 |
 | 
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
 ·Embarq
| Re: "Without Users' Permission" This tactic by Rogers gives them an unfair advantage over other ad suppliers because Rogers gets premium access to their customers. While Google has to fight to get their ad content to consumers, Rogers gets a free ride.
This is exactly what the network neutrality debate is all about, fair access to consumers. | |
|
| Stumbles
join:2002-12-17
Port Saint Lucie, FL | I also read it as Google saying Rogers is violating Google's copyright. | |
|
| 
N10Cities
Is it quittin' time yet?
join:2002-05-07
Podunk, AR
clubs:
·World Lynx
 ·Cox HSI
| said by W8ASA  :"As a general principle, we believe that maintaining the Internet as a neutral platform means that carriers shouldn't be able to interfere with Web content without users' permission," End Quote The last three words of this quote are key. The way I read it is that Google wants a piece of the action somehow, and are just trying to give the impression that they want to protect the user. If there's a buck to be made, Google will figure it out. Why can't those ISPS send their users an e-mail to tell them that they are exceeding the caps? Or possibly a telephone call? That would work if you use the ISP's email system. But a lot of people use Google, Yahoo, etc. for their email and would not receive the message.... | |
|
| | 
meister_sd
Premium
join:2006-01-29
La Mesa, CA
| Re: "Without Users' Permission" said by N10Cities :and would not receive the message.... I agree. I use Cox Cable and the amount of spam that is delivered to the email is overwhelming. I don't mind having a little notice telling me that I'm about to reach my cap as long as that is the ONLY thing I receive. Once they start using it as an advertisement platform - then I'm pissed.
Cox is now using DNS redirection here in San Diego, CA. They do allow you to "opt out" but using different DNS servers. I got that switched about 30 seconds after I saw the redirect. | |
|
GlenQuagmire
Giggidy Giggidy Giggidy Goo
Premium
join:2004-02-16
Grand Rapids, MI | Wallet Google can crush Rogers with their wallet.
--
Yes, its stuck in a windows this time. | |
|
| 
Bellunder
@teksavvy.com | Re: Wallet I wish the subscribers of all the Rogers services would crush him with lawsuits. Good god man... Canada has become worst than Russia. | |
|
| | james1
join:2001-02-26
antarctica | Re: Wallet Yeah, because a monopoly on internet access is just as bad as severe human rights violations. | |
|
|
NoView
@teksavvy.com
| said by GlenQuagmire :Google can crush Rogers with their wallet. But Rogers can block all google sites. | |
|
MagMan
Life is simpler when you tell the truth.
Premium
join:2003-10-01
Westlake, OH | Money Money is the root of all evil. 
The almighty dollar !!
Which has not been all that almighty of late. | |
|
| 
MysticGogeta
The Robot Devil
Premium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
clubs: | Re: Money Yes but Google probally could buy out Rogers if it wanted to. | |
|
| |
xyzzy420
@startek.com
| Re: Money I have mixed feelings on this one...
I would be happy to see a Canada with that crook Ted Rogers having so much influence, but do I really want his "innovations" to become part of Google? I mean, the guy brought throttling, negative option pricing, overpriced data plans, and these superimposed ads to my fair country...And while I think Google would do less to dick my compatriots around, I don't want a company as crooked as Rogers to infuse Google with its rotten culture..hahaha | |
|
| | 
Snickerdo
Premium
join:2001-02-28
St Catharines, ON
·Cogeco Cable
| said by MysticGogeta :Yes but Google probally could buy out Rogers if it wanted to. While I certainly don't have any data, I have a feeling it would probably be the other way around. | |
|
| | |
MysticGogeta
The Robot Devil
Premium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
clubs: | Re: Money There is no way Rogers even has a tenth on the amount it would cost to buy out Google. You might as well buy Microsoft.
--
Team Discovery-Join the fight | |
|
| | | |
Snickerdo
Premium
join:2001-02-28
St Catharines, ON
·Cogeco Cable
| Re: Money said by MysticGogeta :There is no way Rogers even has a tenth on the amount it would cost to buy out Google. You might as well buy Microsoft. I'd be quite shocked if Google were anywhere even near the size of Microsoft, but if you have data I'd love to know for sure.
--
I swear that I will faithfully and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. | |
|
| |
| |
MysticGogeta
The Robot Devil
Premium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
clubs: | Re: Money Perhaps Women? | |
|
| | | 
Vertickle
join:2003-08-05
Madison, AL | Re: Money Not touching that one. | |
|
| | |
| | 
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| It is. The other is a misquote that has gotten a life of its own after "the love of" was dropped. | |
|
| | | SylphFi
Premium
join:2007-06-07
Moses Lake, WA |  Re: Money
| |
|
DiscardedVet
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Sturgis, SD
| Analogy Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is?
