dslreports logo
 story category
Canadians Pine For CRTC's Destruction
One of our regular users makes news for disbanding petition...

Last week Canadian regulatory agency the CRTC once again ruled against independent Canadian ISPs by granting a Bell Canada request to double dip wholesale customers by charging them for up front bandwidth, then charging a new usage-based billing (UBB) charge on the other end. This has been only the latest in a series a rulings that independent ISPs say are aimed to put them out of business. The CBC notes that independent ISPs and content creators are now pushing to have the CRTC disbanded -- however unlikely the request.

The CBC references a new new petition created by one of our users, 23-year-old Ottawa software company employee Mike Lerner (mlerner):
quote:
We, the undersigned, believe that the CRTC has become a burden on the Canadian public and are failing to perform their duties in the interest of the Canadian public and that of a fair and unbiased telecom policy.
Of course online petitions are the digital equivalent of a pebble being thrown in a lake, but the sentiment remains no less potent. The CRTC, staffed heavily by former incumbent Canadian ISP employees and lawyers, mirrors the heavily-lobbied dysfunction systemic in the regulatory process of their neighbors to the south. As we've argued in the past, it's largely impossible to fix any technology problem so long as regulators are in the pockets of their wealthiest constituents. Would dissolving the CRTC fix this, or simply give mega-ISPs free reign?
view:
topics flat nest 

DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 edit

DataRiker

Premium Member

Hope for the best

Guessing from the forums I would say only about >20% of TekSavvy's customers will leave because of this.

That should be a strong indication just how bad Bell Canada really is, or rather how much better smaller independents are.

DrZEUS
join:2004-01-13
Mississauga, ON

DrZEUS

Member

Re: Hope for the best

and where will these people go? what alternative is there? its like leaving one bad party and walking into another one....you're screwed either way.

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz

MVM

Re: Hope for the best

Business services from both DSL and cable providers are largely free of most of this nonsense. Business DSL is still throttled, but unaffected by UBB. Business cable (from Videotron at least) remains both unthrottled and unlimited, although at significant cost.
Guspaz

Guspaz

MVM

It's sad...

I used to be proud of the CRTC. They used to protect the interests of Canadians, and really did foster a competitive telecom environment.

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.

DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 edit

DataRiker

Premium Member

Re: It's sad...

said by Guspaz:

I used to be proud of the CRTC. They used to protect the interests of Canadians, and really did foster a competitive telecom environment.

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.
I know what its like to have a good thing arbitrarily taken away. Here, when cable broadband was first popular we had a company called @home which delivered awesome speeds (5-6 Mbit/s) and literally no caps.

After they were shut down, not due to service problems, but corporate fraud, cox took them over and immediately lowered speeds to 1.5 Mbit/s. It has taken 10 YEARS for cox to catch up.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: It's sad...

There is more to the story than that.

@Home was the ISP for Cox. They were the ISP for MANY cable companies. it was always Name@home or something like that. Comcast, cablevision, Cox, etc.

What did you want Cox to do? shut your Internet off and then let you go back to dial-up?


DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

DataRiker

Premium Member

Re: It's sad...

said by hottboiinnc4:

There is more to the story than that.

@Home was the ISP for Cox. They were the ISP for MANY cable companies. it was always Name@home or something like that. Comcast, cablevision, Cox, etc.

What did you want Cox to do? shut your Internet off and then let you go back to dial-up?


Cox took @home and immediately lowered established speeds which where working fine.

Please explain to me why cox, who took over @home and their equipment was unable to offer the same level of service for a decade?

Please give us the missing part of the story...........
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: It's sad...

Cox started to offer you the service that @home could no longer.

And as far as lowering the speed? What else did you have available? Dial-up? ISDN? IDSL? Market talks

DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 edits

DataRiker

Premium Member

Re: It's sad...

said by hottboiinnc4:

Cox started to offer you the service that @home could no longer.

And as far as lowering the speed? What else did you have available? Dial-up? ISDN? IDSL? Market talks
Yea Market talks.

More like non competitive Monopoly talks ( with numerous local and state tax incentives).

And please we are all waiting for the "more" to the story part you eluded too ( the whole story of which I'm very very familiar with ), like it somehow matters.

