Calling all Canadians- ISPs are about to impose usage-based billing on YOU

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 9:55 PM GMT
    http://openmedia.ca/meter

    There are a lot of Canadian's here. Let's try this out.

    Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are about to impose usage-based billing on YOU.

    This means we're looking at a future where ISPs will charge per byte, the way they do with smart phones. If we allow this to happen Canadians will have no choice but to pay MUCH more for less Internet. Big Telecom companies are obviously trying to gouge consumers, control the Internet market, and ensure that consumers continue to subscribe to their television services.

    These Big Telecom companies are forcing small competing ISPs to adopt the same pricing scheme, so that we have no choice but to pay these punitive fees.

    This will crush innovative services, Canada's digital competitiveness, and your wallet.

    We urgently need to send a clear message to Ottawa, saying that we won't stand by while some of the most profitable companies in the country indiscriminately add new fees to our Internet bills. Enough is enough.

    UPDATE: The CRTC just made a decision that paves the way for new internet fees to be added to your bill. To stop this we need to raise our voices now more than ever.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 9:59 PM GMT
    This will suck for all North Americans... as if it is successful in Canada, it won't take long for US telecos to follow suit in their quest to gouge every last penny per byte.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 10:18 PM GMT
    It really will suck if this happens. I'm very happy with my TekSavvy ISP.

    They actually have a customer support line that helps out instead of the annoying computer that talks to you and tries to solve your issues.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 28, 2011 10:31 PM GMT
    Is this what you mean?:
    "The last few months have revealed an alarming trend in the Government of Canada attempting to quietly push through legislation that will affect your use if the Internet. Under proposed legislation Canada Post will be attempting to bilk email users out of "alternate postage fees."


    Read this:
    http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/bill602p.asp
  • timmytwister

    Posts: 169

    Jan 29, 2011 5:09 AM GMT
    Thanks for posting, simple_collision.
    Did some more digging after seeing this post. Evidently it's true. It seems like an effort to cash in on internet video like Netflix. I'm with Telus, but you can bet they're rubbing their hands together now!

    "The federal regulator on Thursday gave Bell Canada the approval to implement so-called usage-based billing to wholesale customers — usually smaller internet service providers that rent portions of its network — within 90 days. Under the plan, Bell will charge wholesale service providers a flat monthly fee to connect to its network, and for a set monthly usage limit per each ISP customer the ISP has.

    Beyond that set limit, users will be charged per gigabyte, depending on the speed of their connections. Customers using the fastest connections of five megabits per second, for example, will have a monthly allotment of 60 GB, beyond which Bell will charge $1.12 per GB to a maximum of $22.50.

    If a customer uses more than 300 GB a month, Bell will also be able to implement an additional charge of 75 cents per gigabyte."


    Whole article:
    http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/10/28/crtc-usage-based-billing-internet.html#ixzz14Kjjiegy

  • TrentGrad

    Posts: 1541

    Jan 29, 2011 8:24 AM GMT
    Rogers already charges for bandwidth: I can download up to 80GB a month...and if I go over that, I'm charged $2.50 per GB up to an additional $50. It is absolutely ridiculous! I used to be with Primus, and they didn't cap your bandwidth or charge any extra...however even their allegedly top DSL package had pathetically slow download times, unless you were using it at...well, this kind of time...between like 2AM and 7AM.

    Primus' prices were extremely competitive with Bell's or Rogers' (and likely competitive to Telus, Shaw, Cogeco, and so on...)- however their customer service was absolutely horrible!

    Rogers and Bell are becoming too powerful!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2011 8:56 AM GMT
    OP I encourage you to post this in other forums too. I feel like this is more then technology, it's political too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2011 9:58 AM GMT
    simple_collision saidIt really will suck if this happens. I'm very happy with my TekSavvy ISP.

    They actually have a customer support line that helps out instead of the annoying computer that talks to you and tries to solve your issues.


    I'm on Teksavvy too. I love it but yeah that would suck if this shit goes through
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2011 10:05 AM GMT
    TrentGrad saidRogers already charges for bandwidth: I can download up to 80GB a month...and if I go over that, I'm charged $2.50 per GB up to an additional $50. It is absolutely ridiculous! I used to be with Primus, and they didn't cap your bandwidth or charge any extra...however even their allegedly top DSL package had pathetically slow download times, unless you were using it at...well, this kind of time...between like 2AM and 7AM.

