-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Usage Based Billing approved, Canadian govt shoots it down, more developments to come
- Thread starter Anony
- Start date
TouchMyBox said:
I wouldn't think they would have any powers in that area, but I guess they passed the unanimous motion in order to get higher up levels of government to take notice of the issue.
Here's an article on it: Vancouver city council takes stand against Internet metering
The story is slowly starting to pick up steam. I expect it'll reach the mainstream in the next few days and it'll reach the other political parties at that point
Consumer backlash over usage-based Internet billing goes viral
Boards of Canada
Member
So is Telus the only one not monitoring their bandwidth? I watched a CTV Edmonton clip on YouTube where a rep from Telus claims they don't need to do this because they invested a few billion in their infrastructure in Alberta.
I wonder if it's worth switching.
I wonder if it's worth switching.
We don't subscribed to cable (I stream everything, or buy it on DVD.)
We don't have a land line, or a cell phone contract. (Skype and Pay-As-You Go Cell)
We use Teksavvy for our internet. (Unlimited cap FTW)
Fuck these telecom companies. I tried my best to stay away from them, but they still found a way to screw me. If Vancouver passes the UBB ban, I know where I'm moving.
We don't have a land line, or a cell phone contract. (Skype and Pay-As-You Go Cell)
We use Teksavvy for our internet. (Unlimited cap FTW)
Fuck these telecom companies. I tried my best to stay away from them, but they still found a way to screw me. If Vancouver passes the UBB ban, I know where I'm moving.
RobotsAnger
Member
Couple of questions: isn't this for DSL only? And according to this article you can purchase blocks of data for an additional rate, $5 for 40 gigs, is this correct? if so I don't see too much of a problem.
OrangeYouGlad
Banned
Unless they start picking up everyone who jumps ship from the other telecoms.dream said:
I'm moving in a month and was planning on getting Teksavvy. Wonder if it's worth it anymore.
TheNiX said:
Do it. Teksavvy actually stands up against these huge telecoms, and fights this crap tooth and nail. They're not afraid to speak out, and they send e-mails out to their subscribes about this stuff occasionally. Even if it's basically going to be funneling even more money to Bell in the future, I'd rather do it through them.
Made a short video about the cable / internet ownership thing here: http://vimeo.com/17547751M3d10n said:
Telus doesn't have the means to monitor our bandwidth yet so yeah that's true. I was on Telus in Vancouver and never worried about bandwidth. On Rogers in Waterloo now and I have to watch my shit like a hawk. 80 gb / 5 people = pretty much nothing.Boards of Canada said:
Telus in Edmonton gave me terrible service, only reason I had to switch off of them. I do enjoy unlimited bandwidth, but my internet would shut on and off every 2 minutes, meaning I could actually never use it consistently. They always sent us a new modem or router to try to fix it, and this went on for half a year before my family finally switched to Shaw.
Shaw isn't billing people yet and you get three strikes before they charge you. I will be using those strikes... Hopefully by then this shit gets canned. I'm in the Edmonton area and their monitoring system is still inaccurate... Its also down most of the time.Boards of Canada said:
I was contemplating switching to telus without a plan but they recently made it clear that they plan to start UBB soon as well.
There is no where to run with UBB. Either canadians sack up and fight back or get fucked over. Since we get fucked over so often in not that hopeful.
AFAIK, no, if you have a no-cap plan you won't suddenly get a 25GB cap. Your contract says you can't have a cap. They will just steadily and perfectly legally jack up your rate until you agree that you no longer have a signed contract with Bell. $70 bucks a month. $80 bucks a month. $200 bucks a month. It depends on how determined you are to keep what you were promised. Regardless, you will eventually lose and Bell will win. And Bell won't even get mad if you drag it out.X26 said:
And then you can get mad and cancel your Internet and rediscover the joy of going outside and... I dunno... running a stick along the pickets of somebody's fence. Yay progress!
Hey, you know what I miss? 56k modems. That sound of technology was so epic, Stargate SG1 put it in their endings. Back then, billing was done on a per-minute basis. Per minute was a fair system. We should consider bring that one back too.
/sarcasm
It's amazing how you can go from being a world leader in the technology sector to one the most pathetic, and all it takes is about fifteen years of pocketing what should be your basic operating funds. Who knew?