Point is, a Monopolistic minded company took over my internet and I lost, literally a decades worth of speeds over night.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: It's sad...

They don't hold a monoploy. You and everyone is free to compete. The fact is YOU DON'T and NOBODY else wants to either. So you're stuck with what they give you. You either like it or you don't and go some where else.

And what "more" do you want? That is the fact of the story. They either kept providing you the service or they could have shut you off and let you go back to dial-up. In my case, If i was them. I surely would have left you go back.

Be thankful you actually had cable modem that long instead of being on dial-up until 2003 when TWC finally talked your family run "cable" company into selling to them.

DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

2 edits

DataRiker

Premium Member

Re: It's sad...

Wow, first you incorrectly assume they are not a monopoly in my area ( which they are ) then you also incorrectly assume dial-up was an option ( which it was not due to line quality issues ).

Wrong on all counts ! Bravo !

Please read very slow : COX IS A MONOPOLY IN MY AREA

You have also completely failed to give any reason as to why Cox, who took over @homes network, found it reasonable to degrade it 200-300% and CHARGE MORE AT THE SAME TIME

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5 to Guspaz

Premium Member

to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.
You are in the mess you are in because of PAST CRTC policies that inhibited innovation and a ROI for coming out with enhanced infrastructure. CLECs and independent ISPs are the enemies of innovation. They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure. Maybe if the CRTC was more like the US FCC in the past, companies in Canada would have invested in the improvement of the infrastructure.

adisor19
join:2004-10-11

1 recommendation

adisor19

Member

Re: It's sad...

said by FFH5:

said by Guspaz:

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.
You are in the mess you are in because of PAST CRTC policies that inhibited innovation and a ROI for coming out with enhanced infrastructure. CLECs and independent ISPs are the enemies of innovation. They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure. Maybe if the CRTC was more like the US FCC in the past, companies in Canada would have invested in the improvement of the infrastructure.
WoW, haven't heard such extreme capitalist propaganda in a while ! Thanks for that, it made me lol this morning.

No but seriously, the big Bell company built its network with heavy subsidy from the Canadian government, thus from us, canadians. Don't come and insult my intelligence by telling me that we should kill the small ISPs that are trying to bring competition and lower prices to market and we should instead bend over to Bell and their monopolistic prices and practises. Thank GOD the CRTC had some sort of semi good intentions in the begging for forcing Bell to sell the GAS access for their DSL service to third parties, otherwise we would be worse then we are now.

I agree that the CRTC has recently acted in the interests of Bell and not of the canadian consumers. This is bad, but it's not a reason to dismantle them.

Adi
olebiker2
join:2008-04-16
Glenburnie, ON

olebiker2

Member

Re: It's sad...

said by adisor19:

said by FFH5:

said by Guspaz:

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.
You are in the mess you are in because of PAST CRTC policies that inhibited innovation and a ROI for coming out with enhanced infrastructure. CLECs and independent ISPs are the enemies of innovation. They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure. Maybe if the CRTC was more like the US FCC in the past, companies in Canada would have invested in the improvement of the infrastructure.
WoW, haven't heard such extreme capitalist propaganda in a while ! Thanks for that, it made me lol this morning.

No but seriously, the big Bell company built its network with heavy subsidy from the Canadian government, thus from us, canadians. Don't come and insult my intelligence by telling me that we should kill the small ISPs that are trying to bring competition and lower prices to market and we should instead bend over to Bell and their monopolistic prices and practises. Thank GOD the CRTC had some sort of semi good intentions in the begging for forcing Bell to sell the GAS access for their DSL service to third parties, otherwise we would be worse then we are now.

I agree that the CRTC has recently acted in the interests of Bell and not of the canadian consumers. This is bad, but it's not a reason to dismantle them.

Adi
The petition is to dismantle AND REPLACE them. You who would change ISP's over a $4.00 month charge surprise me with not wanting to replace them.

adisor19
join:2004-10-11

adisor19

Member

Re: It's sad...

Actually, yes i DO want to replace them. My comment was objecting to just simply getting rid of the CRTC and "letting the market decide" as golfsun was saying.

