Ontario Government Wants To Regulate the Internet

An anonymous reader writes This afternoon, the Ontario government appeared before the CRTC as part of its future of television hearing. Michael Geist reports that it issued a clear call for new regulation of so-called new media companies such as Netflix and Google. The government states: "In order to create a more level playing field, the ministry recommends decreasing this regulatory imbalance. The ministry believes the best way to accomplish this is to expand the regulation of new media TV, rather than by lightening the current regulation of traditional TV." What does the expansion of regulation involve? For the Ontario government, it includes regulating foreign online video services such as Google and Netflix, but exempting Canadian services.

Comments

Government doesn't get it.

[pubwvj]

Government doesn't get it. They don't control it. Sure, I would like to regulate the orbit of the planets but that is outside my realm. Likewise, the Canadian government is not just impotent but incompetent to think they could actually control foreign entities. Bozos.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[MightyMartian]

Since broadcasting is pretty much a Federal power in Canada, I'm not sure, whatever the other flaws in Ontario's plans, whether they even have the constitutional right to do it.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you ever hit a "this service is not available in your country" message?

Not only can they control online services, they will

Obviously with a small effort most technically savvy people can find ways around roadblocks like this but not for the average user and not always legal. Which is what should piss people off.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Livius]

The constitution says no, in black and white, but unfortunately Canadian courts like to make up the constitution as they go, so much so that they themselves have no idea what is constitutional and what is not.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[ultranova]

Likewise, the Canadian government is not just impotent but incompetent to think they could actually control foreign entities.

They don't want to control foreign entities, they want to control the cultural inputs their subjects are exposed to. We're going to keep seeing more and more such efforts as the Internet threatens to create non-geographic groups for people to identify with, which in the extreme would make local powers into little more than regional managers.

After all, the idea that people owe allegiance to a distant capital rather than a particular city is relatively new one. Who's to say loyalty to a web forum couldn't end up outweighting loyalty to a nation?

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[JMJimmy]

I actually watched the hearing live - the CRTC (federal) asked the Ontario government representative (one presenter of many) "what are you going to do when the headlines read Ontario Government Wants To Regulate the Internet?". He of course tried to side step it as "just new media" but no one was really buying into what the Ontario rep was selling.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[stephanruby]

Government doesn't get it. They don't control it.

Not only that, but with the wording they're using, they'd get their ass handed to them in front of a WTO panel.

...it includes regulating foreign online video services such as Google and Netflix, but exempting Canadian services.

Either that, or may be their end game is to also regulate their own Canadian online streaming services and to claim surprise and innocence when the WTO requires them to impose the same regulation on their own industry.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[JMJimmy]

Courts in the US, Canada, and the UK all disagree with your statement. Operating in a country does not require you to have a physical presence anymore, just "meaningful ties".

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

Eh, can you blame them for wanting to "keep jobs in their country"? I mean, you americans (if you aren't american just ignore that part) just don't get it. The problem with Netflix is that they are US based. And their servers too. Netflix, for example, is available here in Argentina. But they don't have any local servers. They just stream straight from the US. The service sucks (international bandwidth is not the same as national. Or even local, as Netflix does in the US with hundreds of caches across the USA).

Netflix collects money from Argentinians and pays zero taxes in Argentina. They also don't invest here. And they effectively block the competition by making it economically impossible for a company to sell here since they won't be able to match their price (capital cost and taxes). This is the same for every other country that's not the US.

Canada has successfully regulated the TV industry, requiring a certain amount of local productions. This is why a LOT of US shows are actually shot in vancouver with canadian actors. Without this, the TV industry in Canada would be tiny. This is the same thing that happens here in south america: dozens of cable channels broadcasting only US shows.

Unfortunately, capitalism tends to centralize things to make it more efficient. The only way to force things to change is by legislation.

I don't like paying taxes either, but I would like if there was an industry of things, not just "arrogance" like "you don't have a right to collect taxes from me, I don't pay taxes in your country. Yes, i sell millions of my product there but i owe you nothing. And you better have a good infrastructure for me to be able to sell"

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

they'd get their ass handed to them in front of a WTO panel.

So? who gives a fuck ? Do you know what country has the most rulings AGAINST them by the WTO? Find out and let me know. (I'll give you a hint: its name starts with UNITED).

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you ever hit a "this service is not available in your country" message?

Yes, I have. And do you know why I hit them? Because the MPAA (a US corporation) told Netflix (a US corporation) to only allow access to IP addresses deemed to be from the USA. I have not, and will not, hit them because the Canadian government told Netflix to do it. Because the Canadian government has zero power to control a non-Canadian corporation!

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Without a physical presence to point guns at, enforcement is impractical.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Courts in the US, Canada, and the UK all disagree with your statement.

Good for them. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll continue to operate in a country that does not fall under their jurisdiction, making their "decision" completely moot.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[anarcobra]

I'm pretty sure that if the Argentinian content producers sell or give a license to Netflix, that Netflix will offer their content in their catalog. As for the issue of taxes, that should be the consumers problem. If I buy a car in the US and have it shipped over to South America I pay import taxes on it, not Toyota, or whatever car dealer I bought it from. The government could just require its citizens to pay taxes on online international purchases. Unless Netflix has an office in Argentina there is really no reason why they would pay anything. Also, I can't speak for Argentina, but in Suriname the reason we have channels with US shows is because people want to see them. There is a clear difference in the production value of local shows and American shows. I wouldn't want to have to watch some quota of local crap just to be able to watch the content I actually want. The government trying to support local content producers is fine by me, but unlike for the local store, being locally produced isn't a selling point for a tv show if you ask me. It has to compete on some other factors as well.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[knightghost]

The point of trade is that another country can do something better/faster/cheaper. If you can't compete then don't compete - don't invent some imaginary barriers then use lots of logic fallacies to defend it.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

Actually Buenos Aires is trying to get Netflix to pay a 3% tax.

Argentinian netflix does have local movies. I watched Nueve Reinas (Nine Queens) there (if you're a netflix subscriber, would you please check for me if that's available in your region? If so, I'd also suggest you watch it).

The problem, as you say, if you buy a car and have it shipped, you pay tax. But services aren't taxed (I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, i'm just stating a fact). And, as you say, if they don't have offices, they shouldn't pay anything. And this is where it gets interesting: why should any american company have offices outside the US? Everything they do is online or over the phone. You don't go to a netflix office.

As for the quota of local content: yes, I don't want to see crap shows on TV to meet a quota, but, as you say, the production value is different. The US has a huge advantage: they have their own market, which is gigantic. And they own the distribution too. They don't make their shows to "export", they do because it doesn't cost them more money.

But other countries don't have that advantage, and they have to play in a completely unfair game. How do you expect your country's productions to get better if they just simply can't because they have to compete with TV shows?

A TV show in the US has a budget of millions of dollar per episode. High profile shows even have millions of dollars in salaries, per actor, per episode. You can't really expect a TV show made in Suriname to have a $2M budget per episode. Not even for a whole season. No other country shoots their TV shows on FILM like the US does (or used to do - probably now it's all 4K video). All other countries shoot on SD video - that should give you an idea of how much the americans can spend for production - and also: now they can re-release all their old shows in HD (because their source material is able to give you that resolution). Try that with European shows - oopsie: they were shot on video. Good luck competing with that.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[ultranova]

Courts in the US, Canada, and the UK all disagree with your statement. Operating in a country does not require you to have a physical presence anymore, just "meaningful ties".

