dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1408

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

3 edits

bbbc

Member

Big litigious Hollywood & CDN IISPs = Does it make sense?

I started this thread and it's been closed because it eventually devolved into a crap-fest:
»TSI spam: Doubt most folks want cross-promotion for Expendables

Just curious how others would feel if their Canadian IISP buddied up with big Hollywood, especially after the recent copyright suits and proposed legislation - »www.cbc.ca/news/canada/d ··· .2622001 . I'm excluding the folks who use the big incumbents for Internet because these duopolies depend on Hollywood media for their TV offerings.

IISPs (Independent Internet Service Provider)
ColbaNet - IPTV provider
Distributel - IPTV provider in limited footprint, not nationwide
Electronic Box
Primus
Start
TekSavvy
VMedia - IPTV provider

ISPs (these guys don't count)
Bell
Cogeco
Rogers
Shaw
Telus
Vidéotron
despe666
join:2009-06-20
Montreal, QC

despe666

Member

BTW Distributel is an IPTV provider (zazeen)

CBC blows it
@70.24.80.x

CBC blows it to bbbc

Anon

to bbbc
Canadian copyright law was changed a while ago to add a $5000 cap for non-commercial infringement that is both fairly low (compared to what it used to be) and covers all infringement (it is not just a per work or per infringement cap). This removed the high potential liability.

The CBC article is misleading and incomplete due to the omission of the above. It talks about the high liability club being used in the US to frighten people into settling as something that might be coming to Canada when in fact no such club exists here anymore. Including the following in the article without mentioning it can no longer occur in Canada shows very poor journalism on the part of the CBC.

"For example, he says, it might cost a company several hundred dollars to file a case in court, plus a few hours of a lawyer's time. Letters then get sent out to hundreds of people asking them to pay $5,000 to settle before the case reaches the court, or they will be sued for $150,000."
jkoblovsky
join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON

3 edits

jkoblovsky to bbbc

Member

to bbbc
I think a lot of what's going to happen, is that you are going to see a lot of ISPs including ones that are currently content distributors start to loose significant income in content distribution as the Google's and Facebook's of the world start offering more content based services.

It's been predicted for quite sometime now that Telecommunications companies will substitute content distribution for data analytics. Essentially selling your personal data, and what you do online to hollywood and other companies. ISPs can gather a lot more information on you than facebook, google, or other companies do.

Market analysts are now projecting that the Internet population will grow upwards of 3 billion over the next 3 years as the rest of the world gets connected. There is going to be a rush as a result to supply with web with over the top content, which will be lead primarily by Google. Within the next 5 years it'll be impossible for telecom companies to compete within content distribution.

An old friend of mine from the copyright debates a few years ago Gerd Leonhard who is a content market analyst (Google is one of his clients) did an excellent talk on this back in March this year to Europe's Telecom Execs:

»www.youtube.com/watch?v= ··· youtu.be


Bell is already trying to experiment with data analytics. I think it's extremely important for the public to keep an eye on what's happening with their data regarding not just data analytics, but disclosure of that data, and how much is being made off of it, and when a profit is being made and under what circumstances, considering what the future holds for the telecom industry in the next 5 years. This could explain the muted response on privacy related issues on disclosure by consumer advocates who currently support the telecom industry (including TPIA) in Canada.

We're just in the beginning stages I think on debating how our information will be used, profited from, and disclosed by our ISPs.

Fergless
Premium Member
join:2008-04-19
Toronto, ON

2 edits

Fergless to despe666

Premium Member

to despe666
Actually Zazeen Is Acanac Marketed as Zazeen.
Acanac, Distributel and Xinflix are also agents of Zazeen, so they can offer it.

Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:20 pm
said by "Paul" :
Great news: we're making plans to offer TV services in Ontario and Quebec*! It's going to be under our Zazeen's brand.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in

elwoodblues to despe666

Premium Member

to despe666
Distributel owns Acanac, which in turn owns Zazeen.
despe666
join:2009-06-20
Montreal, QC

despe666 to bbbc

Member

to bbbc
If you want to mention that Distributel has limited footprint and is not nationwide, be fair and do the same for VMedia (not available in QC)

Fergless
Premium Member
join:2008-04-19
Toronto, ON

Fergless to elwoodblues

Premium Member

to elwoodblues
said by elwoodblues:

Distributel owns Acanac, which in turn owns Zazeen.