Adi
olebiker2
join:2008-04-16
Glenburnie, ON

olebiker2

Member

Re: It's sad...

said by adisor19:

Actually, yes i DO want to replace them. My comment was objecting to just simply getting rid of the CRTC and "letting the market decide" as golfsun was saying.

Adi
Oh good so you do support the petition.

adisor19
join:2004-10-11

adisor19

Member

Re: It's sad...

said by olebiker2:

said by adisor19:

Actually, yes i DO want to replace them. My comment was objecting to just simply getting rid of the CRTC and "letting the market decide" as golfsun was saying.

Adi
Oh good so you do support the petition.
Yes, but i wold like for the petition to be more clear : replace the CRTC with more pro consumers and less corporate shills.

Adi

tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
MVM
join:2008-01-16
Gilbert, AZ

tubbynet to FFH5

MVM

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure.
this statement is wholly untrue when you look at the fact that we're discussing bell canada, who, much like its southern counterpart, did not build out the infrastructure out of its own pocket, rather it was a government-sponsored monopoly. it was the *people* that sponsored the cost of the network - hence where there is competitive access rules.

now, if you were actually interested in following canadian broadband policy (rather than just trolling), you would understand that bce is actually building out its own adsl2+ infrastructure. indie isps are not granted access to this since (gasp) bell built the network! bell has received a large roi from the sheer number of people using their services. however, since they have throttled (and now initiated ubb), they are simply trying to limit the threat of a clec triple play using iptv. this is a money-grab, pure and simple with the crtc acting like a bell puppet organization.

now, aside from a few select markets that verizon is overbuilding fios in att land, where do we have competition? i live in one of the largest metropolitan areas in the nation (we were 7th the last time i checked) and its either cox cable or qwest dsl (i can only get 7meg adsl, 2+ for me). qwest wants the same price for 7/896k dsl as i pay for my 15/1.5 cable line (since i don't want (a) a contract or (b) a pots line). however, prices have been steadily going up between the two, almost within months of each other.

but, i guess in your little world, you wouldn't see how bad we really are off in terms of net infrastructure



q.

DataRiker
Premium Member
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 edit

DataRiker to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

said by Guspaz:

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.
You are in the mess you are in because of PAST CRTC policies that inhibited innovation and a ROI for coming out with enhanced infrastructure. CLECs and independent ISPs are the enemies of innovation. They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure. Maybe if the CRTC was more like the US FCC in the past, companies in Canada would have invested in the improvement of the infrastructure.
As others have said here, absolutely positively false.
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2

backness

Member

Re: It's sad...

and really what we are fighting for is access to the copper that is run to each of our residences.

Bell wants to double charge us for the small component that they provide.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: It's sad...

said by backness:

and really what we are fighting for is access to the copper that is run to each of our residences.

Bell wants to double charge us for the small component that they provide.
Your arguing for the copper, and middle mile/backhaul fiber. GAS is not the same as 3rd party DSL in the USA. GAS is pretty damn socialist. With GAS its a circuit from your house, from one coast to the other of Canada to your 3rd party DSL over Bell's long haul network. GAS is the direct opposite of Local Loop Unbundling.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Skippy25 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

said by Guspaz:

I used to brag to my American friends about the great broadband industry that we had in Canada, about how we could get fast speeds at great prices. Since then, the CRTC has allowed the US to fly past us into the distance while we're stuck watching helplessly as our internet bills are about to double.
You are in the mess you are in because of PAST CRTC policies that inhibited innovation and a ROI for coming out with enhanced infrastructure. CLECs and independent ISPs are the enemies of innovation. They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure. Maybe if the CRTC was more like the US FCC in the past, companies in Canada would have invested in the improvement of the infrastructure.
Caution: Stock jockey at work!

Ignite
Premium Member
join:2004-03-18
UK

3 edits

Ignite to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

You are in the mess you are in because of PAST CRTC policies that inhibited innovation and a ROI for coming out with enhanced infrastructure. CLECs and independent ISPs are the enemies of innovation. They drag down the profits of the companies that BUILT the infrastructure. Maybe if the CRTC was more like the US FCC in the past, companies in Canada would have invested in the improvement of the infrastructure.
Truly spoken like someone with no idea what he's talking about beyond unfettered capitalism.

