CRTC Internet Metering in Canada

[aimeeandbeatles]

Heres what happened. I am not happy. I can't find a really non-biased news source so I'll pick together what I can figure out:

So some big ISP (I'm not sure which) goes to the CRTC (which, if I understand correctly, is something like the U.S.'s FCC.). Somehow things work out that the 200 GB limit was dropped to 20 GB with surcharges for going over. (I don't remember the exact figures. Its around there.) This would mean that internet becomes more expensive unless you just use it for basic things. And because the big ISPs own a lot of the infrastructure a lot of the smaller ISP's will get hit too. (Personally I think the infrastructure should be publically owned to get the small ISPs a better chance without paying bigger ones. But that's my opinion.) I'm still not 100% sure it passed, can someone confirm? And if they find a better news article please post.

So what do you think?

 

[classical_hero]

Our limit is only 10 peak and 15 off peak I think, so don't worry too much.

 

[Mise]

I agree aimee that the infrastructure should be regulated as a "utility", with a competitive layer on top of that. That's broadly the way it works in the UK, and our market is thriving. We have a broad variety of usage caps and pricing structures across a wide range of providers.

I was under the impression that the Canadian government was going to put a stop on those plans, btw, but I may be mistaken. I haven't read anything about it in any UK press.

 

[emzie]

I don't mind that Bell is doing it. I do mind that Bell is forcing the system on other companies who lease their lines -- if TekSavvy is leasing 200gbps that's what they should get. Bell shouldn't be allowed to throttle that traffic. If TekSavy wishes to give customers unlimited data, they should be able to. The only throttle should be in Bell not allowing the whole of TekSavvy's subscription base to pass 200gbps at any one time. But no, Bell is allowed to impose caps on another company leasing their infrastructure.

I can confirm Rogers has no plans of adopting this practice. But seeing as how you live in NS, you should just get EastLink, my dream ISP in Canada.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Yeah we use EastLink. But I wasn't really sure if they were on the Bell-Aliant (that's the ISP I couldnt think of) infrastructure.

 

[Luckymoose]

I love being in America with my endless supply of bandwidth.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I love being in America with my endless supply of bandwidth.

If you live in the right area. I know people from California and Texas who only have dial-up.

 

[Luckymoose]

If you live in the right area. I know people from California and Texas who only have dial-up.

Then they should stop being hicks and move closer to a population hub.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Then they should stop being hicks and move closer to a population hub.

Except one of them is a minor.

 

[emzie]

If you live in the right area. I know people from California and Texas who only have dial-up.

Because they don't want broadband. My mom just had a 7mbps line installed at her cabin in Montana. The town in which she lives has a massive population of 300 people.

If you're willing to pay 40 bucks a month, there's nowhere outside Alaska that can't get a .5mpbs down connection.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Because they don't want broadband. My mom just had a 7mbps line installed at her cabin in Montana. The town in which she lives has a massive population of 300 people.

If you're willing to pay 40 bucks a month, there's nowhere outside Alaska that can't get a .5mpbs down connection.

Well I was talking to one who was complaining about the dialup. "Why don't you get broadband?" "It's not available around here." Theyd contacted a lot of ISPs.

 

[Luckymoose]

Except one of them is a minor.

Minors can't have internet in their name.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Minors can't have internet in their name.

Her parents have internet, if you couldn't figure that out. She can't just pack up and move.

 

[emzie]

Well I was talking to one who was complaining about the dialup. "Why don't you get broadband?" "It's not available around here." Theyd contacted a lot of ISPs.

They haven't contacted the right ISPs. If they live anywhere but Alaska, satellites cover them. You can get a 384kpbs at ~35 bucks. That's 7 times faster than dial up. It's how my mom was originally going to be covered until another company opened up fibreoptic lines to her little town.

 

[History_Buff]

Yeah we use EastLink. But I wasn't really sure if they were on the Bell-Aliant (that's the ISP I couldnt think of) infrastructure.

Well, it looks like it won't matter what infrastructure they use.