Flambe said:
If you have to move and Telus isn't available, afaik you get to keep the laptop - it's not your fault that you're moving to a location that they aren't available.
This happened when my roommate and I moved to a location where telus TV wasn't available, we didn't have to pay out the rest of our contract or anything.
Slavik81 said:
Actually, in the telecommunications industry, just about every company 'shares' their infrastructure with their "competition". Pretty common practice to extend one's service area.
Canadians probably should've realized by now that the CRTC are nothing more than puppetheads for the likes of Bell and Rogers... Despite the good efforts of TekSavvy and co., we didn`t stand a chance from the very start.
Like how text messages without a plan is always 15 cents across all cell phone brands (and now they're creeping up to 20). In an actual competitive environment, one of the companies would've dropped the price and went "hey, go to us, we have cheaper text messages!" But no, they collude and all price the same for the same level of service.TheExodu5 said:
LakeEarth said:
For fun...
I pay $30 for 6GB of internet on my mobile phone through Rogers.
A text message is 140 bytes in size. With 6GB, I could send 42,857,143 text messages. Even with their overpriced bandwidth, this comes to $0.00000069 per text, or 217,391 texts per $0.15. Essentially, the mark up on text messages is at least 21,739,100%.
I honestly have no idea how any of this is even legal.
Many ISPs have little to no infrastructure, and therefore are therefore wholly dependent on their competitors. There's then a severe imbalance of power in that relationship.Marchiott said:
I can't think of any good reason why you couldn't just cut their business in two. Building infrastructure to lease to ISPs and selling internet to consumers could be entirely separate businesses. That would put all ISPs on an even footing.
Zombie James
Banned
Because the overage charges are astronomically high.
My letter to my MP:
Dear Mrs. Cadman,
Yesterday, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission made a bafflingly anti-competitive decision that will set Canada's internet back by a decade. I am speaking, of course, of the decision to allow Bell to charge wholesale ISPs on a usage-based billing model.
My current Internet Service Provider is TekSavvy solutions, a smaller ISP that has become popular for its high speeds and unlimited download plans. TekSavvy depends on Bell's expensive infrastructure, paid for in part by our tax dollars, in exchange for which Bell is required to lease their lines to other providers. Apparently Bell didn't feel like competing, and decided to lobby their buddies in the CRTC instead. Under UBB, Bell will be able to charge TekSavvy for every GB its users go over a set monthly cap, making it impossible for TekSavvy to offer the unlimited plans that set them apart, and in the words of TekSavvy's president, "essentially handcuffing the entire competitive market." (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...s-competitive-market-teksavvy/article1778211/)
Furthermore, the cap Bell wants to implement is 25 GB a month, charging $1/GB after that. That's insane! Bandwidth costs the big service providers (Bell, Rogers, Telus, etc) nearly nothing. They complain that rising internet traffic congests their networks and forces them to use UBB. Their own data (http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20690166-The-Bell-Disclosure) reveals this as a blatant lie, and their congestion rates never enter the double-digit %s even during peak hours, even while they underdeliver on promised speeds(http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4261/135/).
Not only is 25 GB/month archaic and far behind the rest of the developed world, it's blatantly anti-competitive! For example, just days after Netflix announced its service to Canada, Rogers announced they were implementing bandwidth caps, which would make it somewhat hard to stream movies. Was Roger's own video-on-demand service affected? Nope. Bell's own streaming services will also not use up your 25 GB/month. Like most of the other Telecom giants, Rogers and Bell have obtained vertical monopolies by gobbling up content providers and media companies. Unless the Conservative government embraces Net Neutrality, Rogers and Bell will continue to throttle competitors (and innovation) to make you use THEIR services.
The temporary monopolies we offered these companies to create infrastructure have long since served their purpose, and are now actively retarding the development of Canadian web services. Internet in BC is slower and more expensive than in Mexico! In 2009, the percentage of Canadians using the internet actually dropped 10% (http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/ca.htm). The only explanation for the preferential treatment the Telecartel continues to receive is a disheartening one: complete regulatory capture. How else could the CRTC subvert 1.2 billion tax dollars to enrich private shareholders? (http://www.keithmahar.com/cms/index.php?page=the_scam)
This issue is a huge dealbreaker for me; whatever party takes the firmest stance here will receive my vote in the next election. If only Canadians could vote on CRTC members- then maybe the so-called "regulatory" agency wouldn't be largely staffed by former Telecom execs.
