Canadian Government Rejects Net Neutrality Rules

An anonymous reader writes "The Canadian Press reports that the Canadian government appears ready to reject net neutrality legislation, instead heeding the arguments of large telecommunications companies . Michael Geist has posted transcripts of the documents which can be summarized as the government thinks that blocking or prioritizing content is acceptable, it knows that this runs counter to recommended policy, and it doesn't care because it plans to the leave the issue to the dominant telecommunications providers."

Comments

what's the problem?

[boxlight]

I don't understand the problem here. ISPs should be free to provide what they want, right?

I mean, if I want to set up a "family friendly" ISP that blocks all pornographic content, that might be an attractive product for families with young children.

Why should the government decide what content the ISPs provide?

Re:A Common Problem

[Brickwall]

What a tard you are.. according to StatsCan there are just over 1 million unemployed in Canada, half a million fewer than your "fact". The unemployment rate has fallen over the last year to a 30-year low. http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Labour/LFS/ lfs-en.htm And almost all the employment growth has come from Western Canada, which mostly votes Conservative.

Harper cut the GST by 1%, to offset the income tax rate hike. He allowed seniors to split income, to make up for the income trust decision. He hasn't gutted social programs, as the Libs/NDP alleged, but he has ended public funding for politically driven advocacy groups, such as the SoW council. (I have no problem with the SoW existing, but I'll be damned if my taxes are used to support them, while no conservative women groups get funds.) He's given more tax points to the provinces, which pushes power down to lower levels, something most business gurus have been preaching for years. He got an agreement on softwood lumber which the Liberals failed to get in over 13 years; yes, it wasn't a perfect agreement, but then hasn't the hallmark of a good compromise been that neither party is completely satisfied? He gave parents cash to fund their daycare needs as they see fit, instead of creating a massive new child care bureaucracy to impose their statist agenda on our kids.

All in all, he has taken incremental steps that seem like perfectly reasonable compromises. Even on the environmental file, on which I'll agree his recent change of heart is as sudden as Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus, he still refuses to accept the Kyoto pile of doo-doo, which will penalize Canada by billions of dollars, throwing people out of work, and causing all of us to live poorer lives, while allowing China and India to create more new CO2 emissions than Canada would cut, and thus do absolutely nothing to affect climate change.

It saddens me that tards like you get a vote.