shockwave Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 The CRTC once again has proven how out of touch it is with the ordinary consumer. Against its own mandate, It has ruled that smaller internet companies must reign in their "unlimited" plans and place a "cap" on downloads. This is a huge blow to competitive forces and innovation in Canada and a huge blow to the consumers. The CRTC must not get away with UBB (Usage Based Billing) and it is garnering big attention in Ottawa. Please sign the petition at http://openmedia.ca/meter and happy posting !Shockwave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 OTTAWA—The CRTC’s controversial decision to substantially increase Internet costs to Canadians will be reversed, the Toronto Star has learned.“The CRTC should be under no illusion — the Prime Minister and minister of Industry will reverse this decision unless the CRTC does it itself,” a senior Conservative government official said Wednesday.“If they don’t reconsider we will reverse their decision.” The promise to reverse the ruling comes as CRTC Chair Konrad von Finckenstein is scheduled to explain the decision Thursday before the House of Commons industry committee.While the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is an independent agency, its decision can be overturned by cabinet. The Star was told that could happen as early as next week. The CRTC decision has sparked outrage across the country with Canadians rushing to sign petitions asking the Conservative government to reverse it. Industry Minister Tony Clement has received tens of thousands of emails requesting that it be struck down. “Frankly, a decision like this is clearly not in the best interest of consumers,” the senior official said.“This is a bread-and-butter issue.” Consumers’ Association of Canada president Bruce Cran said it is nothing but corporate gouging by Canada’s monopolistic communications companies. The CRTC’s ruling affects the wholesale business of the major Internet service providers, who sell capacity to smaller resellers. To encourage competitions, major telecom operators that have spent heavily on infrastructure are required to lease bandwidth on their networks to small providers. Major providers charge customers extra if they download more than the monthly limits they set, typically between 20 and 60 gigabytes. Small providers, however, offer plans with 200 gigabyte ceilings and even unlimited use. Although critics say the CRTC ruling will lead to lower download limits and higher rates, major Internet service providers say usage-based billing based is fair because it means heavy users pay more than those who just surf the web and use email. As it invests billions in new broadband capacity, Bell says old pricing structures need to be brought in line with the huge amount of growth in Internet usage. Businesses and consumers are increasingly relying on the Internet to download videos, documents and even software. Rogers says its customers are using about 40 per cent more data each year. John Reid, president of CATA Alliance, a group that advocates for innovation in Canada, said, “This has to be a decision that Canada makes — that it wants to be the best in the world in the provision of high-speed Internet.” He added, however, that usage-based billing is not the answer. “You don’t want to stifle the sort of richness that comes from using high-speed Internet,” says Reid.With files from Patty Winsa and the Star’s wire services Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thor Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'm sure if the Liberals were in power they would have turned a blind eye. Certainly not acted as quickly. Thanks Harper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Great...Now the majority will have to pay more to subsidize the internet hogs Iceman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 Lobbying by Bell/Telus/Aliant and Rogers to the CRTC. Once upon a time, long, long ago, American-style lobbying of politicians in Canada was illegal.I think once Harper weighed in with his opinion, the outcome was a done deal. I can't believe how uncompetitive a decision by the CRTC this was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xmikes@imap.cc Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 We're all going to be hogs. I think the only reason the telco's pushed for this was to protect their turf from the online offerings, understandable, but these offerings are only going to get larger. They would set bandwidth tiers starting at say 15 gig, fine for now, but in a year it could be useless. When I signed up for high speed it was fast, now they have come up with faster offerings that cost more. They let you try it for a month then roll you back. Strange thing is, I swear it's slower than it used to be. This is a push to make you pay more for something you already had. It's the same as the way they package tv channels, you have to pay for a whole package to get one channel, the rest are crap. To be clear, I'm not against high users paying more, question is where do they start, and would it be adjusted. I think the first couple of tiers would be useless to your average Canadian and most of us would be paying a great deal more. Also, the recent events in Egypt show that the internet is no longer just a luxury, more and more the world runs on it. If small business, or low income families can't afford it, we're stifling potential. Great...Now the majority will have to pay more to subsidize the internet hogs Iceman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inchman Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 This is the same von Finckenstein that made so many ludicrous decisions as Commissioner of the Competition Bureau back in the 90's. Seems like these idiots keep getting appointed to new positions regardless as to the quality of their