Re: Just another attempt
> I have lived in a country where the telephone monopoly deliberately downgraded skype traffic so that you would have to use their higher-priced phone service.
That doesn't narrow down the list of countries much !
I have been procuring and using WAN/Internet connections for probably around 1/4 century. One thing I have observed is that whenever a new technology comes along, the incumbent (BT in this case) will do all in it's power to hang on to it's cash cows.
With ISDN they crippled certain functions to protect their leased lines cash cow. With ADSL they "held back" on deployment to protect their leased lines cash cow. When FTTC came along, they 'held back" enabling cabs in primarily business areas to protect their leased lines cash cow.
In some places they have announced "non availability" of (eg) FTTC to an area (typically, but not exclusively, rural villages) - only to have a change of heart when someone comes along and offers something else. In some of these cases, the "imminent" arrival of FTTC quite coincidentally fails to materialise once the alternative offering is off the table (typically because the competitor withdraws or goes bust when enough customers decide to "wait for the BT option") !
That is what monopoly or quasi monopoly business do if they are not controlled by regulators. It's why we have regulators.