Topic 'Re: R0CKY and Teksavvy have a right to be upset but...' in forum ''

Topic 'Re: R0CKY and Teksavvy have a right to be upset but...' in forum '' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21463645 en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:05:56 EDT Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:05:56 EDT R0CKY and Teksavvy have a right to be upset but... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21466669 said by shaner:

said by Glen1:

[quote

CAIP screwed up here. They cried that their members were being discriminated against by Bell Canada. Turns out, everybody, regardless of customer status with Bell, is being throttled equally and in the same manner.

You can't complain about being discriminated against if everybody else is experiencing the same thing.
Unfortunately, what is being overlooked is the fact that Bell Canada did not provide Wholesalers with 30 days notice of intent to throttle Wholesale customers. Bell Canada quietly implemented this procedure believing that no one would notice. It wasn't until Wholesale customers began to notice a slowing down of the service that questions began to be asked of Bell Canada. Only when confronted did Bell admit to interfering in the business practise of Wholesale customers.

Had Bell been upfront and provided 30 days notice of intent to throttle Wholesale Customers, there would not be the public out-lash against Bell. The fight for an unthrottled Internet would have pressed forward and probably been resolved in a more civilized matter.

Where the CRTC is concern in their ruling of denying twice CAIP's request to order Bell to cease and desist throttling Wholesale customers, it definitely is a one-side ruling in favor of Bell Canada. The Commissioner's ruling now allows other Telecoms such as Rogers and Shaw to continue throttling their customers.

The CRTC has given Bell the right-of-way to continue to interfere with the business management of Wholesalers and their customers, to which Bell lays no claim. Generally speaking, large telecoms such as Bell and Rogers want to be the Gate Keeper. Once these large telecoms have you inside their domain, they want to secure the gate, so that entrance beyond the gate would be denied; as well, Bell doesn't want Wholesaler offering a superior service equal to that what Bell offer their subscribers, and in essence is attempting to put the smaller Wholesalers out of business to eliminate any form of competition.

Fundamentally, net neutrality is about equal access to the Internet. Carriers should not be permitted to use their market power to discriminate against competing applications or content. Just as telephone companies are not permitted to tell consumers who they can call or what they can say, broadband carriers should not be allowed to use their market power to control activity on line.

Wholesalers rent lines from Bell Canada. Wholesale customers are not Bell's property. Bell has no business meddling in the business affairs of Wholesale customers. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21466669 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:27:41 EDT Re: R0CKY and Teksavvy have a right to be upset but... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21465901
CAIP: "Dear CRTC, can you check to see if Bell is throttling our members more than their other customers?"

CRTC: "Sure ... nope, everyone's being throttled the same. Thanks for asking."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21465901 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:08:04 EDT Re: R0CKY and Teksavvy have a right to be upset but... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21465822 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21465822 Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:52:34 EDT Re: R0CKY and Teksavvy have a right to be upset but... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-R0CKY-and-Teksavvy-have-a-right-to-be-upset-but-21465202

said by Glen1:

The CRTC is now taking submissions about the whole throttling issue. Yesterday's decision was based on the question whether Bell was discriminating against Wholesalers with respect to throttling and clearly they were not. Now comes the task of discussing the entire throttling issue, submissions by the end of February and the discussion to start in July.

BOLDED FOR TRUTH.

Did anybody here, including the story author actually read the decision?

Here it is.

»www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/NEWS/RELEASES···1120.htm

quote:
“Based on the evidence before us, we found that the measures employed by Bell Canada to manage its network were not discriminatory. Bell Canada applied the same traffic-shaping practices to wholesale customers as it did to its own retail customers,” said Konrad von Finckenstein, Q.C., Chairman of the CRTC.

“CAIP's application asked us to only consider the specific issue of wholesale traffic shaping within a specific context. The broader issue of Internet traffic management raises a number of questions that affect both end-users and service providers,” added Mr. von Finckenstein. “We have decided to hold a separate proceeding to consider both wholesale and retail issues. Its main purpose will be to address the extent to which Internet service providers can manage the traffic on their networks in accordance with the Telecommunications Act.”