work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Looks like the government is going to overturn the ruling due to the backlash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I fall into the" Pay for what you use catagory"....I have 'high-speed' and my limit is 25GB..I seldom use over 5-7GB. I don't watch any movies on my computer..I didn't buy a 42LCD HD TV with all the other stuff just to watch sports..I rent the movies. Scuba 02 would not be happy watching a movie on a 22 inch monitor and I don't feel like streaming movies freom my computer to the TV when I can rent "New Releases" for $2.00 here in Smallville..I can see though, how the smaller Internet provider would have a problem with "pay as you go instead of "Unlimited" in their plans.......no matter what happens the fall-out will be of little consequence to me... I hope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I don't know why this is even being discussed. The rest of the world has gone to virtually free Wi-Fi access everywhere you go. Hotels, airports, Starbucks.The rest of the world also doesn't screw its customers with incoming charges on cell phones and ridiculous penalty-laden cell phone contracts.Telephone companies haven't charged for "local" calls over a limit in decades.Why is internet service any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 ...............................Why is internet service any different?Well, as I used to tell my kids, "Just because......." :Grin-Nod: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 When the internet was defined on a coctail napkin over 40 years ago. It was a network of university computer systems and government systems linked together by a FREE and OPEN network. Back then of course there were no graphics and web browsers and e-commerce and the rest. but the main infrastructure remains mostly unchanged in design. Sure bandwidth is higher and speeds are better but fundamentaly it is still a big wide area network of users for users. Since Al Gore back in 1992 "created the internet" (more correctly announced it to the masses) everyone and their brother has tried to make money at it and frankly many are. The network itself is a conglomerate of millions of servers and cables and fibreoptics connected together and supported by the users. since you and I do not have the knowledsge or means to support the system in cooperation we pay someone to do it for us. That is the ISP. The ISP has the infrastructure to connect at very high bandwidth to the "Backbone" this is what we pay for is access to a FREE system or more correctly we pay for the use of the infrastructure that allows us to connect to a FREE system.In Canada we gat raked over the coals for everything telecommunications related. highest cost data plans on cellualar. highest cable rates. just name it. This is due mainly to little or no competition in this sector. you want cable you have what 3 choices Rogers, Shaw, cogeco. There may be smaller regional ones but they will soon go away like my local one did years ago.You want home phone service. Bell or a subsidiary is about your only choice unless you go with IP phone through a cable provider (or Vonage, but still need an internet connection)As for the cost of data as a whole. In this digital age we can pump 1000X more information through that coax cable than we ever could with analog. Digital data is sooooo much cheaper than analog it is like out cost per movie frame went up 1000x. We are paying more for less and accepting it. Reversing this decision is the best thing to do.BTW I pay $50 for 60Gb limit on my internet and sometimes I come close but mostly i do not. I have kids that game online (I do too) I have a website in support of my riding club that Ioperate (uses little bandwith and data) but sometimes I download large files or updates that can eat that 60Gb up quick. 60Gb is not alot these days and its getting smaller.Heavy or light user all they need to do is make the plan structure more easy to buy what you need. but pay per use will be more expensive than buying a plan hands down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Excellent post Boestar, thanks. I have no objection whatsoever to pay my ISP to deliver the service. I do object to them soaking me for it.The decision by the CRTC further consolidates the monopoly as virtually everyone seems to agree up to and including the PMO. So when it gets reversed, good. Maybe someone will resign over it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Malcom. under the nw ruling if you used that entire allotment you would pay a flat rate for 25Gb lets say $30 then you use a total of 100Gb in a month that would cost you $180 under the proposed cost struucture of $2.00 a gig for our overage.That is why there is an uprsing over the ruling. The cost for the end user increases exponentially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 This hubbub is typical Conrad von Fink theatre. It gets him on TV no matter how ludicrous.The original ruling would not have affected anyone already using the big providers such as Bell, Shaw, Telus etc. They already have usage bands at different prices and were not affected by the ruling. It only affect the people who were subscribed to ISP's that bought bulk rates from the big ISP's and then as a marketing tool charged everyone the same when they resold the service.von Fink got his mug on TV so he was happy either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavok Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I think what a lot of people are missing is the fact that this is about future-proofing Canada's broadband infrastructure and ensuring a competitive landscape in the future.Think back a few years ago when downloading 5 gigs a month was a ridiculous notion. The internet and the pace of technology continue to grow at an exponential pace. Just as 100 gigs seems like a lot to many internet users today, in