    Primus' prices were extremely competitive with Bell's or Rogers' (and likely competitive to Telus, Shaw, Cogeco, and so on...)- however their customer service was absolutely horrible!

    Rogers and Bell are becoming too powerful!


    Come with Teksavvy Trent. It's the best believe me. I have been with them since 2006. Never a problem and when you call for customer service no push 1 2 3 4 shit. This company's great!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 29, 2011 10:56 AM GMT
    Assuming that the current status quo is that all ISP plans are a flat rate, unlimited scenario, are they really intending to gouge their customers or are they intending to offer a lower cost option for those customers that don't want to use 100's of GB per month?

    In Australia there are very few ISP's that offer unlimited plans, for the sole reason that the investment required to significantly expand the networks to cope with carte blanche access would result in significantly more expensive monthly fees.

    I'm not saying one option is better than the other but the second does give less heavy users the ability to choose to pay a lot less. For the record, 100GB from Telstra in Australia is just over $100 by the time you pay line rental, etc.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 6:15 PM GMT
    JAKEBENSON saidOP I encourage you to post this in other forums too. I feel like this is more then technology, it's political too.


    Haha- feel free too. I'm just in for spreading the word. Already posted on FB and telling friends who are also affected. They really are not "Tech Savvy", lol pun... I'm not one to talk about politics unless in person. Too many people get opinionated and hurt over forum debates. So I'll leave it up to others to probe into the political implications of this.

    To be honest, the ISP i have is very pissed and is making the transition easy for users. They even show how much your last months Download and upload totals are so you can purchase a plan that maps to your needs. Last night I checked and along with my original cost which was about $45 a month, I will be charged another $55 to obtain another 250 GB. Mind you, this includes both download and upload. I'd be happy if it went into TekSavvy's pockets, but no, it goes to stupid Bell (Bhell)...

    Because I travel- I want access to some of my files at my home computer and so I setup an FTP to allow me to download things from my home computer when I'm on the road. It's convenient and I don't have to rush to load things onto an external or worry about damaging it. It's often saved me.

    For the month of November, my download was 50 GB, upload was 80 GB.

    I don't have time for TV so I don't bother with cable and I prefer getting my movies via Netflix.

    With technology the way it is and how we integrate our media with personal devices (Online gaming, FTP, PS3 - Netflix), this is a terrible step backwards.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 6:29 PM GMT

    But this is capitalism at it's finest. Y'know, no government interference n stuff. Doesn't America stand for that?

    Business is suffering, don't you know? Ask a Republican or tea party person. icon_wink.gif They'll be falling all over themselves anxious to pay these fees and support business.




  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Jan 30, 2011 7:00 PM GMT
    meninlove said

    But this is capitalism at it's finest. Y'know, no government interference n stuff. Doesn't America stand for that?

    Business is suffering, don't you know? Ask a Republican or tea party person. icon_wink.gif They'll be falling all over themselves anxious to pay these fees and support business.

    Mock, socal, SB et al?



    I am sure it will be tried in the U.S. And some end users may choose a usage plan for lower rates.

    Seems that many experts believe these fees can fly because of lack of competition and lobbying by the providers over there.

    The "government" in Canada approved this. Shows you how much of a savior that can be. But the government simultaneously blocks new providers from coming in. They carve out areas and keep up monopolies.

    In the US, we have in many markets a competition between Wireless ( 4g) now, cable and Fiber.

    Where I live you can have either one, and none of them are talking about doing this.

    Answer is competition . What you have now is a lack of competition. And that reliably brings you more cost.

    There are some differences as Canada is less populated and more rural.

    The CRTC a so called government protection failed the Canadians in protecting them from these fees as government usually does.

    So get your facts right, the governement runs the show. This is not an example of Capitalism "meninlove"

    More like a grocery store in the USSR , where everything is expensive and you wait on line to get it.
    http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/CRTC-Finalizes-ISP-UsageBased-Billing-112406
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 7:10 PM GMT
    http://reason.com/blog/2010/12/20/will-neutrality-save-the-inter
    REASON Magazine

    Advocates say that "Net Neutrality" will "save the Internet."

    But does the Internet need saving?