The British disagreed with their Empire breaking up, but it did anyway. Nor was Soviet leadership capable of keeping power through force despite controlling the military. Or perhaps we should as Gaddafi how it's going?

Nations are held together by a nebulous thing called legitimacy. Totalitarianism is a system where the state's legitimacy is absolute: it can do whatever it pleases. The other end of the spectrum is constitutionalism, where the state earns legitimacy by safeguarding the interests of its citizens. Nowadays we see an emergence of a third "pole", where a state's legitimacy depends from not just how it treats its citizens but also from how it behaves as a part of the international community. We are seeing the rise of an world system, a "city of nations", so to say. Sadly, just as humans are prone to self-centered megalomania, so are our social systems. Thus we should expect jealous attempts to claim "their" people's loyalty through, for example, nationalism and censorship.

Of course the irony is that a properly working world system will be a far safer place with more opportunity than the violent chaos of ages past for nations, just like a nation is a safer place with more opportunity than a jungle for humans. But that doesn't stop people from bitterly complaining how they're robbed by taxes, even as the only reason they have any income to tax besides whatever berries they managed to grap while running from lions is the very infrastructure maintained by said taxes. And of course would-be tyrants see their window of opportunity slipping away, and have every reason to delay the inevitable as long as possible by stirring up trouble and creating resentment. They'll fail, but time will tell how long it'll take.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[scamper_22]

This has little to do with Canadian Content. Most Canadians are well passed the 'Canadian Content' and tend to consume regular popular TV shows. I can't recall the last time cultural influence from 'America' was even an issue (except for maybe Quebec).

You will notice this comes from Ontario. Bell and Rogers have a huge presence here. As does the film and media industry.

It is about jobs and corporate welfare. This government has been very big on trying to create/contain jobs. Just today, Ontario wants to contract out the OLG (Ontario Lottery and Gaming) to Bell or Rogers. Throw that into job creation and containment schemes in the auto sector, green energy...

Jobs might very well be a good goal, but I generally hope subsidies work better than these schemes.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[vux984]

Likewise, the Canadian government is not just impotent but incompetent to think they could actually control foreign entities

Of course they can. They can block netflix traffic at the canadian border.

And if netflix operates servers within canada, then those will be subject to the laws of canada.

Seems to me Canada can effectively regulate netflix for "canadian content requirements" if it wishes.

Whether this is 'good for canada' or "good for the internet" remains open questions, but it would be consistent with the regulation in place already for broadcast / cable tv, and the idea that they can't do it for select large internet streaming services is ridiculous. They most certainly can - half the work is done for them.

Due to licensing agreements for the content, major streamers already "arbitrarily" limit and restrict what is available in different companies, so all the infrastructure to do it is already in place. Incorporating a layer of government regulation wouldn't be particularly onerous.

I disagree with the Canadian content requirements, (although I do endorse the governments efforts to promote Canadian content); so I'm against what the government is proposing here. However, that doesn't mean its impractical for them to do it.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

Yeah, that's not how the world works. Sorry.

You see, you live in the USA. Your country is the biggest piece of shit when it comes to fair trade.

Why? Because you CANNOT compete. So you create bullshit regulations and trade barriers. But you go around the world bullying other countries to sign free trade agreements with you. So you can dump our countries with your crap - but we can't sell to you.

I'm from Argentina. We can't sell lemons to you (even though our lemons are cheaper than yours), and we can't sell beef to you (even though or beef is perfectly healthy). The US claims our beef is contaminated with Foot-and-mouth disease, so they won't accept it. All it takes is ONE case in my country for you to completely block us for years. Think about it for a little and figure it out. Have you? Let me explain: all it takes is for someone from the US to infect ONE of our cows - for the US to completely block trade for one of our main industries.

And the US works ACTIVELY so other countries CANNOT develop. For example, when Argentina was working on a 4K video codec, the US government, by way of "export controls" didn't allow nVidia to sell us more than 4 (four) Tesla units - for the whole country.

See? THAT is how the world works. Not with your libertarian free market theory.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[vux984]

what is available in different companies,

In different *countries*

Netflix for example, maintains separate servers with a separate library for Canada.

(And therefore complying with canadian content rules for the libary would not be particularly difficult)

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

The British disagreed with their Empire breaking up, but it did anyway.

In some cases, but later on they kind of just let it happen.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree this is utterly ridicules ruling I think I'd only selectively gauge the risk and ignore it. Reality suggests that at least some foreign governments do have some control. As an example I'd probably not stop paying my taxes as a US citizen even if I didn't intend to return. The problem is the US has laws and should they attempt to enforce them on me from an overseas location I suspect they'd succeed. Extradition, etc. Obviously this does depend on the country I've selected to move to, extradition policies and practices, and my own travel. I believe if I moved to Russia and was able to become a Russian citizen the US government would have no ability to extradite me (Russia doesn't extradite its own citizens from what I understand) and provided I didn't leave Russia or at least Russia's sphere of influence.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[JMJimmy]

hunwha? The legitimacy you speak of is the courts exercising the rule of law. The courts in all 3 countries established that existing laws put foreign companies operating inside territorial borders in a meaningful way (example: amazon.ca or attempting to earn profit from people in the territory) are subject to the laws of that territory. The same law applies to every company regardless of sector

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[sumdumass]

Not when they control the nodes of access on the data network.

Well, at least in this case, they can enforce even against "meaningful ties" insomuch as if they do not play ball, they do not enter. Of course you could try a proxy and Tor but I imagine it would be a matter of time before that imposed risks on the user for circumventing their will.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[anarcobra]

Damn it. I wrote a long comment, changed a setting in options and my comment disappeared. Anyway, the long and short of it was that local content producers need to find a different selling point from just "we made it in this country". In any established industry you need to find a way to differentiate your product from the others. With locally produced cars it's usually the price. For a show it might be the topic.

There are things on youtube produced with a very small budget that are still very entertaining, so it's possible to do. The problem is that if you just try to emulate US tv shows without the same budget, you will simply fail. As a local content producer you should have a big advantage over a foreign one: namely that you know what people are interested in culturally. Make a film based on a real life events in that country or use comedy styles specific to that country.

If the government wants to support local content they can offer subsidies. If Netflix agrees to charge the tax, that's fine, but I don't think it will help much with the popularity of local shows. If they are entertaining, people will watch them. If not they will continue to watch foreign stuff.

I'm not a Netflix subscriber, and I no longer live in Suriname, so I couldn't have checked either way. Finally, just look at Chinese action movies or Korean horror movies. Those have small budgets compared to Hollywood movies, yet they are still popular around the world.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[dk20]

Once again an AC provides value to the thread.'

You read the article was about the Ontario government and now this thread is about US/CA/UK yet opted to post about how you dont live in these nations?

Since you are not in one of these jurisdictions, doesn't that make your post "completely moot"?

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[davydagger]

sounds like another country I know of, and live in currenty.

It starts with a U, and ends with a nited States of America.

Wait, lets say the entire concept of a constitution as this iron clad protection of rights is a silly concept because the world doesn't work that way.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[anarcobra]

The US is notorious for inventing reasons not to import stuff, but that story about the Teslas is a bit strange.
How would they stop you from simply flying there, buying 10 of them and taking them home in your suitcase?
It's not like they check your passport when you buy them is it?