Acanac and Distributel still operate independently.
It's an Acanac Venture into IPTV.

bluebaron2
Stuff Happens
Mod
join:2001-02-01
North of 44

bluebaron2 to Fergless

Mod

to Fergless
Now that you guys have finished discussing the genealogy of your favourite companies, ( and you have ), how'ld you like to get back on topic or this thread is about to get a whole lot shorter.

Please and Thank You.

Fergless
Premium Member
join:2008-04-19
Toronto, ON

Fergless

Premium Member

said by bluebaron2:

Now that you guys have finished discussing the genealogy of your favourite companies, ( and you have ), how'ld you like to get back on topic or this thread is about to get a whole lot shorter.

Please and Thank You.

Yes Boss ....

jmck
formerly 'shaded'
join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON

jmck to bluebaron2

Member

to bluebaron2
said by bluebaron2:

Now that you guys have finished discussing the genealogy of your favourite companies, ( and you have ), how'ld you like to get back on topic or this thread is about to get a whole lot shorter.

Please and Thank You.

please stay on topic.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

bbbc

Member

said by despe666 :

If you want to mention that Distributel has limited footprint and is not nationwide, be fair and do the same for VMedia (not available in QC)

Last time I looked VMedia isn't an ISP that's nationwide, unlike Distributel.

On another note, I always get confused about the relationship between Acanac and Distributel. I thought Acanac was swallowed up, but maybe they just get their cable from Distributel. Please educate moi.

Back to the topic:
said by jkoblovsky :

Bell is already trying to experiment with data analytics. I think it's extremely important for the public to keep an eye on what's happening with their data regarding not just data analytics, but disclosure of that data, and how much is being made off of it, and when a profit is being made and under what circumstances, considering what the future holds for the telecom industry in the next 5 years. This could explain the muted response on privacy related issues on disclosure by consumer advocates who currently support the telecom industry (including TPIA) in Canada.

Yeah, I think I am one of the few souls who covers their ass and opts-out of these shenanigans.

This business model of making up for lost TV revenue makes sense for the big guys (even though it's icky), but does the rationale work the same for IISPs who's traditional bread and butter is just the pipe. I know a handful of small IISPs are doing IPTV, but they aren't staying in biz with just that. Perhaps George Burger can chime in.

This could explain the muted response on privacy related issues on disclosure by consumer advocates who currently support the telecom industry (including TPIA) in Canada.

Care to name these advocates, I'm clueless who they may be. I'm a tad disappointed with my initial post in the other thread that there has been radio silence from the IISP powers that be. I ponder if eOne Canada as the sponsor not only furnished the prize, but also compensation to the IISP at hand.
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to bbbc

Member

to bbbc
no one "buddied up" with big hollywood. It's all just marketing companies that do these things - it's not like TSI was making back door deals with whatever company made that crappy movie.

Mods, can we get this thread locked? Duplicate and run its course.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

1 recommendation

bbbc

Member

said by JMJimmy :

Mods, can we get this thread locked? Duplicate and run its course.

To be fair, this is meant as a broader discussion regarding all IISPs in Canada. Maybe don't read it.
jkoblovsky
join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON

3 edits

1 recommendation

jkoblovsky

Member

said by bbbc See Profile
To be fair, this is meant as a broader discussion regarding all IISPs in Canada. Maybe don't read it.

A broader discussion is a very good idea. I think people need to be aware of where we are headed with developing business models around telecommunications in Canada. That discussion I believe to a large degree has been suppressed by the telecom industry. People need to start to understand and thinking about things, or we're going to end up in a situation where the public doesn't know how their information is used, and sold. I think that's very important from a public interest stand point, not to mention public policy on the matter.

My bet is, in the next year or so there are going to be a lot of changes to contracts and privacy policies that will pave the way for a lot of the disclosure of user data. Pay very close attention to any changes made to your ISPs disclosures, and privacy policies.

I'm in the process of researching a lot of this for a post in the coming weeks. I'll post the compiled research on this thread, when I'm ready to write about it.