    Net Neutrality is a proposed set of regulatory powers that would grant the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the ability to control how Internet service providers (ISPs) package their services. Proponents argue that such rules are necessary to ensure that ISPs treat all data on the Internet equally and don't slow or even restrict access to various websites and other parts of the Internet.

    However well-intentioned, the practical effect will be to limit consumer choice and grant the federal government unprecedented power over the Internet, all in the name of fixing a problem that doesn't exist in any meaningful way. Indeed, examples of the behavior that Net Neutrality will combat are few and far between.

    Approximately 4 minutes. Produced and animated by Austin Bragg. Written by Zach Weissmueller.

    Visit Reason.tv for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

    Related videos: "Net Neutrality for Dummies" and "Nick Gillespie Talks Net Neutrality, Teen Mags, & More."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 7:14 PM GMT
    Yes, it is. The CRTC is simply allowing this to take place, an example of government non-interference.

    Businesses form agreements with each other where they all get together do this. Competition?

    Back in the 70s and 80s there were little or no service charges at financial institutions for things like cheques on your chequing accounts, and here's a real kicker. When we introduced ATMs we told all that it would be free, no matter what bank's ATM you used. For a little while, it was. Then, fees began appearing. There was a small exodus back to using tellers. Then, the banks began charging people to use live tellers, both deposits and withdrawals unless you had a large swack of cash sitting idle in the accounts then such fees were waived for the wealthy only.

    History; it can be so important.

    Now, many years later, some financial institutions are trying to gain customers by offering free services, but there were many years in between where the consumer was gouged ridiculously. It took a lot of media attention and bank officials having to make public statements that were picked to pieces before they began bowing to public pressure.


    What will likely happen is the opposite: companies will offer a higher flat monthly rate, probably with a locking in contract, to avoid usage (download) charges.



  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Jan 30, 2011 7:22 PM GMT
    The CRTC is proposing rebate rulings nearly daily

    Sound familiar......US Tax code.

    Its an example of your government entity simply failing you.

    Dont blame it on Capitalism. As for most areas that are charging these fees there is NO competition because of a false monopoly.

    In markets where there are more providers things are cheaper simple.


    If you think its a FAILURE of government. Have the Candadian government make it into a UTILITY. Government run internet. See how well that goes. That will be fun.

    sort of like healthcare

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 7:25 PM GMT
    Sometimes I'm baffled by the government here, for a supposedly liberal based government (compared to our southern nabour) we allow cell phone companies and other telecom companies to take advantage when it comes to charging and plans, including things like long distance. Friends from Australia have told me there basically are no such things as long distance mobile charges. Ridiculous!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 7:35 PM GMT

    Er, musclemed, your post office is similar to a Canadian crown corporation. They are not the government.

    Now, the advantage we have here is we can all contact the CRTC and complain. They will respond to that, just as they did the Cable subscriber tax demanded by over-the-air broadcasters.

    With a government body you collectively have a single entity to complain to, often successfully.

    http://www.digitalhome.ca/2009/10/coalition-demands-crtc-stop-television-tax/
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Jan 30, 2011 7:43 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Er, musclemed, your post office is similar to a Canadian crown corporation. They are not the government.

    Now, the advantage we have here is we can all contact the CRTC and complain. They will respond to that, just as they did the Cable subscriber tax demanded by over-the-air broadcasters.

    With a government body you collectively have a single entity to complain to, often successfully.

    http://www.digitalhome.ca/2009/10/coalition-demands-crtc-stop-television-tax/


    The post office is a government run enterprise. Its budget is supplemented by the government via zero interest loans from the treasury it runs deficits every year.( neat political trick)

    Im glad you agree with my point. Complain to the government.

    Make the internet a Utility and just complain to the government
    .

    When your internet is slow or you are on a 8 month wait list dont stand outside my door for a wifi signal.

    Nobody runs to Canada for health-care. Its the opposite, and I know taking care of a few dozen Canadians getting a kidney transplant.
    Now no one will go there for internet either. ( despite Michael Moores BS movie)

    You curse the corporation but fail to see that your government has created a monopoly. So it might as well be run by the government.

    You can replay the same old story over and over others have learned this simple history lesson. In my mind this has been figured out already. Why some would miss the same theme in history is beyond me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 7:46 PM GMT

    As for competition, small ISPs have been forced out of the market or had their market share greatly reduced by the big players who undercut the smaller ISPs rates.