It's not the infrastructure that's the problem in Canada, it's exactly the kind of unfettered capitalism that you get so horny about that's the problem. Thanks to no robust regulation there is an effective cartel of ISPs in Canada offering similarly poor services at similarly high prices.

You appear to think that if you allow companies to do as they please they'll invest, generally they won't as there's no incentive to. Why bother to spend money on infrastructure when you can wring every last drop out of the existing infrastructure and collect the profits without the CapEx?

The only reason why Verizon et al have invested is because they want to keep up with the cable companies, that's it. Saying that though Verizon are the only one who is making the significant investment.

In Canada it's not such an issue, HSI services being expensive and restricted the relatively limited investment by BCE in remotes is more than enough. More amusing is that these remotes are limited to 16Mbit ADSL2+ services (Bell retail only).

In short do go away corporate shill, or alternately go and get a clue what you're talking about, it has always been the case that companies invest in infrastructure until it is required to preserve their market share and profits, which in your world of unfettered capitalism (Canada under the CRTC) isn't needed. Oh yes, the exception being when they get government money, just as Bell did to build the original plant.

Of course they are entitled to an ROI on their investment since, what they are not entitled to do is create an environment which preserves their retail domination and prevents other ISPs who rent their infrastructure from differentiating themselves.

Look at Canada's markets, services are expensive, capped, throttled, or all of the above. Virtually all products in Canada are bandwidth capped and expensive per GB with very little differentiation between the cable companies and the ILEC, so little differentiation it stinks of collusion. That's what your corporate nirvana produces.

hurleyp
join:2000-06-20
Ottawa, ON

hurleyp to Guspaz

Member

to Guspaz
The CRTC is a relic from another era. The sooner this bureaucratic monolith is shut down the better.
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC

zod5000

Member

There would be no independent ISP's without CRTC

As bad as they are, aren't they the ones who also regulate that the cableco's/telco's have to lease out their equipment?

as messed up as this is, if it wasn't regulated, bell/shaw/telus/rogers wouldn't lease out their equipment.

The underlying problem is the independent isp's, at some point, rely on equipment that isn't theres. That makes them vulnerable.

They telco's/cableco's don't want that competition, don't like leasing out their lines/equipment, and do everything they can to mess it up.

the only way we'd ever have any real competition, is if a company installed all their own equipment, including the last mile, and thats not really financialy feasible.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

Re: There would be no independent ISP's without CRTC

said by zod5000:

the only way we'd ever have any real competition, is if a company installed all their own equipment, including the last mile, and thats not really financialy feasible.

Nationalize the 'last mile', make it open and neutral for all providers, and many problems will disappear. Once that happens there will be lots of independents chomping at the bit to install facilities-based equipment.

denis_cgy
@boltbrowser.com

denis_cgy

Anon

Re: There would be no independent ISP's without CRTC

said by MaynardKrebs:

said by zod5000:

the only way we'd ever have any real competition, is if a company installed all their own equipment, including the last mile, and thats not really financialy feasible.

Nationalize the 'last mile', make it open and neutral for all providers, and many problems will disappear. Once that happens there will be lots of independents chomping at the bit to install facilities-based equipment.
My thoughts exactly. Create a broadband public trust. Fostering a level playing field for all wannabes then you will see how fast competion will spur.

Same thing should happen for cellphones. Taxpayers/consumers paid for all the infrastructure anyway, its time to appropriate it and create a level playing field for all.

If domestic players are not being born from this, then bring international players. Let's make these domestic telcos/cableco's work for our loyalty and business.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: There would be no independent ISP's without CRTC

and who pays for that?

you forgot that problem. your taxes will go up so you can then bitch about that.