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Rix]

But services aren't taxed (I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, i'm just stating a fact).

Yes they are. Most sales taxes are in fact Goods and Services Taxes.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you know what country has the most rulings AGAINST them by the WTO? Find out and let me know. (I'll give you a hint: its name starts with UNITED).

Holy shit! I didn't think the United Arab Emirates was that bad!

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

You still have to go through customs. 10 teslas is a lot of money (you can't walk into a country with $50K in cash).

Texas Instruments sends me free samples sometimes. Last time I tried to order a DAC (Analog to digital converter) for AUDIO. Since it was considered, by US customs, a "data processing" device, i had to sign a statement swearing I'm not a military entity and it wasn't going to be used for military purposes.

Getting INTO the US is a whole different story. Read up on the VISA application program and you'll see. (it starts with $180 that you don't get back if you're rejected).

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

I'm talking about international taxes (Import tariffs)

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

Try Lazarus Form Recovery.

As for "guerrilla" shows, that's pretty much how it works. Other countries resort to "content", but American shows can have content AND be super-productions (HBO shows), so it's hard to compete.

Argentina is able to give you a high profile movie, for example. See "The secret in their eyes" by Juan Jose Campanella. Fantastic movie, and rare as it had VFX and shots from an helicopter, something rarely seen in low budget stuff like what we're used to. (Disclaimer: Campanella worked in Hollywood. He directed several "House" episodes. So he does things "hollywood style")

Governments offer subsidies to local productions but it's still a hard sell.

The only way to really regulate is being in a position of power AND pass laws. It's worked great for Canada: they require a certain quota of local production and they've "forced" many US TV shows to be shot there. Also, they managed to sneak canadian actors into US shows too (since Canada is a large enough market for US to care about pleasing them).

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

>This is why a LOT of US shows are actually shot in vancouver with canadian actors

No. Tax benefits and lower costs are the reason for this.

Re: Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Brilliantly said. I see this in my "community" already. I've been an "ex-pat" for 20 years, but I have never returned "home" to Canada and have no intention to ever do so. In the meantime I've lived in four countries and will probably try another 2 or 3 before settling down when the kids go to university. I relate more to other expats or those globally in my sphere than anyone else.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[inject_hotmail.com]

...But services aren't taxed (I'm not saying they should or shouldn't, i'm just stating a fact)...

Clearly, you aren't from Canada. Here, we tax the snot out of everything. Services aren't taxed? HAH! 13%. On everything. Electricity, gasoline, the mechanic's labour. Everything. 13%

Even new houses and used (!) cars.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[silfen]

Eh, can you blame them for wanting to "keep jobs in their country"?

Yes, I can, because "keeping jobs in their country" is just another name for crony capitalism: it doesn't actually do sh*t for jobs, but it does do something for uncompetitive industries.

Unfortunately, capitalism tends to centralize things to make it more efficient. The only way to force things to change is by legislation.

You got it backwards. The primary reason for "centralization" and lack of competitiveness is legislation, as powerful corporate interests lobby for legislation that keeps pesky competitors out of the market.

Yes, i sell millions of my product there but i owe you nothing. And you better have a good infrastructure for me to be able to sell"

Here, too, you are rather confused: if people by stuff by the millions, that means they see a benefit to buying that stuff. Taxing it and making it more expensive won't hurt the manufacturer as much as the people who now need to pay more for it.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Living Tree Doctrine" in Canada
"Constitution as a Spool Based Lightweight Wood Pulp Product Made From Dead Trees Used Primarily To Remove Political Promises From Regions Devoid of Sunshine Doctrine" in the USA.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Minorities with power cease to be minorities. The status of employer is not like immutable characteristics like VISIBLE MINORITIES. Someone CHOSE to start a business. No one chooses to be BLACK, FIRST NATIONS, ASIAN, HISPANIC, etc.

cat /dev/yourmouth > /dev/null

Why do I hear servos and solenoids? Must be the Russian Mafia Randroid I guess.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[stephanruby]

So? who gives a fuck ?

There is one country that does care and that's Canada.

Canada does end up complying with WTO rulings, especially if the complainant in question is already a large trade partner to begin with, like the United States is.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[El Puerco Loco]

Yeah, there's a reason why 99.99% of Canadians live within like 12 feet of the U.S. border. Canadian culture is crap and Canadians know it. The entire national identity revolves around Tim Horton's, poutine, and like the 2 or 3 hockey teams they still have left.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[anarcobra]

I just have to be a pedant here, but a DAC is a digital to analog converter. Anyway, I've never had customs check my suitcases when leaving the US (or noticed it at least). Maybe it's different for Argentina, or for high end stuff like Teslas. It seems pretty strange that they'd make such a big deal of it, since they ship lots of units to other countries, which presumably don't limit the amount that are sent to other countries (unless they do, I wouldn't know).

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Canada & provinces (mostly BC & Ontario) give out significant tax breaks that make it very worthwhile for US producers to film up there, even if they have to hire locals.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[dryeo]

Would you agree that a human right cannot be a right if it trumps some other human right?

Don't be fucking stupid, all human rights conflict other rights. My right to swing my fist is trumped by your right to not get punched in the head. my right of passage is trumped by your right to privacy.
One of the governments jobs is to balance rights. Whether it is restricting my right to swing my fist in favour of your right not to get punched or my right to make a living vs your right to exploit me.
From your viewpoint you should have the right to kick weaker people around. As a society we've decided you shouldn't have the right to kick weaker people around. I'm sorry that we're infringing on your right to kick people around but some of us don't like being kicked around.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[hjf]

To ALLY countries!

Argentina isn't an ally of the US. And, of course, that means Argentina is an enemy of the US. The US has "allies" and several levels of enemies. The US doesn't have "neutral" relationships with any country. Either you do what they say or they pretend not to care, but screw you later on.

Assange says Argentina's problem with holdouts is because of our "agreement" with Iran (to investigate the bombing of AMIA). Initially the US said they would support Argentina's cause, but now they've changed completely and trying to push us into bankruptcy.

You can send as many Teslas as you like to the UK or Canada. To south america? No chance. Too dangerous. These jungle monkeys are actually smart and they might use this to build an ICBM. (See: Condor project. Argentina's missile, shut down by US pressures).

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[dryeo]

The big Canadian cable/phone/internet companies are branching out into media and this is just a move to remove competition. In this case the people like netflix/google and hate bell/rogers so it won't fly.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[udachny]

The only one that is 'fucking stupid' (in your own words) is you here. Human rights do not stop under any circumstances. Human right is a right not to be murdered by government, it's a right not to have your property stolen by the government, it's a right not to be abused, imprisoned by the government.

Human right is a protection against government abuse, which is why it is a HUMAN right. A government (a collective) denying human rights has absolutely nothing to do with 'fist near my nose' routine.