another few years it will be common place. With UBB, we'll be stuck with just two internet service providers and everyone will be paying these overages in the future as the content online becomes more multimedia oriented. For example, in the USA, people routinely use Apple TV and Slingbox to forward their TV cable subscriptions over the internet to their vacation homes in Florida. As TV content moves more and more toward high definition the average user will use more and more bandwidth. These services, like Netflix, can also allow content to be delivered over the internet to your home.Anyone remember paying high fees for long distance? Look at what competition and resellers did to bring the price of that down over the years.My hope is that preventing UBB should have the same effect on Canada's internet service providers.Given the critical importance of the wired world today and in the future, Canada can't afford to let this critical piece of infrastructure develop without the prospect of the beneficial effects of increased competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Great posting, cavok! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Just my POV.Yes I do find the Internet a valuable tool, especially when wanting to do research on a product or some other entity...but as far as 'sling backing', 'the cloud', garbage transfer, or whatever you call it, the technology that we have today and what is coming down the pipe seems to take the humanity out of our lives. It seems the art of conversation is dieing and many have become isolationist, with respect to their electronic gadgets. Soon people will need 200GB as they spend their whole day glued to some electronic device...how sad. I am sure you have all see the add on TV with the couple who are told their flight will be delayed so they use "the cloud" to down-load junk they have recorded on their home computer and watch it on their laptop in the airport........what happened to engaging people in conversation???The other add for 'the cloud', is the woman trying to get a good family picture when her kids are acting up and one is even texting??? Good grief it would seem the family core has given way to "I always want to do what I want to do".And finally, my eldest son is an IT specialist, he's the one with the two granddaughters and guess what.......no cable/Antennae TV in the house! I thought he was crazy but his two girls are always doing something, the 3 1/2 year old has a vocabulary that would rival a High School graduate, both kids are athletic and when we visit there is a lot of talking and discussions going on. When they visit here , they have never once asked if they could watch TV...(Son does have a DVD player and about once a week they watch one "kids" DVD )Now is the fact that their father is not letting them be introduced to the crap on TV and does not intend to give them cell phones at age 5 a bad thing? Is it a bad thing that they are not addicted to the junk on TV and that my son and his wife plan to slowly introduce them to technology. I don't think so.......I honestly think that the texting, tweeting and spending an inordinate time on the Internet or watching endless TV is turning society into a bunch of people who are certainly well informed but informed about stuff that is not relevant to maintaining a cohesive society.I had to spend a week in YZ last year, (wife in surgery) and each day as I walked to the hospital from the hotel, I was stunned by what appeared to be the masses , head down pounding away on their keyboard...like a bunch of zombies.I am sure there are brighter folks than me that have reasoned, rationalized, etc etc the whole electronic gadgetry thing but as far as I am concerned, l'd rather be in the 'slow' lane and enjoying people and the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Amen Kip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shockwave Posted February 5, 2011 Author Share Posted February 5, 2011 Best analogy I have seen so far on the issue taken from a comment in the Globe and Mail."If the same corporations who sell me my cable believe that I should be charged for the internet bandwidth I use, they should only be charging me for the cable stations I watch, right? Otherwise they'd be sucking and blowing at the same time, right?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Best analogy I have seen so far on the issue taken from a comment in the Globe and Mail."If the same corporations who sell me my cable believe that I should be charged for the internet bandwidth I use, they should only be charging me for the cable stations I watch, right? Otherwise they'd be sucking and blowing at the same time, right?"Electrifying comment, Shock! Or how 'bout once our allotment of spoken words have been uttered, we pay per syllable...They are just a delivery service. They are not providing the data that goes through their lines.Not a well known fact, but in Canada, our water bills are not for the water, but for its delivery. Water is a fundamental human right. It is illegal and immoral to deny anyone water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Water is a fundamental human right. It is illegal and immoral to deny anyone water.Tell that to airport security, or Ryanair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Actually your water bill is for DISPOSAL as well as delivery. so when you ater you lawn you are paying for the disposal of that water. I have never been sure why they should get paid for evaporation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavok Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 There are a bunch of spoofs created based on a scene from the movie Downfall (2004).Of course, this won't be funny to anyone that actually understands German!Here's one that touches a little on the UBB topic.Link to youtube video: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.