MrReality
@cgocable.net

MrReality

Anon

Re: There would be no independent ISP's without CRTC

said by hottboiinnc4:

and who pays for that?
The for-profit companies using it. They, in turn, will pass those costs on to customers.
said by hottboiinnc4:

you forgot that problem.
Nope. Try again.
said by hottboiinnc4:

your taxes will go up so you can then bitch about that.
Nope. The "Federal copper COGS recovery fee" line item will increase well past parity...until competition flattens it.
said by hottboiinnc4:

I know, I know. Properly regulated capitalism is much more difficult to manipulate. Life's tough.
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4

Member

Re: There would be no independent ISP's without CRTC

Recovery fees are passed onto the Enduser and everyone else. And what happens when its not enough to pay for the network? Tax payers will pay for it.

sbrook
Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa

1 recommendation

sbrook to zod5000

Mod

to zod5000
I think some understanding of the way the CRTC works and is influenced is in order here to understand why there would possibly be no independent ISPs were it not for the CRTC and why they appear to be killing off those same ISPs today.

The CRTC is an agency set up under the auspices of two government ministries ... the Industry ministry, and the Heritage ministry. The Heritage ministry is responsible more for content of telecomms ... like CanCon. The Industry ministry controls the more technical aspects of telecomms, and most specifically the aspects under the telecommunications act and other pieces of legislation.

The Telecommunications Act is not a highly detailed piece of legislation. It is mostly a set of guidelines that the Industry Ministry must turn into enactable laws through regulation.

The Department of Communications (back whenever) created the CRTC as a quasi judicial regulatory agency, partially independent of government with supposedly knowledgable people in these fields to create, implement and enforce the regulations.

Because the Act is full of generalities, these matters can be influenced by the ministries. So, for example, the idea of anti-competitive behaviour that the act talks about is influenced by the government of the day's policies.

Similarly, because the CRTC is a committee of predominantly players from the industries being regulated, there is the potential for a conflict of interest.

This means that while the CRTC created the vehicle for independent ISPs at a time when the government of the day was not influenced by the idea of the "free market", were the idea to be floated today, it's likely they would not create that vehicle today. A CRTC differently staffed and under the influence of a different government might result in an entirely different scenario unfolding today.

Abolishing the CRTC would simply move power of creating legislation back to the Minister of Industry and the government of the day. The last two ministers of industry have not been particularly savvy on this or any other technological stuff, and far more inclined to see Canadian industry sold off! So, abolishing the CRTC might not be such a good idea.

Personally, I think the CRTC is a reasonable idea ... but what needs to change is how the committee and so on is made up, and to reduce the influence of the government of the day.

RedWatch
join:2003-02-21
Toronto, ON

RedWatch

Member

There is a petition

There is a petition
»dissolvethecrtc.ca
djforumsguy
join:2004-10-03
Hamilton, ON

djforumsguy

Member

Re: There is a petition

I doubt this will kill the CRTC (Although I did sign the petition), but we need the public to know how corrupt and anti-competitive the recent practices of the CRTC are.

With head employees working for the telecommunications industry for 28 years (Or was it 29?), it's obvious that there is a huge conflict of interest. It's unfair to be able to make the rules that affect your friends.
binded2
join:2009-08-11
Providence, RI

binded2

Member

get them where it hurts

get back at them there running people outta bussiness
and raping cust. with high charges make it impossable for them to do there bussiness

cut there lines
remove lines
what ever it takes
till they play fair
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned)

Member

even if it goes does it matter?

Clement's focus on longevity appears to be a tacit acknowledgement that Bill C-61, the last Conservative copyright bill that died with the federal election call last fall, was not sufficiently forward looking. With specific references to VHS tapes, emphasis on digital rights management, and blocks on the use of network-based personal video recorders, critics argued that bill was past its best before date the moment it was introduced. Designing copyright reforms that are not rendered outdated soon after introduction requires identifying the right principles to use as a metric against which new provisions can be measured. At least four come to mind.

YOU either get net neutrality OR better copyright and htey have us at both angles badly, as the above shows they are wrangling to get bill c61 back on the books better worded is all to remove a VERY few of the worst issues, if i download essentially record a tv show what is the difference to a VCR?
How does 50 year copyright benefit ME OR YOU?
YOu notice a huge focus away form those issues to the "digital locks " BS, that already they know they lose so lets make it priority issue and forget the rest.

Sorry geist your idea of fair and ballanced is in at min keeping it as is which is 50 years and loads a shite for actors and musicians to keep status quo WILL NOT DO.

