said by JonyBelGeul:If they mean non-P2P, this implies that they consider all P2P to be illegitimate. If that's what they mean, it's probably due to the fact that lots of P2P traffic is not so legal. If that's their argument, they should also throttle HTTP because lots of traffic on that protocol is also not so legal. But if they did that, it would mean they'd have to sniff IP packets to find out if the data was legal or not. If they did that, they'd have to show that they own the rights to the data that is being transferred not-so-legally across their networks. If they did that, then they could just as easily apply this discrimination to P2P traffic. If they did that...
But that's not the true purpose of throttling P2P traffic, is it Rogers? No, you want to prevent people from getting stuff that you otherwise sell, don't you? If you throttle all P2P, you are making it impractical for people to shop around for crap you sell at absurd prices.
By eliminating throttling, and by lowering usage caps, you are doing the same thing, aren't you Rogers? You're profiting from the not-so-legal traffic generated by P2P apps, aren't you Rogers? And you say "Well, if you don't want to pay extra for overage, why don't you subscribe to our service and give us the money directly instead?", don't you Rogers?
ITMP means a whole nother thing for Rogers.
The CRTC permits ISPs to manage non time-sensitive traffic on their networks, which we've done in the past and will phase out beginning in March.
Also, we upgraded two of the most popular high speed internet plans with faster download speeds and higher monthly data allowances earlier this month.