Sincerely,
mugwhump
I'm trying to find evidence that the CRTC actually is staffed by former Telecom execs though. Anyone got a link?
Also, good image explaining how TekSavvy actually uses Bell's lines, and how TekSavvy traffic has a pretty minimal impact on Bell:
Dear Mrs. Cadman,
Yesterday, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission made a bafflingly anti-competitive decision that will set Canada's internet back by a decade. I am speaking, of course, of the decision to allow Bell to charge wholesale ISPs on a usage-based billing model.
My current Internet Service Provider is TekSavvy solutions, a smaller ISP that has become popular for its high speeds and unlimited download plans. TekSavvy depends on Bell's expensive infrastructure, paid for in part by our tax dollars, in exchange for which Bell is required to lease their lines to other providers. Apparently Bell didn't feel like competing, and decided to lobby their buddies in the CRTC instead. Under UBB, Bell will be able to charge TekSavvy for every GB its users go over a set monthly cap, making it impossible for TekSavvy to offer the unlimited plans that set them apart, and in the words of TekSavvy's president, "essentially handcuffing the entire competitive market." (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...s-competitive-market-teksavvy/article1778211/)
Furthermore, the cap Bell wants to implement is 25 GB a month, charging $1/GB after that. That's insane! Bandwidth costs the big service providers (Bell, Rogers, Telus, etc) nearly nothing. They complain that rising internet traffic congests their networks and forces them to use UBB. Their own data (http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20690166-The-Bell-Disclosure) reveals this as a blatant lie, and their congestion rates never enter the double-digit %s even during peak hours, even while they underdeliver on promised speeds(http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4261/135/).
Not only is 25 GB/month archaic and far behind the rest of the developed world, it's blatantly anti-competitive! For example, just days after Netflix announced its service to Canada, Rogers announced they were implementing bandwidth caps, which would make it somewhat hard to stream movies. Was Roger's own video-on-demand service affected? Nope. Bell's own streaming services will also not use up your 25 GB/month. Like most of the other Telecom giants, Rogers and Bell have obtained vertical monopolies by gobbling up content providers and media companies. Unless the Conservative government embraces Net Neutrality, Rogers and Bell will continue to throttle competitors (and innovation) to make you use THEIR services.
The temporary monopolies we offered these companies to create infrastructure have long since served their purpose, and are now actively retarding the development of Canadian web services. Internet in BC is slower and more expensive than in Mexico! In 2009, the percentage of Canadians using the internet actually dropped 10% (http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/ca.htm). The only explanation for the preferential treatment the Telecartel continues to receive is a disheartening one: complete regulatory capture. How else could the CRTC subvert 1.2 billion tax dollars to enrich private shareholders? (http://www.keithmahar.com/cms/index.php?page=the_scam)
This issue is a huge dealbreaker for me; whatever party takes the firmest stance here will receive my vote in the next election. If only Canadians could vote on CRTC members- then maybe the so-called "regulatory" agency wouldn't be largely staffed by former Telecom execs.
Sincerely,
mugwhump
I'm trying to find evidence that the CRTC actually is staffed by former Telecom execs though. Anyone got a link?
Also, good image explaining how TekSavvy actually uses Bell's lines, and how TekSavvy traffic has a pretty minimal impact on Bell:
realraptor
Member
Smash88 said:
Cable will follow. It's always like that. One giant does one thing, the other follows. Rogers already submitted their documents for UBB.
Firestorm said:And it will say 0 no matter what if you're on their higher speedsIt doesn't work on their VDSL2 or whatever lines.
It reported usage at least two-three years ago last time I used it...
Does this mean they upgraded my area and didn't bother upping my bandwidth from 1.5 Mbit?!
Here's my version which works a little better for snail mail. Credit for the original goes to mugwhump:
-------
Dear Mr. So and So,
Yesterday, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission made a bafflingly anti-competitive decision that will set Canada's internet back by a decade. I am speaking, of course, of the decision to allow Bell to charge wholesale ISPs on a Usage-Based Billing (UBB) model.