My human rights are NOT violated because I cannot legally punch you in the nose, however my human rights are violated when the government comes out with a rule that some people are entitled to GET SOMETHING FROM ME AGAINST MY WILL.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[dryeo]

Depends on where in Canada you are. Here it's 5% and 7% Provincial tax on real stuff. Next door they don't even have the provincial tax. Besides if you're rich enough you get that 13% back, just need a business and GST number. That's why your province is doing so good with cheaper goods and zero unemployment, at least that was what was promised here when they tried to stick us with the 12%.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[rtb61]

For a start government creates the concept of ownership of property. All property is owned by the government, the people that create that government and that government just allots control of elements that it owns based upon rules created by the individuals that form that government. First and foremost is rule of self ownership a right right fought for with the deaths of millions for centuries and screw any asshat that puts property rights about personal rights. So the employee always takes precedence over their personal rights ahead of the employers property rights because the employee is not property. You apparently don't get that. Property rights are a privilege not a right and assigned by the government to benefit the majority. When that privilege not no longer benefits the majority than that privilege is taken away either voluntarily or as is the norm by lethal force due to the nature of the psychopaths and narcissists who routinely abuse property privileged and try to extend to include ownership and control of persons via extortion or slavery.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[dryeo]

Yea, well personally I think that human rights exist irrespective of government and there are lots of things that I don't do because they interfere with others rights.
Some people don't believe in universal rights and the only reason they don't do certain things is from fear of punishment which is why we need some government. Even your privilege of owning property is only due to the government protecting your privilege.
If you really think not having a government around means more individual rights, there's lots of places to test out the idea.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Libertarian free market theory does accommodate and explain government action through public choice theory though. And there are numerous historic examples where government supported enterprises who are not the most efficient at satisfying consumer demand fail against no-capital private individuals that are new entrants to those markets.

THAT is how the world works. Not with your low-information/unimpressive worldview.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[X.25]

Government doesn't get it. They don't control

Ermm... you are wrong.

They are controlling it, and they have been working on controlling Internet for years now.

Although many people used to say "They can't win", they actually did win some time ago.

This is a denial phase, I guess.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[JMJimmy]

More than that, because of rule of law they can simply go after their money through various treaties.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[strikethree]

. The problem with Netflix is that they are US based.

Say what? Why would you care about where they are based? I do not care. I have purchased entertainment from Eastern European countries and Northern European countries and I felt no different than paying for my son's Netflix account. Whoever earns my money will get it. I do not care where they are.

Netflix, for example, is available here in Argentina. But they don't have any local servers. They just stream straight from the US. The service sucks (international bandwidth is not the same as national.

I am sure if it were affecting their bottom line and your government did not intervene, they would be more than happy to install local servers. Again, what does it matter if they are US based or running out of Viet Nam?

Netflix collects money from Argentinians and pays zero taxes in Argentina. They also don't invest here.

Why is this a problem? If it is a problem for you then do not give them your money. Stop trying to decide what is right for everyone else. Netflix does not invest in Kuwait, Ukraine, South Korea, or Ireland. What is the problem?

I don't like paying taxes either, but I would like if there was an industry of things, not just "arrogance" like "you don't have a right to collect taxes from me, I don't pay taxes in your country. Yes, i sell millions of my product there but i owe you nothing. And you better have a good infrastructure for me to be able to sell"

Erm, um... they already paid for their infrastructure. YOU are the one who wants to watch what they have. That means that YOU have to pay for YOUR infrastructure to connect to THEIR infrastructure. WTF? You think Netflix should subsidize YOUR internet connection?

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[ultranova]

The legitimacy you speak of is the courts exercising the rule of law. The courts in all 3 countries established that existing laws put foreign companies operating inside territorial borders in a meaningful way (example: amazon.ca or attempting to earn profit from people in the territory) are subject to the laws of that territory.

Courts are claiming jurisdiction. Since the courts do not have magical powers, what if any effect the claim has depends on whether the people needed to enforce it, or in positions to hinder it, consider it legitimate. Look at how impotent law is in regards to the Pirate Bay for a good example.

Basically, governments are afraid that the next time they try to order their subjects attack some place they'll be quietly escorted to a padded cell rather than sieg heiled, if their subjects continue making friends over national borders. In other words, they're afraid being seen as legitimate authority becomes dependent on getting along with their neighbours, just like it nowadays depends on not genociding their own subjects. That's already happening, which is why every war is accompanied by a massive propaganda campaign attempting to excuse it. And it'll eventually be enshrined in law as the world continues to evolve.

Nations will be dragged from the current semi-feudal state of international affairs to a more stable, just and efficient democratic one, kicking and screaming if need be. The only real question is whether humanity requires a third solid kick in the rear to finish the process, or if World Wars part I and II were enough.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

What human right specifically has been violated in which some people were entitled to get something from you against your will?

Human rights, as listed in a Constitution, never to be all inclusive, should be limited to the very basic.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[rastos1]

The US has "allies" and several levels of enemies.

Nope. They don't have allies. But they have several levels of not-enemy-at-the-moment. Also the status can change very quickly.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[temcat]

Netflix collects money from Argentinians and pays zero taxes in Argentina.

Netflix shouldn't pay taxes in Argentina. Argentinians and Argentinian businesses should pay taxes for the money they earn. Netflix is neither. They don't you and your country anything, taxing them is pure theft.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[petermgreen]

Governements control people and entities made up of groups of pople by exerting punishments on them.

There are various ways a government can attempt to punish a corporation beyond their borders. For example they can order those within their borders to make efforts to block access to the corporations services. They can order those within their borders not to do buisness with the foriegn corporation (It's kinda hard to sell services to a market if you can't get paid easilly by people in that market) . They can arrest any officers of the company that enter their territory.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[ILongForDarkness]

What exactly wouldn't be "new media"? Does Flickr and the ilk count if they allow you to search what would otherwise be impossible with random hard copy photos? How about FB? If you start spending 4 hours a day reading your friends blog rather than watching TV does that become "new media"? Slippery slope. If they restrict it to precisely the areas of old media it is replacing, music, long format video maybe.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[ILongForDarkness]

I know several white teenagers in the Eminem era that would disagree.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, capitalism tends to centralize things to make it more efficient. The only way to force things to change is by legislation.

I agree. We need to introduce more laws immediately in order to make things less efficient.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[keneng]

I agree entirely with your statement about personal rights. I would like to re-express "personal rights" as one's "digital freedoms" in this case. The Ontario Government must not hamper on one's existing digital freedoms to watch whatever one wants to watch from wherever on the planet. What makes Canada's multiculturalism work is the ability to have access to culture from across the planet, NOT ACROSS ONTARIO. This is our strength being able to view different perspectives and opinions from around the world about any topic. The beauty of it is I don't need to watch subject matter I'm not particularly interested in. When you have limited media like we had with CABLE TV/ANTENNA-ONLY TV not long ago, it was like living in the dark ages. From what I understand the Ontario Gov wants to bring back the dark ages so they can tax/tariff foreign media revenue. FORGET IT. Canadians and citizens from all provinces won't stand for that.

More importantly, the Ontario Government must not impose what they want their provincial constituents to watch because it will resemble more and more a dictatorship rather than a democracy.

It's becoming quite obvious that there is too much concentrated political power controlled by a few corrupted officials not representing the interests of the general populace. Ontario provincial citizens should raise an alarm and consider "lack of confidence" in the government for even accepting the consideration of such an internet regulation proposal.

CRTC has NOT REPRESENTED the interests of Canadian Internet Users for quite some time now so why is the CRTC still in existence? Abolish the CRTC, let the market open up. Allow more competition for as long as the prices become more affordable and all of the businesses offer honest products with no fine print.

