Slashdot Mirror


CTRC Orders Big ISPs To Provide Matching Speeds For Resellers

Meshach writes "In Canada there has been a regulatory decision rendered by the CRTC ordering ISPs to provide the same speed to resellers as they do for their own customers. 'Smaller internet providers such as Teksavvy and Execulink had argued that without requirements to offer matching speeds, the big companies would put them out of business. Bell and Telus are selling internet connections of up to 25 and 15 megabits per second respectively over newer fibre-based networks, but smaller providers can typically offer speeds of no more than five megabits per second over older copper-based infrastructure. After holding a public hearing earlier this year, the CRTC now says it will allow phone companies to charge smaller providers an extra 10-per-cent mark-up to use their newer infrastructure in order to recoup the costs of their investments. The regulator also said it would require cable companies to modify their existing internet access services to make it easier for smaller, "alternative" providers to connect to them.'"

21 of 91 comments (clear)

  1. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The CRTC did something reasonable for a change! Woo!

    That's a step in the right direction, however the lines are still owned by the monopolies, and they still set the base prices.

    1. Re:Wow! by cgenman · · Score: 2, Informative

      I remember back when DSL last-mile resellers would sell access per-user access to ISP's for $5 per month more than they were charging direct customers, for whom they also provided backbone access, service, and aquisition. It met the letter of the law for open networks, but it basically guaranteed that they wouldn't have to compete with small ISP's for service and access charges.

  2. Hmmm... by msauve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The summary left out the "up to..." with regard to speeds.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  3. About Canada by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For those foreign readers one must realize that in Canada we have very little competition in that the competitors don't really try and compete. I doubt they conspire but they just like things as they are. With each other cut throat is just not in their nature. But for newcomers cut throat does not even begin to describe the environment. The cards have been traditionally stacked against anyone new. If a newcomer does somehow make it then they are usually bought out by one of the monsters.
    But there has been a sea change. The CRTC(our FCC) that seems to have supported this anti consumer situation is no longer friends with the government and thus the big players have lost their biggest weapon to stop annoying things like pro-consumer companies. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
    Interestingly enough this is not part of an anti-big-business campaign like the Democrats in the US but a pro level playing fields campaign.
    If the government continues on this path we might have a chance to have one of the greatest internet systems at low cost that is found on earth. As a heavy user of this sort of technology I can't wait.

    1. Re:About Canada by causality · · Score: 4, Funny

      Interestingly enough this is not part of an anti-big-business campaign like the Democrats in the US but a pro level playing fields campaign.

      Dear Sir,

      A pro-level playing fields campaign IS an anti-big business campaign. In fact it is an outrage!

      Signed,
      Lobbyists for Major Monopoly ISPs

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    2. Re:About Canada by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Someone modded you funny, but that *is* the operating environment in Canada.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:About Canada by Malc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's always been competition in the DSL market, thanks to the CRTC. For many people though, this is not enough as it's often a case of a choice between cable or DSL. If your phone isn't up to scratch, then you have no or little choice of ISP. That sucks.

      Canada used to be a leader with high speed internet, but has fallen behind in recent years. Why are the DSL resellers limited to the speeds they were offering four years ago? It's about time they were offering ADSL2+, which, ignoring the story's comment about newer fibre based networks, offers up to 25/2.5mbs over phone lines. Not everybody can get that speed of course, but I've just switched over from ADSL to ADSL2+ in London (UK, not ON), and at 3km from the exchange, I'm getting higher speeds than the these resellers in Canada offer.

    4. Re:About Canada by javacowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What are you talking about? The CRTC nearly always sides with Bell. They allowed them to throttle their resellers and imposed a 60 Gb cap on their resellers (which will take effect once Bell discontinues all their unlimited contracts). The CRTC seems determined to put the Bell resellers out of business but for some reason I can't fathom decided to throw them a bone in this case. Maybe this has something to do with just how unpopular the CRTC is among Canadians, with an online petition that has over 10,000 signatures.

      --
      This space left intentionally blank.
    5. Re:About Canada by skids · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We've seen this movie already down here in the U.S. The government steps in to break the stranglehold on the market, forcing the private owners of the infrastructure (ILEC), after much biting and screaming to sell to competitors. Then the small competitors (CLECs) come in. The ones that try to play fair get kneecapped by the ILECs mercilessly. The other ones are ravenous bastards who do things like telling customers to order service from the ILEC (so that they, under common carriage, have to build out any equipment needed to provide the service) and then cancel it. That way the ILEC pays for the equipment, doesn't make their money back on it before it is cancelled, and the CLEC comes in there undercutting the ILEC and the ILEC is forced to let the CLEC use the equipment below cost.

      Every party ends up hating each other's guts, and the customers lose in the end.