There are many smaller Internet Service Providers that will be crippled by this decision. These ISPs depend on Bell's infrastructure. This infrastructure was paid for in part by our tax dollars in exchange for which Bell is required to lease their lines to other providers. Apparently Bell didn't feel like competing, and decided to lobby their buddies in the CRTC instead. Under UBB, Bell will be able to charge these ISPs for every GB its users go over a set monthly cap, making it impossible for them to offer the unlimited plans that set them apart. TekSavvy is one of these ISPs, and in the words of TekSavvy's president, the CRTC decision will result in "essentially handcuffing the entire competitive market." (Google search: CRTC ruling handcuffs competitive market)
Furthermore, the cap Bell wants to implement is 25 GB per month, charging $1 per GB after that, and Rogers will be following the same path right behind them. You may initially think that 25 GB per month is enough, but that means under 1 GB per day. Most people use the Internet now for much more than checking their email. People share videos on YouTube or Facebook, video or audio conferencing using Skype, buy video games online, pay for movie rentals through one of the movie services such as Netflix or iTunes, and purchase songs, movies or audio books online just to name a few. Streaming an average 1.5 hour movie on Netflix takes around 3 GBs of data, so you can see that 25 GBs would be eaten up rather quickly for someone using this service, not to mention everything else. Each of these everyday uses of the Internet will easily see users go over the 25 GB per month limit.
Bandwidth costs the big service providers (Bell, Rogers, Telus, etc) less than a penny per GB. They complain that rising internet traffic congests their networks and forces them to use UBB. Their own data (Google search: The Bell Disclosure) reveals this as a blatant lie, and their congestion rates never enter the double-digit percentages even during peak hours, even while they under-deliver on promised speeds (Google search: Bell and Rogers square off).
Not only is 25 GB per month archaic and far behind the rest of the developed world, it's blatantly anti-competitive! For example, just days after Netflix announced its service to Canada, Rogers announced they were implementing bandwidth caps, which would make it hard to stream movies. Was Roger's own video-on-demand service affected? No. Bell's own streaming services will also not use up your 25 GB per month. Like most of the other Telecom giants, Rogers and Bell have obtained vertical monopolies by gobbling up content providers and media companies. Unless the Conservative government embraces Net Neutrality, Rogers and Bell will continue to throttle competitors (and innovation) to make you use THEIR services.
Internet in BC is slower and more expensive than in Mexico! In 2009, the percentage of Canadians using the internet actually dropped 10% (Google search: Canada Internet usage). The only explanation for the preferential treatment the Telecartel continues to receive is a disheartening one: complete regulatory capture.
The temporary monopolies we offered these companies to create infrastructure have long since served their purpose, and are now actively retarding the development of Canadian web services. I am a software developer who tries to innovate by providing new Internet based products and services to Canadians, but decisions like this are stifling my ability to provide these services. Now I have to consider whether potential customers will be worried about their bandwidth bill and therefore decide not to download the software I create, or use the web services I provide.
This issue is a huge deal breaker for me; whatever party takes the firmest stance here will receive my vote in the next election.
Sincerely,
Me
-------
Dear Mr. So and So,
Yesterday, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission made a bafflingly anti-competitive decision that will set Canada's internet back by a decade. I am speaking, of course, of the decision to allow Bell to charge wholesale ISPs on a Usage-Based Billing (UBB) model.
There are many smaller Internet Service Providers that will be crippled by this decision. These ISPs depend on Bell's infrastructure. This infrastructure was paid for in part by our tax dollars in exchange for which Bell is required to lease their lines to other providers. Apparently Bell didn't feel like competing, and decided to lobby their buddies in the CRTC instead. Under UBB, Bell will be able to charge these ISPs for every GB its users go over a set monthly cap, making it impossible for them to offer the unlimited plans that set them apart. TekSavvy is one of these ISPs, and in the words of TekSavvy's president, the CRTC decision will result in "essentially handcuffing the entire competitive market." (Google search: CRTC ruling handcuffs competitive market)
Furthermore, the cap Bell wants to implement is 25 GB per month, charging $1 per GB after that, and Rogers will be following the same path right behind them. You may initially think that 25 GB per month is enough, but that means under 1 GB per day. Most people use the Internet now for much more than checking their email. People share videos on YouTube or Facebook, video or audio conferencing using Skype, buy video games online, pay for movie rentals through one of the movie services such as Netflix or iTunes, and purchase songs, movies or audio books online just to name a few. Streaming an average 1.5 hour movie on Netflix takes around 3 GBs of data, so you can see that 25 GBs would be eaten up rather quickly for someone using this service, not to mention everything else. Each of these everyday uses of the Internet will easily see users go over the 25 GB per month limit.