To address the issue from the beginning: yes, Bell, Telus and Shaw have been looking to drop the bandwidth caps to really, really low limits. Rogers is probably entertaining the idea as well, though they've been smart enough not to mention it publicly. The most plausible reason they're doing this is to protect their TV businesses - supplying us with 200GB/month costs a few pennies more than 20GB/month, but letting us download all our TV from Netflix for $8/month would be a catastrophe for their TV businesses.

Now, the cable ISPs, since they own all the infrastructure, figure they can force this pricing model onto the little guys (TekSavvy, EastLink, etc). That's what the CRTC decision basically said. In exchange for a measly 15% discount, the cable company ISPs could force the little guys to cap you to the same 10/20/40/whatever GBs/month. Effectively, the CRTC decided to screw both the small ISPs and the consumers at large.

But that's where the good news comes in. Trying to screw over an entire countries internet users tends to backfire, particularly when they still have the internet to organize themselves. Within 3 days of the CRTC announcing it's decision, OpenMedia had raised about 200,000 signatures on their online petition. All of those involved sending form emails to every leader in Parliament. The spam filters must have been working overtime. But it seems they were listening. Tony Clement (the Industry Minister) has said that if the CRTC doesn't reverse their decision, the Federal government will reverse it for them. Assuming they actually follow through on that, it's a pretty big win for the consumers, as well as for the PCs popularity amongst young folk.

But why is that a big deal, since the CRTC decision only truly affects the smaller, independent ISPs? In fact, your internet usage is almost certainly already capped at some number, but 90% of people never reach it, so it's been a moot point thus far. Legally, there is nothing stopping Bell, or Telus, or TekSavvy, or any ISP from lowering your flat rate cap to 5GB, and then charging you per GB after that. The problem is that the economics of it won't work. If all the big cable ISPs drop their caps to 20GB, you are going to see an exodus of people heading for the independent ISPs that are still offering 200+GB packages. It would be a disaster for anyone who tried it.

Beyond that, it would be terrible for the country if we get a real UBB scheme going; in fact, internet usage all used to be per data usage. But when a big American company (Comcast? AOL? I can't remember) starting offering flat rate internet fees (all you can download for $X/month), internet usage took off. Trying to return to that ancient state of affairs will do nothing except cripple innovation.

But anyway, that's my little rant on the subject. If you have any questions, ask away. It's probably confusing, there's definitely a fair bit of speculation on my part, and maybe even some factual inaccuracy. But it's a good summary.

 

[warpus]

I love being in America with my endless supply of bandwidth.

The U.S. is closely watching developments in Canada. If this goes forward here, you guys will probably eventually get crappy mandated metered internet too.

By the way, the CRTC is delaying the decision for 60 days, hoping that everyone forgets about this. They will then likely sneak it into legislation. Right everyone is pretty upset, but in 60 days? Who knows

 

[W|M]

The U.S. is closely watching developments in Canada. If this goes forward here, you guys will probably eventually get crappy mandated metered internet too.

If that happens, so will Britain!

 

[History_Buff]

By the way, the CRTC is delaying the decision for 60 days, hoping that everyone forgets about this. They will then likely sneak it into legislation. Right everyone is pretty upset, but in 60 days? Who knows

That does indeed seem to be what the CRTC is up to, but I don't see why we won't all be just as upset then. We won't be angry about it for the full 60 days, but it's not like there's any mainstream media coverage now, so the lack of it in 60 days won't much matter either. The exact same forces will be in play then.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

That does indeed seem to be what the CRTC is up to, but I don't see why we won't all be just as upset then. We won't be angry about it for the full 60 days, but it's not like there's any mainstream media coverage now, so the lack of it in 60 days won't much matter either. The exact same forces will be in play then.

Exactly. The local newspaper only caught on today and the sum total was a few inches in the editorial section.

 

[Bill3000]

Her parents have internet, if you couldn't figure that out. She can't just pack up and move.

Children shouldn't be on the internet, anyway.