Expand your moderator at work
jkoblovsky

jkoblovsky to JMJimmy

Member

to JMJimmy

Re: Big litigious Hollywood & CDN IISPs = Does it make sense?

said by JMJimmy See Profileno one "buddied up" with big hollywood. It's all just marketing companies that do these things - it's not like TSI was making back door deals with whatever company made that crappy movie.

Kudo's for TSI for trying to expand their business model beyond the service they provide. Personally I don't see anything wrong with promoting an opportunity for it's customers.

What's the white space read from these e-mails, links? Any embedded tracking bugs? When you click on these links, how is your information being used? That would be more of a thing I would be concerned about then the promo for Expendables 3 TBH.


Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

2 edits

Davesnothere to jkoblovsky

Premium Member

to jkoblovsky
said by jkoblovsky:

said by bbbc:

this is meant as a broader discussion regarding ALL IISPs in Canada....

A broader discussion is a very good idea. I think people need to be aware of where we are headed with developing business models around telecommunications in Canada.

That discussion I believe to a large degree has been suppressed by the telecom industry.

People need to start to understand and thinking about things, or we're going to end up in a situation where the public doesn't know how their information is used, and sold.

I think that's very important from a public interest stand point, not to mention [from a] public policy [perspective] on the matter.

My bet is, in the next year or so, there are going to be a lot of changes to contracts and privacy policies that will pave the way for a lot of the disclosure of user data.

Pay very close attention to any changes made to your ISPs disclosures, and privacy policies
....

 
That's exactly where I was heading with my posts in the earlier thread in the TSI forum (Please follow these direct links to my most important posts) :

»Re: TSI spam: Doubt most folks want cross-promotion for Expendables
»Re: TSI spam: Doubt most folks want cross-promotion for Expendables
»PROOF that WE are the PRODUCT
»Re: PROOF that WE are the PRODUCT

TSI is not the villain here, but they ARE (and possibly somewhat unwittingly so, depending upon how carefully their legal department has examined the fine print regarding THEIR part in it) participating in an example of an early symptom of a much larger problem, one involving the compromise of our privacy and to what degree that we get to keep our personal information personal in the future.

And it does illustrate shamefully well that some folks (even some of those who are technically inclined, and who understand some of the consequences) are nonetheless willing to sell their future privacy for, well, some PIZZA (and 'maybe' pizza at that), in the example.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

All the more reason to enforce functional separation.

There's nothing written in the Canadian constitution / Charter of Rights & Freedoms, nor in Telecom or Broadcasting Acts, or CRTC regulations which enshrines the rights of the Indumbents* to be vertically integrated nor their profits protected.

The sooner our regulators remember this (forget the politicians - they're too stupid to even question anything), the sooner we'll get what we need - functional separation.

'Indumbents' is a registered trademark of Maynard G. Krebs Enterprises (Panama) Limited. All Rights Reserved.
jkoblovsky
join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON

2 edits

jkoblovsky to Davesnothere

Member

to Davesnothere
Some very good points in those threads you raised. I get spam about twice a week from Rogers. I think you're right regarding this being a much larger problem. Telecom providers are just interested at this point in selling ad space in these emails. Why would they care about how those they are promoting use your info? They got their money. Its up to the user whether they opt in or not. Is it right for them not to care considering what the near future will look like? A hell of a lot more user data will be disclosed if Telecom gets into data analytics. Should there be limits on that data?

One of the problems we are facing especially in the future, will an opt in be required for an internet connection? Will the sharing of your information be mandatory in order to surf online? How is telecom currently using and profiting from the disclosure of personal data both directly and in this case indirectly? Should ISPs take a more proactive roll in understanding how thier subscribers data is used by the companies they are promoting, or disclosing it to? What needs to be done on the legislative front to ensure user data isn't abused by the telecom, or private industry?
jkoblovsky

jkoblovsky to MaynardKrebs

Member

to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

All the more reason to enforce functional separation.

There's nothing written in the Canadian constitution / Charter of Rights & Freedoms, nor in Telecom or Broadcasting Acts, or CRTC regulations which enshrines the rights of the Indumbents* to be vertically integrated nor their profits protected.