Little by little, the world is getting smaller. We are becoming global citizens and the internet and our inherent digital freedoms are the catalyst. Bitcoin will be internet's unstoppable currency. Governments at the Federal, Provincial and Municipal levels who says otherwise are placing a veil of dark ages on their populace. The global majority want spiritual freedom, want peace, want clean air, want clean water, want accessible food, want accessible accommodation, and want work opportunities. It's all within our grasp. Our number one enemy across the planet right now is CORRUPTION in government at all levels. It must be identified and stopped. Governments must make themselves transparent throughout every process they are involved with. Decisions affecting everyone's money and opportunity to thrive should involve representation from all walks of life to ensure progress and prosperity for everyone and not just the corrupt elite. We need to be vigilant. Governments in Canada at all levels have let down many citizens. There are many people who struggle everyday. All is not roses in Canada. Far from it. I can't speak for the U.S.A., but I'm guessing it's pretty much the same there too.

This occurrence of the Ontario Government wanting to regulate the internet is a subtlety we shouldn't take lightly. I have seen another country introduce a similar, but ever so subtle mechanism: in order provide the illusion of freedom, it does something ANTI-NET-NEUTRALITY; it does not restrict non-domestic website access, but it does throttle/traffic-shape the non-domestic bandwidth making it particularly difficult, making it a lower quality of service, making it a frustrating experience to view non-domestic video websites; what can we do to prevent this scenario from occurring elsewhere on the planet and in the short-term in Ontario in particular? ENSURE NET-NEUTRALITY. INTRODUCE MORE INTERNET AND TELECOM PROVIDERS EVERYWHERE ON THE PLANET THAT DON'T HAVE ANY GOVERNMENT OR POLITICAL PARTY AFFILIATION TO THEM. ALL GLOBAL CITIZENS WOULD AGREE TO THAT EVERYWHERE.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[HornWumpus]

I'll have you know that Canadian beer is just like American can beer, only 1% higher in alcohol content. And they're proud of it.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[reanjr]

If that's the case, then perhaps they should start putting more Canadian shows on Netflix. I watch lots of Canadian shows on Hulu and Vudu, but Netflix seems to have a dearth of them.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

I've had "content blocked in your country" on YouTube here in the US. I assume it's blocking copyrighted stuff where they can sue and not in countries where they can't.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Also poutine is superior to fries with ketchup on them. It also edges out mayonnaise, popular in Europe and also vastly superior to kerchup.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Regulating companies on what they produce (NetFlix) is FAR different than attempting to regulate the Internet.

But the bottom line is that many companies have found a way around taxes, and governments are looking for, and need to reinstate, a new revenue stream to be able to provide the services they purport to provide.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[JMJimmy]

You're right, courts do not have magical powers - but the rule of law and application of the law is within their domain. If it's not enforceable, it's not up to the courts to enforce it beyond issuing court orders to be enforced by others in the government.

Justice being served is a separate issue.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[JMJimmy]

Exactly why nobody was buying what the rep was selling. CRTC's questions are usually rather passive but in this case they grilled the Ontario rep and poked so many holes in his presentation it was embarrassing.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Gibgezr]

Are you on Canadian Netflix? There are more Canadian shows on Netflix in Canada, compared to the U.S. Netflix.

At least, there were last time I checked.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[aurizon]

They want to build the Great Wall of Canada - Good Luck with that, and good luck getting elected on it...

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

> Canada has successfully regulated the TV industry

They've propped up the occasional good show and a huge load of absolute crap. The writers and actors in Ontario that can make it in Hollywood or New York go there, just like they would if they grew up in Nebraska or Florida or anywhere else in the English-speaking part of North America. The ones left mostly suck. Sorry, but it's true, and it doesn't promote Canadian anything to have these laughably bad shows (promoting the CBC's hippy-ass political agenda more often than not) jammed down my throat. They've clued in that people aren't watching them on TV, so now they'll try to force us to watch them on Netflix. What are they going to do, cut off American shows until I watch my quota of local garbage? Do I get points for watching a German movie?

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[micahraleigh]

"a properly working world system will be a far safer place with more opportunity than the violent chaos of ages past for nations"

History is not on the side of this claim. I am not sure what you are referring to about the "violent chaos of ages past for nations".

The US became a super power nation about the time of the Spanish American war. This is before the Roosevelt expansions of regulation. The US has traditionally had less regulation (and taxes) than other nations and it is far and away the strongest economically and militarily. The most centralized nations (North Korea, China, USSR) have the poorest citizens with the least amount of opportunity. They don't/didn't have opportunity because the government narrows their choices through regulation.

In most places a "properly working world system" is as interpreted by a committee of government-class politicians so they can snort coke or waste millions on studies explaining why lesbians are fatter than other women.

Individuals know better than the government!

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[spectrumlogic]

Don't be daft...governments will generally figure out how will monetize (tax) the players serving their people...it is their historic/absolute right. The big players are not being "good" corporate citizens....dodging tax, accumulating massive reserves, lagging hiring, etc. Governments need control before they can tax. They exempt Canadian companies to groom them to be better taxpayers and economic engines...sooner or later...directly or indirectly.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

sounds like the net neutrality movement here. same thing government wants to lay out the rules.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're the stupid one. Actually. Really fucking arrogant too. You don't "balance " rights. It's also not their job to do that. It's their job to DO WHAT WE FUCKING SAY. And nobody is telling them with the exception of some zealots that this needs to happen.

But yeah, man, you're a prick.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[gordonw2621]

I just had to point out the irony of this statement providing the amount of outrage people have over outsourcing jobs (read: phone support, et al) to third world countries or other regions of the world that pay employees less. Though I suppose the argument against my statement would be that the workers there deserve more money and to not be underpaid in poor conditions, but I rarely see that side of the argument presented versus the _they're taking our jobs!_ rebuttal.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Rakarra]

By explicitly using the phrase "government," you are using a much different definition of human right than other people use. If a gang sweeps through the jungle with machetes to eliminate the Tutsis, the Tutsis' human rights are violated. If Boko Haram kidnaps a school-full of girls, those girls' human rights have been violated. Those rights are seen as inalienable, a right that you are entitled to just for being human. If the FBI violates your human rights, they are just as violated as if the local KKK do it, or your neighbor does it. That's why what falls under "human right" is pretty limited.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Rakarra]

Good for them. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll continue to operate in a country that does not fall under their jurisdiction, making their "decision" completely moot.

Is your country a signatory to the Berne Convention?
Has your country come under pressure to "harmonize" its copyright laws with US/Canada/Europe/Japan/etc?

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Rakarra]

And curling.

And Tim Horton's is owned by an American company, to Canadians' collective shame. Though it's not the first time that's happened.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Rakarra]

Erm, um... they already paid for their infrastructure. YOU are the one who wants to watch what they have. That means that YOU have to pay for YOUR infrastructure to connect to THEIR infrastructure. WTF? You think Netflix should subsidize YOUR internet connection?

That's pretty much what I got from the grandparent post. "You have money. We want some of your money. Why aren't you sending us the money? You guys are assholes, no wonder we hate you."

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a key point you've missed here, in your zeal to bash the USA:

The vast majority of so-called "US" corporations -- certainly all the major ones -- are actually multinationals, with workers, executives, and stockholders all over the world, except in places that actively try to keep multinationals out (such as most of South America during the second half of the 20th century). Design teams often involve groups from multiple countries, collaborating over long distances.

