Slashdot Mirror
Gov't Docs Reveal Canada's Net Neutrality Enforcement Failure
An anonymous reader writes "An investigation into the enforcement of Canada's net neutrality rules reveals that virtually all major Canadian ISPs have been the target of complaints, but there have been few, if any, consequences arising from the complaints process. Michael Geist obtained internal CRTC documents on all net neutrality complaints and found
that Rogers was the top target, primarily for throttling access to World of Warcraft. Other notable cases include Bell throttling access
to hotfile.com and Barrett Xplore, a satellite Internet provider, rendering VoIP unusable. Despite the revelations, there have no fines, no audits, and the CRTC has even refused to investigate some cases that appear to raise obvious net neutrality concerns."
I cant really think of any conditions under which that would be "useable". Speed of light limitations and all of that.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Everyone in the ISP industry in Canada is fully aware that the entire CRTC is a joke full of corporate bribery and incompetent schlubs who don't want to do anything that would involve work. (If they were competent and lazy, they'd be joining the corporate bribery gang.)
Internet in Canada is expensive and slow, and it will stay that way until the CRTC stops pandering to Bell and Rogers.
Follow the money.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Regulators should be like engineers, personally responsible for a failure to do their jobs. They should be paid well enough to accept those risks. This will draw more competent people away from lucrative public sector jobs, and ensure that they actually do the job they are required to by law.
As of now, if a regulator refuses to enforce regulations, what recourse do people have? They are not elected, so we can't vote them out.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
And i thought some countries had rampant corruption, seems Canada is the underdog.
Net Neutrality is backed by industries like the music and movie industry specifically so they can put in place a structure to impose controls on consumers later.
It was never about helping you, the consumer, with any problem.
Any thoughts otherwise are purest fantasy as Canada shows us.
Enjoy your chains Canada.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I work with a couple oil companies here in Alberta, and at their drilling sites you'll usually only have internet via a shared connection from data logging companies.
You barely get high-speed, but if you use a lower quality codec and are careful about setup the call quality is as good as a cell phone call. Which compared to nothing makes satellite internet awesome! :)
-Matt
--- Need web hosting?
Before you assume anything about net neutrality being deprioritized, remember that this is business as usual for government agencies.
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
We have more than 100 years of evidence wrt the effectiveness of regulations.
Are there ANY successes? How do these successes compare to the failures, e.g. the 100s of 1000s of people that the FDA's regulations kill every year via inhibiting the development of new drugs and protecting drug manufacturers from competition and the resulting high prices.
Money buys power in all times and places. So far as I can see, the only way to prevent that is to limit the power of the gov to the absolute minimum that is consistent with civilization. We should be experimenting with that lower edge of gov power, as the "sky's the limit" edge we are on has proven a failure in all cases it has been tried in.
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
It's very simple: Have the laws on the books, but don't enforce them. That way, congressmen / MPs can go back to their district / riding and announce that they've gotten some law passed to deal with a problem, but your pals in industry don't have to actually deal with the law.
There were lots of laws that the SEC and Federal Reserve could have used to squash down much of the real estate bubble. They didn't use them. After the fact, there were people and organizations who had committed criminal fraud, and the "Justice" Department has refused to investigate them. There were laws on the book that the MSHA could have used to prevent the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster in West Virginia. They didn't use them, despite lots of evidence that the owner of the mine routinely violated the law and then bribed the judges in the state to ensure that they were effectively immune from lawsuits. There are laws on the books saying that torturing people is illegal. A few grunts have been prosecuted for it, but those giving the orders have gotten off without even a cursory investigation.
Sad to see Harper go that route though. I thought the Canadians had more resistance to the blending of corporate and government power that's so prevalent in the US.
I am officially gone from
At the same time as this is going on, the CRTC is holding a "fact finding mission" to discuss whether or not online video like Netlfix and YouTube should be required to meet CANCON regulations. This means a minimum amount of Canadian content, and paying taxes into a fund to drive the creation of more Canadian content.
Of course this idea is retarded to anyone reading this. How exactly do they propose to enforce content rules on YouTube? Block it at a national level until it's able to show it complies with the rules? Would YouTube even care?
But Bell, Shaw, Telus, MTS, and many other telecom, cable, and content providers are complaining that they can't possibly compete with an $8 a month Netflix account, so they want it regulated/taxed/restricted/throttled. Only Rogers said they didn't see the need to regulate Netflix. You'd think the CRTC (a regulator whose primary purpose is to protect the consumer) would see Netflix and YouTube as an opportunity to increase competition in the marketplace and drive down prices for consumers. But in reality, the CRTC is so deeply influenced by the incumbents it's supposed to be controlling that a internet video tax seems somewhat likely.