Actually that could be a good thing, and actually serve to bankrupt Rogers, Bell and Shaw. Gerd Leonhard made a fact in pointing out that telecom providers will not be able to sustain income through content distribution. Currently the Rogers, Bell and Shaw's of the world are dealing with managed dissatisfaction. Once Google and Facebook get into content distribution, its going to be very hard to fight that off. Watch the video I posted. It's long but informative.
JMJimmy
join:2008-07-23

JMJimmy to Davesnothere

Member

to Davesnothere
This is just absurd. You don't want to enter the contest, don't enter. I'm all for privacy but think about it - they list why they need the info and what they are going to do with it. The vast majority of the info being requested is required by law or by simple practical need. If you enter your birth date and you're not 18 you can't win and the data must be destroyed. If you win the law requires the address/phone number just like it would on a lottery ticket. The only borderline thing is the gender. For all those that don't win, the data must be destroyed within a certain number of days. For those that do, they'll keep it for at most a year + same number of days.

These are not being sent out to anyone, just those who signed up for buzz. There are simply no questionable tactics being used here it's about as above board as you can get.

Any ISP or any company is free to do the same, and they do every day. What would be untoward is if a company was sending this out to every customer, without their request. Or if they didn't specifically indicate what the info was being used for.

PS: IP address is not private info
jkoblovsky
join:2011-09-27
Keswick, ON

jkoblovsky to Davesnothere

Member

to Davesnothere
Speaking on this very topic:

More transparency needed on digital privacy, says federal watchdog

»www.cbc.ca/news/politics ··· .2742890

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

3 edits

1 recommendation

Davesnothere to JMJimmy

Premium Member

to JMJimmy
said by JMJimmy:

This is just absurd. [If] You don't want to enter the contest, don't enter.

Of course, but that's not the point.

I hate seeing other innocent folks being exploited.
said by JMJimmy:

I'm all for privacy but think about it - they list why they need the info and what they are going to do with it. The vast majority of the info being requested is required by law or by simple practical need.

I do not trust what the partners would do with the info, and they do not NEED most of it upfront (see my next paragraphs).
said by JMJimmy:

If you enter your birth date and you're not 18, you can't win and the data must be destroyed. If you win the law requires the address/phone number just like it would on a lottery ticket.

Ironic that you made that comparison, as lotteries really demonstrate what SHOULD happen.

When you buy a lottery ticket, NO INFO is requested of those who do not win.

And THAT's how it should also be for these online contests
, except that they would need one, and ONLY one piece of contact info upfront to reach a winner if they should win, be it the email, OR the phone, OR the postal address, and the entrant should be allowed to choose which piece.

Only if you WIN should they ask for the rest of the info, confirm your age, etc.

Otherwise, it's just data harvesting.
said by JMJimmy:

The only borderline thing is the gender.

One more nail....
said by JMJimmy:

For all those that don't win, the data must be destroyed within a certain number of days. For those that do, they'll keep it for at most a year + same number of days.

Again, I do not trust what the partners would do with the info, nor that they would destroy it.
said by JMJimmy:

These are not being sent out to anyone, just those who signed up for buzz. There are simply no questionable tactics being used here it's about as above board as you can get.

Remember that we are not talking only about the Teksavvy eMail. - It is simply an example.
said by JMJimmy:

Any ISP or any company is free to do the same, and they do every day.

And that point alone makes it OK for all of them to do so ?
said by JMJimmy:

What would be untoward is if a company was sending this out to every customer, without their request. Or if they didn't specifically indicate what the info was being used for.

That would be worse, yes.
said by JMJimmy:

PS: IP address is not private info

But combined with some of the other info being harvested, it could go a long way towards identifying someone who is online, and their online activities.

Bottom Line : Information IS money, and that's why companies who sell things WANT it.

It's more important to them than the current contest, or whatever other means is being used to harvest info.

sm5w2
Premium Member
join:2004-10-13
St Thomas, ON

sm5w2 to bbbc

Premium Member

to bbbc
> It's been predicted for quite sometime now that telecommunications companies will
> substitute content distribution for data analytics. Essentially selling your personal data,
> and what you do online to hollywood and other companies.

And that personal information is worth exactly ZERO, except it will take some time for the people paying for it to figure that out, but in the mean time the analytics ecosystem will make a killing along the way.

Throwing a monkey wrench into the collection of these metrics and click tracking and advertising by leveraging your HOSTS file is trivial, yet it's mysteriously never mentioned in media or even technical stories pertaining to web surfing, privacy, anonymity and tracking.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

1 recommendation

bbbc

Member

said by sm5w2 :

And that personal information is worth exactly ZERO, except it will take some time for the people paying for it to figure that out, but in the mean time the analytics ecosystem will make a killing along the way.