Most of the goods sold by these corporations are not produced in the USA, they are produced in less expensive places such as East Asia. Many never come close to US soil between the time of manufacture and sale. In some cases, parts produced in many different countries go together to form a product. In other cases, the parts may be assembled in one place, then tested and packaged in another.

Just as in Adam Smith's time, different places or locales or regions or groups can specialize in providing various services or components, and businesses can selectively choose who does what to provide a net gain in efficiency (versus trying to be good at everything and do it all in one place). So long as the costs of transportation remain relatively low, businesses can and will take advantage of this.

Free trade is a policy pursued by many different countries, because they all have so many people working for, or vested in, or providing goods for these corporations, and thus the success of a corporation gives shared benefits that cross national boundaries.

Argentina's economic problems do not result from conflict between Argentina and US business, because the major businesses participating in world trade are no longer primarily US businesses. In all likelihood, many people in Argentina own stock in the major corporations listed in the NY Stock Exchange. It's called globalization.

It would have been straightforward to buy those NVidia units in any of several dozen countries, then ship them to Argentina. If you tried to go through a US bureaucracy to get them, you might have run into problems, but that kind of thing can happen in any country - it's the nature of bureaucracy to cause problems for people.

It's pure fantasy to claim the USA is deliberately messing with Argentine beef. Most Americans would love to get lower prices for beef, and Argentine beef has a great reputation! Bureaucracy and politics can often get in the way of what people want, however, and that's just part of life anywhere one goes, not specific to any particular nation.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[udachny]

A gang sweeping through the jungle with machetes to eliminate the Tutsis does not violate human rights of the Tutsis, it just murders them, but there is no human right violation there, only murder.

Human right violation is a violation of the right of an individual to exist without being harassed by supposedly 'legal' powers that authorities hold. If the gang was an arm of a government, then it would be violating human rights of Tutsis while murdering them.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's bullshit. Property rights are rights, and they're incredibly important. Recognizing someone else's property rights means respecting them enough to acknowledge they are humans and have the right to own things.

Re:Government doesn't get it.

[rhodium_mir]

A gang sweeping through the jungle with machetes to eliminate the Tutsis

This CANNOT HAPPEN because as is well known government has a MONOPOLY on the initiation of violence.

I would be angy too...

[Dj Stingray]

...if my country lost the earnings from Trailer Park Boys!

Wouldn't it be nice...

[RhettLivingston]

if these new media companies would simply stop their feed to Ontario IPs for a week just to make the point for once?

Re:Wouldn't it be nice...

[Ender Wiggin 77]

Agreed! And I'm based in Ontario. I suppose it is a coincidence that Rogers, the cable monopoly, is launching a streaming content service (movies, sports, etc) called Shomi that competes directly with Netflix. Rogers has too much influence with govt and needs to be broken up.

Re:Wouldn't it be nice...

[hjf]

Your libertarian, free market theory says if they do, someone else will start a thriving business because of that.

Re:Wouldn't it be nice...

[TheRecklessWanderer]

No Rogers are our friends. Everything is awesome!!

Re:Wouldn't it be nice...

[Anonymous Coward]

Except no, this is a telecom monopoly here. They won't allow anyone else to start any sort of streaming video business let alone a thriving one.

Secondly, being a telecom monopoly (plus mixed with a bit of "suckage") the telecom itself won't do anything itself that would reach above the level of "forced upon unsuspecting customers" let alone thrive.

Your theories result in zero options while our theories of regulating monopolies are the very reason netflix, youtube, and google video exist in the very first place.

Re:Wouldn't it be nice...

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect you are right. Both Bell and Rogers have announced streaming content services, available only to subscribers of their networks. These would be in direct competition with things like Netflix and TuneIn. So it is completely Canadian, and Ontario in particular, to pass legislation allowing them to throttle the competition to favor the locals. It also reduced the bar for both Bell and Rogers -- who cares if your offerings are poor as long as you can block anyone else...

And in the best government tradition, think of all the new executive jobs this will create for their friends and golfing buddies... cannot have regulation without a regulatory agency.

Re:Wouldn't it be nice...

[ArcadeMan]

I suspect you are right. Both Bell and Rogers have announced streaming content services, available only to subscribers of their networks.

And that alone shows you how Canadian media companies are just incredibly stupid. They want to block Netflix in every possible way but then they shoot themselves in the foot by not making their own services available to all Canadians, knowing that most of the population don't have access to multiple ISPs except in the half-dozen major cities of the country.

And all movies MUST be subtitled in French

[Anonymous Coward]

And all movies MUST be subtitled in French. By law. Because they're the government, they have the guns, and they know best.

Re:And all movies MUST be subtitled in French

[ZipK]

And all movies MUST be subtitled in French.

Subtitled? French first! All movies must be in French, and may, if you ask nicely (and in French), be subtitled in other languages.

Re:And all movies MUST be subtitled in French

[Samantha Wright]

That's really more of a federal government thing than an Ontario one.

Ontario would just require subtitles.

It's okay, though; as a Torontonian, I forgive you for not being able to make the distinction. It is the centre of the universe, after all.

Re:And all movies MUST be subtitled in French

[ColdWetDog]

I'm French! How do you think I got this outrageous accent?

Re:And all movies MUST be subtitled in French

[ChunderDownunder]

Ontario, *not* Quebec.

Re:And all movies MUST be subtitled in French

[ArcadeMan]

I actually wouldn't mind seeing more french subtitled titles on Netflix. They bothered to make a Canadian service, which is only roughly 12.5% of the potential USA market, but they haven't bothered to understand that nearly 25% of the Canadian population lives in Québec and that most of them only speak french. I always watch in the native language with english or french subtitles, so I don't care personally but a lot of my friends which could be potential Netflix subscribers will never sign up because of this.

What's worst is that 99.9% of the DVDs have at least french subtitles but when those movies appear on Netflix Canada, they only have english audio with english subtitles. Heck, a few are even missing the english subtitles.

Ontario == China

[Required Snark]

So what is the Canadian equivilant of the Great Wall internet barrier?

Re:Ontario == China

[Anonymous Coward]

When users try to visit a blocked site they are met with a screen politely asking them not to go to the website?

Cue

[Anonymous Coward]

I am anxious to see how Harper will be blamed on this moronic idea by the Liberal Ontario government.

Get your grubby mitts out of my Internet.

Or we can just kill everyone in charge

[Anonymous Coward]

fuck all these busybody pricks telling everyone what to do

Re: Or we can just kill everyone in charge

[Oonushi]

I am not being fasicious when I say that I share this sentiment exactly. Though, as an American, my concern is mostly with US busy bodies. Bloated government deserves a hard reset. Politicians should remember from where their so called power derives - from our collective decision each day to NOT behead them all and start over. (Otherwise known as conset of the governed). It seems these days that the busy bodies go for the frog in slowly boiling water approach, however, taking little bits at a time. When the frog finally explodes it will sure be messy.

Gentlemen, let's start with packet sizes

[Anonymous Coward]

Do people still think 1500 bytes is adequate, or should this committee move to change that to a new number, for example 1800?

Re:Gentlemen, let's start with packet sizes

[ArcadeMan]

The standard packet size should be OVER 9000!!!

Wait, I know this one...

[jargonburn]

Why not just call it a tariff and be done with it?