Why have a regulator that only further reinforces incumbent and monopoly actors?
I'm not saying remove all regulation, that would make things even worse. What we need is a regulator whose sole focus is increasing market competition, and maximizing consumer benefit.
So we have misleading headlines, and misleading stuff by Geist again. Big shock. Here's the thing, we don't have net neutrality rules in Canada. There are voluntary guidelines. And people got 'upset' and threw a hissyfit the last time the conservatives were going to rip the mandate away from the CRTC on internet related stuff.
And yet the CRTC is continuing the status-quo. So what's the problem fellow Canucks? You want one, but don't want anyone to do anything about it. And you don't want those 'evil conservatives' to remove the mandate but you want the CRTC scrapped.
You blow my fucking mind.
I suppose the upside is old Von Cough(Konrad von Finckenstein), will be gone in a little bit with a new chairman.
Om, nomnomnom...
a rule without sanctions is no rule at all, it's merely advice.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
An unregulated telecom business would have no coverage in rural areas because the density isn't worth the effort. It wouldn't have universal 911, it wouldn't have interoperable services, and you'd have totally unfettered monopolies.
No thanks, telecommunications and utilities should be owned by the people (i.e., the government).
Okay... so, I randomly pick one of these complaints that was closed without an audit....
Bell -- December 2009 --- CRTC #475593
Nice fax of the screenshots saying that the user's activity is being throttled. CRTC correctly finds that this is not the network provider. (if it were it wouldn't put up a page saying it was throttling, they wouldn't be allowed). Sure enough the problem
http://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=6245
is an application issue with mediamonkey as the CRTC stated.
Another random choice:
Rogers - February 2011 - CRTC #513298
No details provided on the complaint. The CRTC correctly states such and that further evidence is required to show a violation from what Roger's listed policy to meet the guideline.
One must assume that this evidence couldn't be recorded as the complainant did not follow up.
The CRTC is not tech support and shouldn't be expected to be....
...the regulations were passed under one party, and now another party is in power and has decided not to enforce those laws. Am I right?
I have to wonder why any part of law enforcement is in the executive branch of government. Inevitably, the law becomes politicized as executive(s) selectively enforce(s) only the laws that will lead to re-election of his/her BFFs, especially when there's money involved (e.g. large corporations).
Instead, maybe all law enforcement should be part of the judicial branch. And while we're at it, eliminate election of judges and court officers (e.g. DAs). Instead, appoint them ranked on only their competency (their accuracy and competency in past investigations and court cases, as judged anonymously by their peers).
Oooo. Governance by meritocracy. What a concept.
Umm, we're the ones free to copy our music as well as to rebroadcast any over the air signal.
Yes, you are "free" to do that because a tax is added on to media everywhere, basically assuming you are all thieves.
We are "free" to do what we like in the U.S. and we don't have to funnel money to the music industry for data CD's in order to enjoy that "freedom".
Maybe if you understood the issues
I understand the long-term issues; it is plain you and many do not. When the regulations tighten then you will comprehend what you have allowed to come through the door...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Anyone else feel like we are on the verge of a revolution across the western world? Where the people finally say, enough of of this shit, we are not going to take the corporate overload crap anymore.
Then again, maybe everyone will sit there and take it like always.
Everyone (well every Canadian at least) knows that the CRTC exists to serve the interests of Bell and Rogers. And it goes farther than just net neutrality complaints. Canadians are getting SCREWED by Bell and Rogers for pricing on internet access, data caps, cell phones plan pricing and options, and data plans.
Pardon my french but I think it's obligatory to share some discomfort when THEY are mentioned.
with a mostly solid atramentous top featuring a white midsole and some nice red accents. Nike Outlets ,2011 Cheap Nike Air Max Online Storeat the heel which is arresting from the ancillary of the midsole in Air Max Premium a lot of models.
Top band cobweb appearance Flywire technology and a sub band accessible cobweb offers breathability and abundance Air Max 90 Premium. The top superior with Air Max 90 Accepted saleNike Air Max Shoes
How much of that money did the people [who were ripped off] get back?
At the same time as this is going on, the CRTC is holding a "fact finding mission" to discuss whether or not online video like Netlfix and YouTube should be required to meet CANCON regulations.
The Great White North was a long running series of skits on SCTV, which owed its inception to the CTRC deciding that a Canadian comedy show, written by Canadian writers, staring Canadian comedians, produced in Canada by a Canadian company using a (mostly?, entirely?) Canadian production staff did not have sufficient Canadian Content.
I don’t have much faith in anything reasonable coming from the CRTC.