      Sometimes I amuse myself by imagining what it would be like if we ran our highway system like that.

      It would make much more sense for the government to buy the infrastructure, maintain it as a break-even venture using private contractors, and provide a fair deal to providers who can distinguish themselves in ways other than "Don't like my prices, I'll just take my ball and go home!" Of course, then the legislative charter would have to be carefully set up to prevent it's use as a giant patronage job bank for do-nothing political allies.

    6. Re:About Canada by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe this has something to do with just how unpopular the CRTC is among Canadians, with an online petition that has over 10,000 signatures [dissolvethecrtc.ca].

      Dude. The "Help nominate William Shatner for Governor General of Canada" Facebook group has over 40,000 votes. I'm not a big fan of the CRTC either, but let's keep things in perspective here ....

    7. Re:About Canada by mini+me · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would argue that competition is strong in this rural region of Ontario. We have a handful of independent telephone companies, a couple of cable companies, not to mention the big players all duking it out. Everyone has their own infrastructure so we do not have problems with the alternative ISPs having to use Bell's last mile, for example.

    8. Re:About Canada by Moryath · · Score: 2, Informative

      As opposed to the US, where the companies DO conspire, and when caught simply buy off the judge or buy off some legislators or "regulators" to claim that it's not "really" collusion, or else just buy up whole local areas for "exclusive" provisioning.

      I remember when Warner Cable ran Viacom Cable out of my hometown and got a monopoly in the county. Ads with a king declaring "I declare Warner Cable for my entire kingdom", and then hiking the rates by $40/month because what was someone going to do - go to a competitor? Switch back to over-the-air, where you could get maybe 3 stations and possibly the local barely-1000-watt PBS with a ton of snow in the picture on a REALLY clear day?

    9. Re:About Canada by Guspaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      the CLEC comes in there undercutting the ILEC and the ILEC is forced to let the CLEC use the equipment below cost.

      In Canada, the CLECs often undercut the ILEC (by running tighter ships and accepting slimmer margins), and the tariffs the ILEC charges the CLEC for use of equipment is far from below cost (indeed, for the new usage-based-billing aspect of the tariffs, it's most likely a markup of 5000-10000% of cost).

    10. Re:About Canada by Guspaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Rogers/Fido doesn't offer TV or wired internet service in Quebec. Internet remains a duopoly between Bell and Videotron, TV has a third competitor (Star Choice/Shaw Direct), but it has a relatively small market share (less customers over the whole country than Videotron has in Quebec alone).

      Only the telephony market sees a fair amount of competition, with a variety of options (POTS/VoIP/cell) and providers (Bell, Videotron, Rogers, all the VoIP carriers, Public Mobile, etc).

      Internet access infrastructure largely remains a duopoly.

  4. CRTTCSJER? by udowish · · Score: 3, Informative

    CTRC should read CRTC..messed up banner

    --
    when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
    1. Re:CRTTCSJER? by skids · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is there also a GRPH, ATTR and DAC? Oh. Is it too late for VGA humor? I suppose nobody got that.

  5. USA by pleappleappleap · · Score: 2, Informative

    If only they would do that here. There's a local ISP here called Cloud 9 Internet which has EXCELLENT service. I'd much rather use them. However I'm forced to deal with Verizon (who don't even know how to route a CIDR block to me) to get my 35Mbps symmetric connection. It' infuriating.

  6. Re:WTF copper lines? by Dynedain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem isn't copper vs. fiber. The problem is that the large telcos who own the backbones and built the networks with government funding/subsidies were forced to open up the copper networks to other smaller players on a reseller basis. Now that fiber to the home is being rolled out, they are not obligated (until now) to grant access to the fiber networks.

    The small companies don't own the physical wires and so by not letting them access the next generation infrastructure rollout, the monopolistic big companies can effectively force them out of the market.

    --
    I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  7. Re:WTF copper lines? by Psaakyrn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, but that's a separate problem which "matching speeds" or "network neutrality" doesn't solve. That's a problem with "monopoly", plain and simple.

  8. FIBE by simonbas · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They should rule against Bell Canada for pretending to have fiber services with their DSL "Fibe" network

  9. Just for comparison by ZDRuX · · Score: 3, Informative

    For comparison to those outside of Canada:

    My current ISP is Rogers Inc and I'm using their 15mbit/1mbit package which costs about $54 and comes with about 90GB cap (that's not a misprint).

    Since I'm a heavy user, I always end up using upwards of 300gb/month, which they charge extra for. My total monthly bill is always $102.

    Now, I can get the same speed service with NO bandwidth cap from "Montreal-DSL" for $54 flat. The two big ISP's Rogers and Bell will now be losing half of the money I was giving to them each month just for being total dicks, and I'm calling to start the switch over tomorrow morning.

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0