    When this happened in telephone land, the CRTC stepped in and forced the telcos to keep their long distance rates unsubsidized by other sources of revenue. This allowed the smaller players greater market share as they were able to offer lower LD rates, undercutting the giants. Once they had enough market share, the government let go and leveled the playing field.




  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Jan 30, 2011 7:48 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    As for competition, small ISPs have been forced out of the market or had their market share greatly reduced by the big players who undercut the smaller ISPs rates.

    When this happened in telephone land, the CRTC stepped in and forced the telcos to keep their long distance rates unsubsidized by other sources of revenue. This allowed the smaller players greater market share as they were able to offer lower LD rates, undercutting the giants. Once they had enough market share, the government let go and leveled the playing field.






    Sounds like fun. But nothing like Capitalism.

    thank you for making my point.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 7:55 PM GMT
    lol, musclemed, before the Canadian government stepped in US citizens were coming up here for the free healthcare. We never charged 'em, silly us. At times the hospital where we lived was full up in the maternity wards with US mommies.

    Recently, when the H1N1 vaccinations were happening, you could go down to the local community hall on vaccination clinic days (free, no proof of Canadian citizenship required) and look at all the US plates in the parking lot. icon_wink.gif


    So it works both ways.

    Now there's not going to be much a regulatory body can do, because if the fees are denied, a flat rate increase on everyone's bill will happen. I think this is better as it spreads out the cost evenly among all the consumers, and how it has worked in the past. This time, however, the players want it to be more selective. Go after those doing TV stuff on their computers. You're supposed to be taking in 15 -18 minutes of ads per hour, dammit!

    lol!

    I also think this is partly due to the fact that advertisers are likely spending truckloads of cash on TV ads that people aren't seeing because they're not watching TV.

    Don't forget, government works for business, too. Small ones as well, as in the telephone capers.
    At one time all the major telcos joined up in a cross country collective to kill competitors offering lower long distance. Competition is good, but businesses do get together and form enormous power blocks that kill the very competition they piously publicly state they want. They also like to buy up competing chains in retail, keep the business names, and then the poor sucker of a consumer, mad at one business, goes to another only to find, after painstaking investigation, the money going into the same pocket that owns both.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 8:15 PM GMT
    meninlove said... Recently, when the H1N1 vaccinations were happening, you could go down to the local community hall on vaccination clinic days (free, no proof of Canadian citizenship required) and look at all the US plates in the parking lot....
    So it works both ways.

    ...Don't forget, government works for business, too.

    We had a shortage of H1N1 vaccinations last year - not a typical situation. Hence the US plates in Canada. On the other hand, I have met many Canadians on cruises who themselves or someone they knew came to the US for treatment because of the delay in getting care in Canada - even in their view, life-threatening situations involving cancer surgeries. Most of the Canadians I met who liked their system had not needed prompt care.

    Last comment - government typically does not work very well for business.
    ------------------
    To the telco discussion since you started another thread with my screen name in title.

    Because the OP requested Canadian input on a Canadian problem, I would tend to stay out of the discussion. I don't worry about Canadian policies or laws that most US citizens consider objectionable coming here. Even telco policies - e.g. European policies of landline caller paying airtime for mobile phone calling is not adopted here. (In part because European numbering plans make it easy to identify mobile numbers.)

    Assume you believed those of us in favor of minimal government intervention and free market competition would be in a bind because of the telco policies. Not so. Public utilities, such as telcos, are monopolies and as such are, on a state by state basis, subject to regulation. In California we have a Public Utilities Commission that approves rate or feature changes proposed by the telcos. Regulating public utilities is not inconsistent with the free market to the extent the monopolies are not driven by free market competition.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 8:22 PM GMT
    Incidentally, I'm just reading about GB caps on residential customers by your major players like comcast....


    Socal, all our telcos are private, although I'll have to check on that.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 30, 2011 8:32 PM GMT
    meninlove said Incidentally, I'm just reading about GB caps on residential customers by your major players like comcast....

    Socal, all our telcos are private, although I'll have to check on that.

    Our telcos, power and gas companies are private, but are still labeled as "public utilities" because they serve the public and are in an inherently monopolistic position. In other words, in return for them enjoying being a monopoly, they are subject to regulations.