Bandwidth costs the big service providers (Bell, Rogers, Telus, etc) less than a penny per GB. They complain that rising internet traffic congests their networks and forces them to use UBB. Their own data (Google search: The Bell Disclosure) reveals this as a blatant lie, and their congestion rates never enter the double-digit percentages even during peak hours, even while they under-deliver on promised speeds (Google search: Bell and Rogers square off).
Not only is 25 GB per month archaic and far behind the rest of the developed world, it's blatantly anti-competitive! For example, just days after Netflix announced its service to Canada, Rogers announced they were implementing bandwidth caps, which would make it hard to stream movies. Was Roger's own video-on-demand service affected? No. Bell's own streaming services will also not use up your 25 GB per month. Like most of the other Telecom giants, Rogers and Bell have obtained vertical monopolies by gobbling up content providers and media companies. Unless the Conservative government embraces Net Neutrality, Rogers and Bell will continue to throttle competitors (and innovation) to make you use THEIR services.
Internet in BC is slower and more expensive than in Mexico! In 2009, the percentage of Canadians using the internet actually dropped 10% (Google search: Canada Internet usage). The only explanation for the preferential treatment the Telecartel continues to receive is a disheartening one: complete regulatory capture.
The temporary monopolies we offered these companies to create infrastructure have long since served their purpose, and are now actively retarding the development of Canadian web services. I am a software developer who tries to innovate by providing new Internet based products and services to Canadians, but decisions like this are stifling my ability to provide these services. Now I have to consider whether potential customers will be worried about their bandwidth bill and therefore decide not to download the software I create, or use the web services I provide.
This issue is a huge deal breaker for me; whatever party takes the firmest stance here will receive my vote in the next election.
Sincerely,
Me
Some people don`t seem to understand a few things though...when you say fuck Bell and go with tecksavvy or whatever,you guys do realise that they use what Bell took 100 years to build and so on right...why would Bell just let tecksavvy use their infrastructure,from the freaking land pole and CO`s and wired stuff that took years to build and make money with it for almost nothing...
Also I don`t think this means that all bandwith caps now will be 25 GB amonth,that`s absolutly ridiculous...yes you will pay for more but not at 1 extra GB a month...for instance,Videotron,which is cable and Telus and Rodgers and Bell`s big competition in the Province of Quebec have a plan of up to 250 GB a month,upload and download combined but it costs about 70 bucks a month...these plans will stay i`m pretty sure...
Also I don`t think this means that all bandwith caps now will be 25 GB amonth,that`s absolutly ridiculous...yes you will pay for more but not at 1 extra GB a month...for instance,Videotron,which is cable and Telus and Rodgers and Bell`s big competition in the Province of Quebec have a plan of up to 250 GB a month,upload and download combined but it costs about 70 bucks a month...these plans will stay i`m pretty sure...
Canadians paid for bells infrastructure - in the hopes of expanding and making canadas network a world leader - it backfired in our faces and the only right thing to do is remove ownership of the infrastructure - make it canadas and force them to pay us - allow companies like teksavvy an equal to Rogers and bell
If the companies protest, then break them apart into smaller companies
The monopolies or oligopolies in this country need to die
If the companies protest, then break them apart into smaller companies
The monopolies or oligopolies in this country need to die
So how much longer until Bell is "paid back" for their massive investment? Then we will have no caps and compete with the rest of the fucking WORLD? Highly unlikely.Ricker said:
I hope this shit gets covered in TWIT so our neighbours can laugh at us and appreciate their less shitty connections.