An overregulated province anyway...

[StandardCell]

Ontario is so overregulated that actions like this are practically ingrained in the culture of bureaucrats.

The government has a monopoly on all liquor sales. You aren't even allowed to buy certain cough medicines unless there is a licensed pharmacist on premises, even though while they're busy in the back you can just grab the stuff off the shelf. All stores MUST be closed on certain statutory holidays even if there are people willing to work those days, and the store is fined heavily if it opens anyway.

All of this is, of course, theatrics designed to garner the perception of an effective government while the Ontario government debt has risen by a third or $90B over the last five years alone. And they're worried about regulating foreign OTT services? I predict spectacular failure as it has been for the longest time in the province.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

The government has a monopoly on all liquor sales.

Honest question, from an American, how is that different than say B.C? Last time I was up in B.C. you couldn't buy liquor from a regular store, I had to get it from a special liquor store, which I understood to be government controlled.

According to our Canadian friends, I understood this to be the case everywhere in Canada, /except/ Quebec where apparently the French speaking population has more power over the law making.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

It differs by province. The territories and Alberta allow freedom of sales of any form of Alcohol by any seller. Other provinces permit private sales of wine, beer, or both. Ontario permits no private sales whatsoever except at licensed establishments such as pubs where you cannot bring the alcohol off premises (an exception also exists for Ontario made wine to be sold at places such as grocery stores in stores fully separated from the main store).

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-s-weird-liquor-laws-1.1004724

It is also illegal to bring alcohol across provincial lines except when specifically permitted.

BC is more permissive as unfinished wine bottles bought in restaurants may be brought home (in Ontario they must either be completely consumed on premises or destroyed).

Ontario has the highest taxes of anywhere in Canada on booze, and also regulates pricing (Cheap swill is required to be priced at $1 a bottle or higher, as you can imagine it's of limited popularity).

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Em Adespoton]

In BC, you can get liquor from a microbrewery, and from various other establishments licensed to sell it. 30 years ago, the BC Liquor Store was the only game in town, but with the advent of microbreweries all over BC, this changed. People were kind of upset that some of the best alcoholic beverages were made in BC, but you had to go to Washington State in order to buy them.

So now, while you still see the BCL stores, you can get your cans/bottles/kegs from all sorts of places.

Other provinces also have the freedom to regulate as they see fit now; most have decided to just go with what's always been done.

Ontario's always been an odd fish, with way stricter regulations, often just because "that's the way it's always been done, and deregulation is a slippery slope." So you get things like mandatory Grade 13 for students going into Ontario universities (but those from outside the province don't need to take it), mandatory business closure on boxing day (even though the reason for this is lost in the mists of time for most), all the OPP-related regulations (I always found it odd that the RCMP polices so much of the country, but can't police Ontario, where it (was) headquartered), etc. Look into dairy regulations in Ontario, and you'll find they're even worse than liquor regulations, due to the fact that they used to be in heavy competition with Quebec back before confederacy....

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

Over-regulated? We're the only province with an exception to the engineering act allowing any untrained employee to work on any "machine" in any facility as long as it's work being done for their employer. No other province has such an exception. Ontario is extremely lenient on regulation of companies, even for begin the biggest (most populous) province.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[jpmorgan]

Alberta also has private liquor stores.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ontario also grew a great deal of its debt over the years helping uplift other "have not" provinces, and now that it too is becoming a "have not" province, people just tell them to shut up and stop complaining - after all, THEY are the ones running themselves into the ground, not federal requirements and industries changing (both of which are the kinds of things that caused Ontario to have to pay out to other "have not" provinces). In the meantime, the old "have not" provinces that are finally starting to do well are still sucking on Ontario's teat and doing everything they can to make sure they can continue to do so for generations to come.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

Last time i was in the US the highway had speed signs which read: "state limit 65" but yet several minutes later the signs now said "state limit 55" on the exact same stretch of highway.

Same thing, it is about jurisdiction.

Liquor sales in Canada are governed by the provinces. Ontario has the prohibition era system, while Quebec has a more "open" system.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

Epic failure on "The government has a monopoly on all liquor sales."
Yes the govenrment has a monoploy on the regulation of liqour sales and on the wholesale purchase of liqour in the province but they do not have a monopoly on all liqour sales. There is a big difference. Now if a company wants to invest the money in the infrasturcture of setting up retail shops that have the proper trained staff and meet all regulatory requirements then go ahead and build a private corp to make liqour sales to the public. Just don't think it should be sold in the local corner store by a 16 year old.

 

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

Alberta also has private liquor stores.

I live in Toronto and was in Calgary last year. The liquor prices downtown were at least 1.5x higher than what I buy at the LCBO (which is 3x higher than the US).

The LCBO is a monopoly and should be broken up but using Alberta as an example does not seem logical to me.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure they have debt, but think of all those lovely windmills making green energy, so the nuclear plants can idly dump all their production into heating lake water. How else is an investor going to get a guaranteed 20% ROI for the next 20 years without government regulation?

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[dryeo]

To add to this, when the government tried to sell off the BCL stores and privatize the whole thing, the people complained heavily so we still have them.
Its funny, as usual the sell by the right wing government was that private liqueur stores would be cheaper and more efficient (and they donated a lot of money to the election campaign). Well we have lots of private liqueur stores and they're 10-20% more expensive then government stores and the government stores often have more expensive locations, pay more then minimum wage, subsidize stores in bumfuck nowhere, and make a very good profit. One example of how private is inefficient due to having to have ever increasing profits

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[IllogicalStudent]

." So you get things like mandatory Grade 13 for students going into Ontario universities (but those from outside the province don't need to take it), mandatory business closure on boxing day (even though the reason for this is lost in the mists of time for most),

Outdated info. The Ontario Academic Credit (OAC/"Grade 13") year was removed by Mike Harris (PC-ONT) back in `01-`02 (a sibling was a member of the double-cohort year [Grade 12s and OACs graduating and applying to university at the same time -- basically a royal clusterf***]). Also, I worked retail through my teens (`90s), always worked the 26th of December. And no, I was not in a designated "tourist attraction" mall (and yes, that loophole IS stupid -- either it's illegal to be open on x day or it isn't), nor were fines levied against my employer at any time. Closed on Christmas Day, yes; Boxing Day, no.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[HornWumpus]

Ontario made wine? Shudders...

Is that like Canadian beer? Just like the bad American stuff but 1% higher alcohol content.

Re:An overregulated province anyway...

[Rakarra]

The government has a monopoly on all liquor sales. You aren't even allowed to buy certain cough medicines unless there is a licensed pharmacist on premises, even though while they're busy in the back you can just grab the stuff off the shelf. All stores MUST be closed on certain statutory holidays even if there are people willing to work those days, and the store is fined heavily if it opens anyway.

Some US states still have really strange liquor laws. Alaska is hardcore, alcohol is banned from supermarkets and can only be bought at liquor stores (though wikipedia states that stores find ways to get around this). In some Alaskan districts alcohol sellers are allowed to drink on the job, but it's not legal to have intoxicated people at a liquor store, so if the seller is impaired, he's required to leave the premises...

Colorado allows supermarkets to sell 3.2% ABV beer but not full-strength beer. Colorado also treats stores with pharmacists differently, allowing stores with them to sell beer, wine, and spirits in specific areas.