I pay the post office to deliver my mail as sent by the original sender.
It would be illegal for Walmart to read it.
I pay my ISP to deliver my content as sent by the original site.
Why is it not illegal for them to read it (Packet inspect)?
--
Bush is the Prez....Think Patriot Act II....This outspoken dissident....In jail I'll be soon. | |
|
| shashinka
join:2000-09-16
West Boylston, MA
·Verizon Online DSL
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: Analogy said by DiscardedVet :Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is? I pay the post office to deliver my mail as sent by the original sender. It would be illegal for Walmart to read it. I pay my ISP to deliver my content as sent by the original site. Why is it not illegal for them to read it (Packet inspect)? It all depends on what they are doing. If they are just giving you system messages then that is fine my be. But if they start advertising over what I am looking at then that I have a problem with. If I want to visit a site with ads that is my choice. It is my choice to block or allow them. If Roger's or another ISP takes it further then that is wrong. | |
|
| 
newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
 ·Vonage
| said by DiscardedVet :Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is? Or television stations inserting content over the top of broadcasting content . . . oh wait . . . they do that NOW.
--
Ö¿Ö
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's Newest Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? | |
|
| | 
Rob
In Deo speramus
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
·Comcast
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Analogy said by newview :said by DiscardedVet :Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is? Or television stations inserting content over the top of broadcasting content . . . oh wait . . . they do that NOW. When they were doing it in the bottom left/right corner with no sound, it was manageable. Now the ads have gotten bigger and have noise, which distracts from the show.
Funny how they don't do it during commercials | |
|
| | |
newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
·Vonage
| Re: Analogy said by Rob :said by newview :said by DiscardedVet :Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is? Or television stations inserting content over the top of broadcasting content . . . oh wait . . . they do that NOW. When they were doing it in the bottom left/right corner with no sound, it was manageable. Now the ads have gotten bigger and have noise, which distracts from the show. Not only is it distracting . . . it's damn disruptive. I particularly loathe the ones that show up to cover sub-titled dialog during key parts of the plot.
--
Ö¿Ö
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's Newest Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? | |
|
| | | popper
join:2006-05-30
Baton Rouge,
| This practice has annoyed me from the get-go and why the lower 25% of the screen? That area should be reserved for closed caption only. It's the number one reason 90% of my TV time is devoted to DVDs.
In hindsight, many ISP's also provide the cable for the TV and since their customer's have "allowed" this spam into their $5K plasma TV why wouldn't they simply accept
additional spam into their PC?
This topic prolly requires a thread of its own. | |
|
| | battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | That one would be like the cable company sticking their logo over the network bug. | |
|
| bgraham
join:2001-03-15
Smithtown, NY | Maybe someone at Google is smart enough to bury a couple of lines of java or activex code in their web pages to remove the code inserted by Rogers. | |
|
| | 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| Re: Analogy said by bgraham :Maybe someone at Google is smart enough to bury a couple of lines of java or activex code in their web pages to remove the code inserted by Rogers. Not even that would be necessary. Switch Google over to https and you will have an encrypted end-to-end link. No injecting code in to that stream unless you are up to cracking the encryption. | |
|
| | | TheMG
join:2007-09-04
Edmonton, AB | Re: Analogy Maybe all site should start doing https.
Oh wait... security certificates are not cheap. | |
|
| | | | 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Analogy said by TheMG :Maybe all site should start doing https. Oh wait... security certificates are not cheap. And encryption slows things down a little.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
|
| | | | |
| | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by TheMG :Maybe all site should start doing https. Oh wait... security certificates are not cheap. Google already has certificates for when you login and optionally for when you use gmail. Its just a configuration change. | |
|
| | baj475
join:2004-11-02
Chico, CA | The post says that content is being injected via javascript. Is there any reason why NoScript would not automatically block the script? | |
|
| | |
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
edit:
December 12th, @11:48AM
| Re: Analogy said by baj475 :The post says that content is being injected via javascript. Is there any reason why NoScript would not automatically block the script? noscript will work, but most people won't be blocking either Google or their own ISP. Most people would have those on their noscript whitelist. Of course, if Rogers started doing more than cap notifications, you could pull them from the whitelist and block their content. | |
|
| | | | baj475
join:2004-11-02
Chico, CA | Re: Analogy HCT,
I do not have Google on my NoScript white list and it works just fine. NoScript will allow you to temporarily allow scripts if needed. | |
|
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by baj475 :The post says that content is being injected via javascript. Is there any reason why NoScript would not automatically block the script? The javascript simply writes in the code, and its added through straight HTML anyways. It would only take one mouse click for them to make a non-javascript version. | |
|
| jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | WTF does Wal-mart have to do with anything, other than the fact that it's fashionable to ridicule them? | |
|
| | 
phantasm11b
Premium
join:2007-11-02
Cocoa, FL | Re: Analogy It's called an Analogy. | |
|
| | | rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Re: Analogy I understand but I agree with jester. Wal-Mart is used because they are the latest fashionable "evil empire". While I'm sure Wal-Mart is not the perfect employer, I don't think they employ children to stock their shelves as do some overseas manufacturers. Would they if they could? Maybe but so would every other corporation. They just make a lot of money and that makes them a huge target. It's no different than the oil companies. When gas was cheap, we didn't seem to mind they made billions. Now that gas is expensive and they are making billions x 10, people love to hate them.