Regarding the crtc well if it goes then what give that power to what harper and iggy who both are copyright shils that will just do the same stuff?

Perhaps a push to make it illegal for any corporation over 100 employees to lobby might be a way to stop things, after all its said small to medium business is what drives the economy allow them to be heard a little more. END BIG CORPORATE LOBBYING FOR GOOD. BAN them OUTRIGHT FOR any political gifts afterwards for ten years to any politician.

Copyright is why after all BCE stated its doing the throttle so lets end it and make laws that exempt ISPS form being liable for what users do just as if i lend you my car and you run 50 people over i am not liable.

ALSO one way to tackle throttling is to mandate that if you do not within a reasonable time fix the issue that a refund be givin to the user ship at a proportion to what the throttle is.

so if you 95% us for 10 hrs of the day we get that back as a refund after say 6 months of you doing it. AND you cant just stop and then restart it ( must go at min 6 months no issues)

logical and gives them time to get stuff fixed.

1000 gigabit speed with a 1GB cap is useless.
Getting rid of the CRTC will just put the power ofr all htis in peoples hands that have already shown to be bought and paid for thats right im saying it ALL LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES ARE BRIBED OFF on this issue. See how the copyright consultations are now being shilled out to become a at min keep as is or it gets worse.

WHY the hell should some jerk actor or musician get MORE RIGHTS? Take the rights form the big distribution houses 1st. lower the copyright terms to 12 years and that will sort out the stupidity and also slow the ISPS takeover and want to SCREW you for net neutrality.

IF you can't see how they are both intertwined too bad , i and many do. I will vote for the green party who has as a solid policy all the things i want to see happen. The liberals had many MPS for it and then iggy screwed them to do it.
The NDP leader is a writer and part of there union to stay a member he will be and have to not speak about good reform that makes sense , and how about that charlie angus ...silenced ? Hows that feel Charlie?
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: even if it goes does it matter?

Vehicle Safety through Electrical Measures Act of 2009.

1. enable licensing of intellectual property that is a part of a vehicle
2. provides penalties and sanctions for violating license agreement of the technology and IP of the vehicle
3. permits vehicle manufacturers to use DRM to ensure the warranty validity and the public safety in the vehicles
4. creates licensing mechanism for legal repair entities for said vehicles
5. prohibits circumvention of DRM on vehicles

Welcome to the future!

DJMASACRE
join:2008-05-27
Nepean, ON

DJMASACRE

Member

Obama creates positive change, U.S goes Beserk

Isnt that was Obama is doing in the U.S now, getting the bullshit out of the senate ... so stupid people cant do crap like this. yeah Republicans hate him dont they, no wonder eh.

people still get pissed at him for trying to do the right things, what an upside down world we live in

•••
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

answer is easy

Answer is easy, do what Britain did with their scheming lying ILEC,

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach

Make the ILEC sell off the last mile/plant, and the ILEC becomes a CLEC/customer of the plant owner, like every other CLEC/competitor. Ban the plant owner from offering services to the end user. This way the plant owner can NEVER get profit by controlling the pipes, since they have no content to put over their pipes by law, and can't sell or advertise to the end user. Their only business model would be selling bigger better pipes to CLECs. Not limiting content and making exclusive deals violating common carrier to make profit.

•••

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron

Premium Member

If it must stay...

Then fire everyone there,

have the new board set a "hard churn" policy and nationalize (or at least not of profit it) the last mile. So that everyone one who sells directly to consumers isn't profiting off artificial scarcity created by pipe control.
JimBee
Premium Member
join:2003-03-28
Ottawa, ON

JimBee

Premium Member

Most people don't understand...

The problem is people don't understand the issue...it's technological.

The average Canadian doesn't understand how the internet works, let alone how it's delivered.

It's up to people who DO understand to dumb it down and explain it completely with analogies that are accurate so that the layman can comprehend.

The only reason the CRTC is getting away with all of this is because Joe Blow doesn't understand what it means/how it affects them.

The ONLY way Canadians are going to act on this type of issue is if the conclusions/consequences are spoon-fed to them.

The internet-literate community is up in arms, obviously. I bet 95% of those who signed that petition did so because they know at least the basics of how it affects them.