license from the TVLA (TV Licensing Authority).
The TVLA can find out who is accessing BBC content with relative ease. How does it work?
The BBC already knows which ISPs use which IP ranges (there’s more to it, but it gets very techie), as ISPs have to sign a contract to be able to get BBC broadband content in the first place – to ensure content doesn’t leak out of the UK being one of the main reasons.
The TVLA can just go to the BBC, request the IP addresses watching the streams, link these back to the ISP and even the ISP’s customer – especially if they’re a business.
Be aware that they can do a lot of this without even having to go to the trouble of getting a court order for the ISP to release the customer details, as if a customer is using real IP address space it’s likely there’s a RIPE registration for them.
The final piece in the Jigsaw? The TVLA just checks to see if the company has a license. If not, bingo, a £1,000 fine.
The need for a license also covers TV tuner cards and dongles that plug into PCs.
Are there any exceptions?
There is a get-out, but it’s quite specific. If the employee happens to be watching the footie on a laptop and it isn’t plugged in (i.e. working on batteries) AND the laptop owner has a valid TV license at home – it’s then covered under the laptop owners home license.
How to Block access to the World Cup
If a company doesn’t want to risk a fine, they should probably have a clear internal policy about what employees can do (or can’t do).
They can be draconian and block access to the streaming servers completely and Auntie Beeb has nicely provided a list of the URLs to block.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now6a_bb.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now6a_bb.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now6a_bb350k.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now6a_bb350k.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now7a_bb.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now7a_bb.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now7a_bb350k.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now7a_bb350k.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now8a_bb.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now8a_bb.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now8a_bb350k.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now8a_bb350k.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now9a_bb.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now9a_bb.asx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/rm/video/ukonly/sol_now9a_bb350k.ram
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/sport/live/bb/wm/video/ukonly/sol_now9a_bb350k.asx
Hope you enjoy your World Cup free days. It’s highly unlikely that everyone in the company will feel the same though.
16 June, 2006
BBC World Cup Website Woos Football Fans
According to Internet research firm Nielsen/NetRatings, the BBC Sport Website is the most popular online source for World Cup news in the UK, with over 1.3 million footie fans visiting the site in the first week of the tournament.
With more than half of all footie fans choosing to visit the BBC Website, there must be glum faces at Sky Sports, whose online World Cup offering attracted four time less traffic than the Beeb.
Not surprisingly, there was a spike in traffic on Sunday, as surfers followed England’s half-arsed win over Paraguay online, with a similar peak the week before as troubled England fans tuned in to find out about Wayne Rooney’s final metatarsal injury scan.
“Traffic during the week peaked the day after the first game with over 1.1 million sports fans going online,” said Alex Burmaster, European Internet analyst at Nielsen/NetRatings.
“The large audience figures for the weekend shows the major advantages the Internet has in on-demand content,” he added.
The BBC Sport Website includes new features to keep punters coming back for more, with player ratings and virtual replays accompanying the live streaming video of every match shown on their TV network.
Ben Gallop, editor of BBC Sport Interactive cranked his chuffed-o-meter up to ’11’ and enthused, “We’re delighted with the audience figures we’ve seen for the first few days of the World Cup.”
Goal! And crash goes the server!
Some office bosses may not share his joy though, as we predicted the BBC’s decision to show England matches online could see WANs and LANs collapsing in a heap under the strain as office staff tune into the footie.
Mike Hemes, country manager for UK and Ireland at Packeteer, reckons that the bandwidth-busting footie action could cause big problems for IT managers, commenting: “It is likely that millions of workers will log on to watch matches due to faster Internet connections at work than at home …this will generate a huge surge in network traffic, eating into the bandwidth available to run business-critical applications effectively.”
Licence fee warning
Elsewhere, the BBC has warned firms who let staff watch the World Cup on their office networks that they could be hit with a hefty £1,000 fine if they do not hold a TV licence.
Legally, a TV licence is required for any device that is “installed or used” for receiving television broadcasts, so that a networked PC used for streaming games needs a licence as well as the gogglebox at home.
“It doesn’t matter how you’re watching, if you are watching a live match you will need a licence,” insisted a finger wagging TV Licensing spokesperson.
Hinting at dark, omnipotent powers, the spokesperson added: “We know exactly which unlicensed business premises to target.”
BBC World Cup
14 June, 2006