CRTC Rules Bell Can Squeeze Downloads 245
pparsons writes "Bell Canada Inc. will not have to suspend its practice of 'shaping' traffic on the Internet after a group of companies that resell access to Bell's network complained their customers were also being negatively affected. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission today released a decision that denied the Canadian Association of Internet Providers' request that Bell be ordered to cease its application of the practice to its wholesale customers."
Re:Tag this story (Score:5, Interesting)
I would think it would be. If you're selling something to someone, and you change what you're selling them, then you've just broken your contract.
It doesn't surprise me at all that Bell would do such a thing, though. I've got a Bell cellphone w/3 year contract. They've added charges left, right and center since I've got it. So I'm tied in, but they're not. I'm going to bitch like hell about this month's bill, though, as the extra charges alone are almost twice what my original contract was for.
Sounds to me (Score:2, Interesting)
Like a bunch of middlemen whining because they want Bell to stop doing what it's been doing just because it hurts their already shoddy business model. Unless, of course, these are last-mile providers who extend the Bell network into areas it doesn't already service.
While I don't think that they should be traffic-shaping anyway, the fact is that they are, and asking them to stop doing it just for these companies is unreasonable. What they should be asking for is Bell to cease this practice altogether.
Glad I'm not using Bell DSL (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm in a strangely unique environment; Bell Canada doesn't have a DSLAM at my local CO, yet a CLEC (actually an ILEC from a few miles away that bought an ISP a few years ago) decided that it was worthwhile installing one. Bell won't put one in because they think that WiMax is the "right" solution for Rural broadband. Feh.
I have far, far better internet than I ever did in the city, which I was buying resold Bell DSL from the same ISP. And this is with the exact same hardware at my end.
Re:Abolish the CRTC (Score:5, Interesting)
Agreed. I don't think they've made a single decision in favor of consumers in the last decade. TELUS has also been granted many favors by the CRTC, all of which reinforce their monopoly position out west.
Specifically, their requirement that all downstream DSL connections be associated with a local phone number (provided only by TELUS) is nothing more than a money grab that prevents me from having a single network connection into my house. I don't want to give TELUS money, but the CRTC's inaction in many such cases forces me to fund the big monopoly in addition to the local ISP that actually provides what I want at a reasonable price.
Re:Tag this story (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tag this story (Score:3, Interesting)
They don't seem to have a problem doing that, either. They (and Telus) changed the rules for text messages back in August when they started charging 15 cents for every message received unless you went on a plan.
Telus also informed us back in August that their new billing policy was to charge for the following month's Internet service in advance, effective immediately. So our bill for that month was double. Nice little cash-grab for them.
My response was to investigate other providers. We informed them a couple of weeks later that our new policy was to cancel our service with them.
Re:Sounds to me (Score:5, Interesting)
> Of course not, but this isn't competition. Bell -owns- this infrastructure, and they
> shape all traffic going through their lines.
But, they don't. That infrastructure was built with significant tax dollars. In exchange for the build-out money, the government retained certain rights. Which is why there was a CRTC hearing at all.
> Somehow, I fail to see how any of that smacks of wanting to reduce competition.
Well, you've stated that you believe that the company owning the last mile (and not the company leasing access to it) should be the one deciding how it's used.
So, what's your proposed solution? That each ISP run their own last mile? Then, should the taxpayers also help each ISP run the last mile to their house? Or should Bell have to give back the money they got from us? If they have to give it back, at what interest rate should we have loaned it to them? And how do we handle 50 competing companies all running wire-willy nilly? What if some of those companies go bankrupt? Who handles the line maintenance? It's redundant, so Bell won't do it. Will the taxpayers pay for removal?
Re:In the US (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate to be the guy that nitpicks over something trivial, but phone systems are designed to give constant bandwidth to a phone call, so the quality can neither improve nor degrade... That's why you occasionally get "The network is busy, please try again later" messages when you try to make a call... the phone system can't establish a circuit for you.
But to comment on "Do they also listen to my phone calls", I'd have to say "yes and no". Phone companies monitor their networks, and may monitor calls carried on their network - it is their network, after all, and you give up your right to privacy (at least privacy from the phone company) if you use their network for a phone call.
I hate to side with telecoms on anything, but in this case I think I need to - as long as people sign up to use a service on company X's network, company X can do whatever they want with the packets that find their way on to the network (provided that no false advertisements, misrepresentations, or contract breaches occur).
In the case of Bell Canada, I think the most-likely-to-succeed attack vector would be "the service agreement as signed implied impartial packet routing and transmission, but they're not doing that", not "OH NOES THEY'RE IN UR PACKETS LOOKIN AT UR PRON".
No, Not Misleading (Score:1, Interesting)
That is in no way misleading. Companies buy access from Bell and resell it to individual customers. Bell is tampering with that access and it negatively affects the resellers' customers. All of that is fact.
If the situation you describe is true, that makes it even worse because it is not Bell's bandwidth that Bell is throttling. They are throttling the bandwidth of someone else's network and doing it under false pretenses.
I don't know anything about Canadian government. If you testify to this CRTC regulator and lie, does that constitute perjury? If so, someone should make some noise about that.
Re:In the US (Score:3, Interesting)
since legally there is no expectation or indication of privacy from the network owner, and that legally they can do pretty much whatever they want to the packets on their network (assuming no breach of contract or misrepresentation of services has occurred).
Since you appear to know the law, it would be helpful if you gave a reference to any evidence you have to this statement. In Canada our privacy laws have always been rather strict (as compared to the US for example). I personally doubt that phone companies can listen to phone calls or Internet sessions at their whim. However if you provide some evidence to this it may change my perceptions (and I'm talking about actual laws or legal precedents and not just possibly illegal EULAs or inadvertent listening do to maintenance work).
Re:In the US (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Abolish the CRTC (Score:3, Interesting)
From what I heard from my friend who worked for Telus, they are either lying or are deliberately misinformed. He quit a couple months ago in disgust.
Re:Why is shaping in "quotes?" (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Abolish the CRTC (Score:3, Interesting)
You ain't seen nothing yet. I'm in contact with the administrator of some small co-op telecom, and he told me wildly unsettling stuff.
Within the next 18 months, the CRTC will hold audiences regarding the regulation of the Internet, it's rationale being that since the Internet is being used to bypass the airwaves regulation the CRTC was originally setup for, it will have to lay down rules to establish what content gets sent over the wire, and how producers are compensated for it.
Of course, this reeks of the legendary cluelessness of broadcast/traditionnal media types regarding the Internet; if you truly want the Internet as it is to survive, at least in Canada, you better be prepared for this upcoming battle.
* * *
Oh, and you know, those "unlimited" DSL ISPs reselling Bell's "connectivity"? Starting January 2009, they gonna run like chickens with their heads chopped-off since Bell is going to meter every single fucking DSL connection on it's network...