We all hate success unless we can share in it. Do the people in Boston hate the NFL Patriots?
Here's my solution -- if you think a company is evil because it makes a lot of money, buy some of its stock. Capital gains on your stock portfolio provides a wonderful evil empire attitude adjustment.
I have no inside knowledge but I suspect that even though we're rooting for Google in this one, they are likely a more true evil empire. If we knew, we'd all probably be very afraid of just how much data Google has on all of us. If you happened to buy their stock at IPO, I seriously doubt if you care what people think of it. | |
|
| | | |
DiscardedVet
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Sturgis, SD
edit:
December 13th, @05:16PM
| Re: Analogy I used WalMart because an ad from them was sitting on my damn desk when I came up with the analogy !!!!
JEEZ !! | |
|
|
Readin da mails
@sbcglobal.net
| said by DiscardedVet :Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is? Well if that's the case, you can make the same argument about why Gmail itself is bad. It, too, "reads" mail and inserts ads that are "suggested" by the contents of the email.
said by DiscardedVet :I pay my ISP to deliver my content as sent by the original site. Where, specifically, in your TOS does it say that you're paying the ISP to "deliver content as sent by the original site?"
I don't blame you for feeling that way, but I also think you might be confusing what you *want* with what your ISP is legally *obligated* to provide.
Big difference.
said by DiscardedVet :Why is it not illegal for them to read it (Packet inspect)? Likely because the TOS that you agreed to when you signed up for service does not specifically prohibit them from doing this.
I'm not entirely convinced that tampering with "web content" is equivalent with "tampering with the mails" in legal circles. | |
|
| | |
| | |
the mails
@sbcglobal.net
| Re: Analogy said by Readin da mails :
Well if that's the case, you can make the same argument about why Gmail itself is bad. It, too, "reads" mail and inserts ads that are "suggested" by the contents of the email. said by dualsub2006 :Wrong. Gmail and Google search is a this for that free service. You know full well that by using Gmail or Google.com or any other free email or web search service that you will get ads served up that are relevant to what you are reading. It comes as no surprise. You're right: I *do* know full well that Gmail serves ads according to the mail you send using the service. The problem here is that in your rush to yell "wrong!" you failed to include the original quote that I responded to in my original post:
Isn't this tantamount to ....... Walmart opening and reading my snail-mail, then insterting adverts correlating to what the content of the mail is?
Notice that the first sentence of my response began "Well, if that's the case."
The OP was upset because he felt that the issue at hand was tantamount to his ISP "reading his mail" by their possibly inspecting his traffic in order to insert their own stuff. The point I was making was that if he found that premise upsetting.....that Gmail itself operated under that premise.
That's the point I was making, okay? Please read the posts in full before you respond. If you had, you would have actually understood the point being made. And you clearly didn't. | |
|
| battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | It's more like the post office putting a Blockbuster.com sticker on the out side of your netflicks.com package. | |
|
| lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL
| your all drolling on about how rogers should not insert adverts - well they aren't - they are sending out bandwith cap notices. other folks with their own agendas have taken that FACT and added their own editorial comments that it could be used for advertising. BUT in actual fact they are not using it as such. Pleases stop the madness and irelvent speculation on what they could do until they DO DO. Ha DO DO get it ?. | |
|
norrab
join:2001-03-02
Burlington, ON | What about other parties of influence? I'm sure Google wouldn't be the only party irked by this. Too bad they don't have screenies of other sites that could have influence with Rogers' content sprawled across it (Microsoft, EFF, Government landing pages, major bank landing pages, etc.) | |
|
hough
@navy.mil
| sick This is absolutely outragous. If this becomes an acceptable practice for ISP's I think I will just have to quit using the internet. I like many of you have watched the internet evolve. We dealt with the million popups asking us to watch donkey action when we typed whithouse.com instead of .gov and we somehow have worked through it. we have popup blockers anti fishing filters and anti virus. Those of us who have remained faithful did so because we believed that because we pay our isps for our gateway it was for us to use how we wanted. WE PAY THEM!!! Given that there are so few broadband options for a lot of people it is not very effective to try to make a statement with our wallets. I personally only have one choice and if verizon starts doing this I quit. Im going to take my toys and go home. | |
|
votum76
join:2002-01-29
Matawan, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Or Google Putting Ads next to email of competitors. Oh Wait google does the same thing in gmail, they put ads related to the content of your email on the right hand side. If it's an email advertisement those are likely direct competitors. Kinda the pot calling the kettle black. Both services are adding content to user requested information, which they could possibly (an in google's case do make money off of) Seems like google has already beat them to the punch in doing it. I guess everyone forgot because gmail is so cool. I admit I use it too. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
Armour
join:2002-01-08
Scarborough, ON
| Rogers tests injecting content into web pages This is one of the few things that I thing Rogers has done right if they leave it at notifying users that they are nearing limits.