Zero, Amazon doesn't seem to think so - »fortune.com/2014/08/22/a ··· usiness/ .

Throwing a monkey wrench into the collection of these metrics and click tracking and advertising by leveraging your HOSTS file is trivial, yet it's mysteriously never mentioned in media or even technical stories pertaining to web surfing, privacy, anonymity and tracking.

Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but who owns the mass media in North America, the folks who control the Internet's pipes. DSLR geeks may know how to eff with host files, but the masses do not have a clue and probably could give a shit. A perfect example is even the nerds here will pony up the goods (personal data) for a damn pizza pie.

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere

Premium Member

said by bbbc:

....A perfect example is even the nerds here will pony up the goods (personal data) for a damn pizza pie.

 
No, for only a CHANCE of some pizza - Remember that this example is a contest.

As long as some company thinks that our information is valuable, then it IS valuable (the stock market operates on the identical premise in establishing share prices), and if they are willing to PAY for the info (be it with the CHANCE of some free pizza, or with cold hard cash, or with any alternate consideration in between), then other companies will spring up and be more than glad to gather it for them (at least if there is cash to be made for serving as a go-between).

And Amazon (for example) is pretty good at what they do, with what little demographic info that I have so far allowed them thru my dealings.

So is eBay.
Davesnothere

3 edits

Davesnothere

Premium Member

 
Another way to look at the Teksavvy/Pizza/Movie example is that Teksavvy ALREADY has on file all of the information which is being solicited to be harvested by the other two entities, and MORE.

However, privacy laws and/or the TSI customer ToS and/or the TSI Buzz subscription agreement prohibit(s) TSI from simply sharing it, obviously.

So the contest partners are forced to ask for it thru the entry form.

BUT, if our information is worth 'ZERO', then why ask for so much of it, when we haven't even WON yet ?

It's clear that Pizza and Movie company each think this info to be valuable, otherwise they would not ask for it, and would instead govern themselves like the lottery ticket issuers do, only requiring WINNERS to provide that degree of personal info.

It would be so much simpler record keeping for Pizza-co and Movie-co to not have to store and manage all of that allegedly worthless information at all, wouldn't it ?

sm5w2
Premium Member
join:2004-10-13
St Thomas, ON

sm5w2

Premium Member

> > Our personal info (to the extent that it can be determined through web-analytics and
> > tracking through fecebook and twatter accounts) has zero value
>
> Zero, Amazon doesn't seem to think so

Amazon is part of the web-metrics ecosystem (like google) that is monetizing a service to someone else that's paying for the info.

That someone else is being sold a steaming pile of sh*t in terms of what this data will do for their bottom line.

Speaking of amazon, here are my HOSTS file entries for them:

127.0.0.1 cloudfront-labs.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 s.amazon-adsystem.com
127.0.0.1 c.amazon-adsystem.com
127.0.0.1 ec2-54-211-70-113.compute-1.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 trafficads.s3-website-us-west-1.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 wms.assoc-amazon.com
127.0.0.1 twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 s3-1.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 alexa-sitestats.s3.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 ecommstats.s3.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 partner-us-east-1a-1806761701.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 analytics-beacon-1354134853.us-east-1.elb.amazonaws.com
127.0.0.1 ads.smowtion.com #[s3-1-w.amazonaws.com]
127.0.0.1 rcm.amazon.com
127.0.0.1 rcm-images.amazon.com

I have many more for google.

At work, I'm blocking many amazon-owned IP net-blocks on my mail server. Apparently amazon likes to rent their AWS servers to spammers.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to Davesnothere

Premium Member

to Davesnothere
said by Davesnothere:

As long as some company thinks that our information is valuable, then it IS valuable (the stock market operates on the identical premise in establishing share prices), and if they are willing to PAY for the info (be it with the CHANCE of some free pizza, or with cold hard cash, or with any alternate consideration in between), then other companies will spring up and be more than glad to gather it for them (at least if there is cash to be made for serving as a go-between).

If I want free pizza (or practically a free meal if I go at the right time of day), I can prowl the aisles of Costco for free samples - no recorded ID required.