CircleID

But you have to consider that, if the service providers really attempted to disclose it, if they really tried to explain the theory behind oversubscription and how it keeps broadband prices low, could it really be done in a way where the general layperson can understand (or would even read in the service agreement for that matter)?

Well, ISPs in other countries do, countries with significant competition between ISPs, so the answer would appear to be yes.

Few people will read the service contract.  Those that do will skim it, probably not understand the part about the shared bandwidth or at least not understand the implication, and even if they do they will likely not remember months later if and when a throttling issue becomes apparent.  People are too busy or too lazy, don't see it as important or have only a few choices and figure that the DSL and Cable provider probably have similar stipulations that they the consumer don't have the power to change.  And I'm pretty sure thet ISPs have always disclosed it, it's just vague and buried in the fine print.  I'd have to go look at my own broadband service contract but I'm pretty sure there will be some language in there right after the "Get speeds up to XYZ Mbps" saying something like "actual bandwidth may vary depending on time of day or network conditions..." I don't know about overseas but in the very litigious United States where you can sue anyone anytime anywhere for anything, you can't rent a car or sign up at Blockbuster to rent a movie without receiving a contract whose length rivals War and Peace, even when they are printed in 4-pt font.  It has even become impractical to read through every detail in every document when you are closing on a house, a major purchase and contract agreement, and alot is just assumed and taken on faith.  In the broadband world, you would be trying to explain something that is both technical and a business model that is foreign to many a layperson (which is obvious when you read through alot of blogs on this topic.) So, I wouldn't expect contract language to help much no matter how clearly it is spelled out.  To a degree, it is buyer beware, where the consumer must educate themselves a bit to make wise purchasing decisions and, if they are later unhappy, to exercise the power to cancel service.

The point of disclosure is not for users to read it.  It's for service providers to remain transparent.  Had Comcast the necessary transparency, a lot of this hubub could have been avoided.  And regardless of the difficulty of leagalese involved, transparency is what matters most in this particular instance. 

The problem, as arstechnica points out, is at the edge.  The core experiences little or no congestion.  Regardless of traffic shaping or other 'management' practices, as the edge becomes oversubscribed, users suffer.