I can not stand them as a whole but this one I do agree on many users have complained they do not no when they reach their limit and are charged addition usage fee. It dose not slow down your service at all or add to your data usage as the page is injected after the gateway where your data usage is measured. Any browsing of Rogers sites or locations on their network within the gateway dose not add to your monthly usage.
The only time this is employed is when you reach a particular limit near your cap that the router routes the packet to have the information injected. Click on the confirmation or opt out and you’ll never see the message again and normal routing takes place. They are in no way reading or cashing information. Not more then they currently do.
This is one thing I would accept and would like to see on my own service. If it gets used for anything beyond that then I would be up in arms and severely pissed.
Step back and look what it is really doing it is helping people that may not be tech savvy from being hit with higher usage fees. Their dammed if they do dammed if they don’t.
I will never use their services again and am not normally a defender of their practices but this one time I have to say it right on track that helps users where it actually counts. | |
|
|
xyzzy420
@startek.com
| Re: Rogers tests injecting content into web pages I understand your sentiments, but it's possible for Rogers to add and modify banners without even making it clear to you that it's them with this technology...There are a million other ways that Rogers can provide this service without without engaging in tactics without engaging in tactics associated with the West's favourite Trotskyist. (Hint: It starts with George and ends with Orwell.) | |
|
Morty
@aliant.net | Rogers SUX I think what Rogers is doing is very intrusive. They are supposed to be a service provider - If they want to send a notice about my bandwidth usage, use email. | |
|
Bellunder
@teksavvy.com | Living in Canada as an excuse didn't work for Conrad As Ted lives in Canada why do whatever you want... they're not building anymore courts or jails. The long arm of the law (thank god for America) caught up with Conrad so the long list of who's next is who gets it next. | |
|
|
| 
Unit649
I B U, Who U B?
Premium
join:2000-01-22
Stockton, CA | Re: What if? Easily done.
Directed service, current price.
Non-Directed service is a new tier, priced at the Directed service price X 2. Keeps the accounting easier  | |
|
| Armour
join:2002-01-08
Scarborough, ON
| said by tc1uscg :SO, for those who think Google is blowing smoke.. What if your telco re-directed your calls through other networks that cost you more to make a call then it normally would? Oh wait.. they can't. It's illegal to do so.. So what shouldn't the same rule apply to ISP's? They provide the pipe from end to end and that's all they SHOULD provide. If they want to "subsidise" themselves at our expense, why not offer another level of service. Directed service, half price. Non-Directed service. Full standard price.  What are you talking about? That doesn’t even equate to what is going on with Rogers injecting notifications because it doesn’t cost Google or the subscriber a thing. The other alternative is that the request for a webpage doesn’t get completed at all and that a full warning page comes up with the message.
As for other alternatives such as e-mail what about house holds with multiple users? How dose sending a message to an e-mail account help if the current person using the service is not the account holder? I have an email account from my provider but I never use it because I own a domain and use my domain e-mails. I’ve done service calls in peoples houses and they were not eaven aware that they had an email account from their provider because they have always used hotmail. My provider allows you to log in and see your usage. Fortunately for me there are no caps but if there were how dose that help alert if I was close to a limit particularly when they are 4 internet users in our house hold. Every use should log in every day and check where they are in usage? Phone ? the overhead and cost involved in that to call and tell some one that they are reaching a cap then people would complain that they getting calls at three in the morning because they near a cap then when that practice ends they would probly complain that they didn’t receive a call when some one in their household exceeded the limit over night.
This is a right balance of notifying customers who are not tech savvy that they are approaching a limit that if they exceed will cost them more. How is that a bad thing? If you don’t like it you can opt out of the notifications or change providers. There are other more pressing things to beat Rogers over the head about such as bit torrent throttling and blocking various email ports then this.
There have been threats of class actions over difficulties of people finding their limits. Other providers don’t eaven list their invisible caps and people get up in arms over this. Yet here is a provider doing exactly what people were asking for a clear and easy to understand placement of monthly limits if there are any and a easy way to be notified if they are exceeding those caps.
With that all b |
|
Rogers Website Messages Irk Google
