What? How do you get to the conclusion that "it's not anti-competitive"??
Just because something is your own service doesn't mean that you can do whatever you want (specifically, it doesn't mean you can abuse a dominant market position to create dominant positions in other areas). Think Microsoft bundling Internet Explorer with Windows - they made life more difficult for their competitors (customers would have to go out of their way to install another browser, while IE was already installed). Opera Software formally complained to the EU competition commission, and won http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2009/12/16/
"Microsoft will now offer users of Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows 7 a screen presenting a choice of Web browsers. In December 2007, Opera Software urged the European Commission to investigate Microsoft’s abuse of its dominant market position and the company’s bundling of Internet Explorer with its Windows operating system."
I'm not a lawyer, but the way this Anytime product is offered sure looks like thinly-veiled anti-competitive behaviour to me... Sky would be wise to change this requirement (to be with Sky Broadband) to avoid further antitrust scrutiny.
I say that, as a "neutral party" in the sense that I am a (very happy) Sky Broadband and Sky TV customer, so this policy doesn't affect me directly; but I'm afraid this kind of behaviour is pretty obviously not in the best interest of customers, and is abuse of a dominant position. If they were genuinely worried about customer experience, perhaps they would only allow the best-performing UK ISPs customers to use it, but instead they're only allowing Sky Broadband customers to use it.