In Florida, beer may be sold in containers 32 oz or less, or 1 gallon and greater. Beer containers of 40 or 64 oz are prohibited.

In Lousiana, drive-through frozen daiquiri stands are legal and common.

New Jersey: Each chain store gets only two licenses, so if you're a chain store with eight locations in NJ, only two can sell alcohol.

Oklahoma: You may only sell high-alcohol drinks at room temperature.

Those are just the weird laws, plenty of states arbitrarily restrict liquor sales. Thanks, Google!

So who's worst???

[JDAustin]

Governments who want to overregulate or TW/Comcast?

Re:So who's worst???

[dryeo]

This is Rogers/Bell pushing the government to over regulate. At least TW/Comcast are cheap, have high bandwidths, high caps and better customer service compared to Rogers/Bell.

A tepid defence

[quantaman]

I think regulating Google and Netflix is a really bad idea but I think there's a defensible motive in trying to promote Canadian content and defend Canadian content providers.

I'm not sure Americans really understand what it's like for smaller countries who lack the population or money to compete with American media productions. People get so much culture from television that it's hard to maintain a national identity when there's a US megaphone next door that dominates mass media. In some ways a well functioning film industry is as important as a military. Just look at what's happening in Ukraine, the rebellion is most certainly not fuelled by East Ukrainians, however it would be hard for Russia to do what it's doing without the support of an East Ukrainian minority who feels closer to Russia and is scared by Kiev. Almost certainly Russia's game would be much more difficult if Ukraine had a mass media strong enough to forge a strong national identity in East Ukraine.

That being said I'm not sure how this works on the Internet, but smaller countries do have a reason to worry about getting swamped by culture from American websites.

Re:A tepid defence

[hjf]

Not only culture. There are economic interests too.

You see, every country sells goods and services to other countries. For this, they receive (gasp!) money, which goes into their reserves. These reserves are what makes that country's moneys worth something.

So, it's not in the best interest of Canadians to be funneling money into the US for something like a streaming service. It is, though, in the best interest of Americans that they do.

So, Canada tries to regulate Netflix, since Netflix, not being a US company, does not pay taxes in the US. So, why should the Canadian government defend netflix? They don't pay any taxes there. And they don't leave any money there. They don't even hire people there. Canada, in fact, loses money because Canada needs to pay Netflix off their own reserves.

Netflix doesn't do anything for Canada. Why should Canada do any favors to them?

Re:A tepid defence

[hjf]

Read that as: So, Canada tries to regulate Netflix, since Netflix, being a US company, pay taxes in the US. So, why should the Canadian government defend netflix?

Re:A tepid defence

[Em Adespoton]

An interesting part of all this is that Netflix already has to play by Canadian rules to some degree, as licensing for Canada isn't the same as for the US, so in Canada, you get NetFlix Canada, which has different content. I'm pretty sure they'd actually be more than happy to play by the Canadian Content rules (they already offer French content, just like Apple) as long as they could get reasonable discounts on Canadian content creation so that it would be competitive.

Google has nothing to worry about really, as there's already a huge amount of Canadian content on YouTube. Of course, if they're asked to regulate to a percentage of total content offered, that would be a significant issue, as YouTube doesn't work that way.

Re:A tepid defence

[quantaman]

True but that's the case for any kind of business with international customers.

That's actually got me wondering why politicians always talk about job creation when selling film and television subsidies since the underlying economics are so dodgy. It seems the true reason for subsidies is the cultural benefit from having a healthy film industry.

Re:A tepid defence

[dissy]

I think regulating Google and Netflix is a really bad idea but I think there's a defensible motive in trying to promote Canadian content and defend Canadian content providers.

I can't speak for all video streaming services, but does not netflix canada already make the same percentage of canadian content available as required by the network broadcasters?

Personally I have no issues with making such options available, and while part of me wishes it was not required to force anyone to do it, but not enough broadcasters willingly would do so, and as you say there are problems with culture and identity being overtaken (although personally I think that's already happened - but not saying that's an excuse to stop trying)

What I do have issue with is forcing extra money out of non-canadian content producers to show their content in canada.

On TV I can change channels to find whichever media I'm wanting at the time, be it canadian or american. I appreciate the option being there, but would very much resent being forced to watch something against my will.

The thing with sites like netflix (and this may just be my usage) I typically know what I want to watch before hand and am only going there to specifically watch that.
This current plan sounds an awful lot like trying to force me into watching something canadian I don't want to watch at that moment and forcing others to not allow me to watch content from elsewhere at the same time.

A lot of canadians, or at least the younger generations anyway, already seem to identify mainly as americans do. Forcing content on them they don't want to watch will at best make them turn off the TV/PC, and at worse build anger and hatred towards these very regulations.

While this specific case is nothing more than one existing monopoly trying to get more money at the expense of everyone else, it's still worth thinking about continuing to make canadian content available to those that want it, while not forcibly blocking all non canadian content at the same time.
Sadly however, this doesn't appear to be the solution.

Re:A tepid defence

[RhettLivingston]

Actually, I think we might. The smaller outfits within America can't compete either. And the reasons behind that also explain (IMO) why this regulation won't work. The movie companies do not won't to deal with dozens of media content providers. It takes companies the size of Netflix to make the deals that make the business possible. Without these large companies, the vacuum would not be filled by many small companies. Instead the business simply either would not exist or it would only be direct from the movie companies.

Re:A tepid defence

[silfen]

I'm not sure Americans really understand what it's like for smaller countries who lack the population or money to compete with American media productions.

Who cares? Let America make the movies and Canada the Maple syrup.

that it's hard to maintain a national identity

And you want to maintain the fiction of a separate culture... why?

Re:A tepid defence

[dryeo]

This is why the CBC and National Film Board of Canada are supposed to exist. If you want Canadian content, you can tune into the CBC or go to their free streaming music service etc and Netflix can carry the NFB catalog. Unluckily our government is starving these institutions out of ideology.

Re:A tepid defence

[strikethree]

I think regulating Google and Netflix is a really bad idea but I think there's a defensible motive in trying to promote Canadian content and defend Canadian content providers.

I'm not sure Americans really understand what it's like for smaller countries who lack the population or money to compete with American media productions. People get so much culture from television that it's hard to maintain a national identity when there's a US megaphone next door that dominates mass media.

Why does any of this matter? If your "national identity" is not strong enough to withstand the culture of another area, then your "national identity" was not unique or strong enough to justify its own existence.

I live in a foreign country and yet my "culture" is my own. There are very few cultural things here that are better than from my home country. The ones that are better, I integrate. The ones that are not, are ignored.

For example, one of the cultural things here that are superior to EVERYWHERE else I have ever been is the bathroom/restroom/toilet area. Everything in the bathroom is ceramic and tile. They have a bidet and toilet paper. When it is time to clean the bathroom, you merely spray water everywhere... and it all drains nice and neat into a drain. So very clean. So very spacious. So very awesome. Do I feel defensive that my own country does not have the same setup and feel the need to defend my own country? Hell no! When I come home, I am getting my bathroom remodeled to emulate the bathrooms here. So very practical.

National Identity? Screw that. Take what works best and run with it.

Re:A tepid defence

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

And what if some content doesn't exist for purchase by them? Throw together some shit on the cheap with Canadians in it? Woo hoo, thanks government!

User clicks on a movie. "We're sorry, your government has decreed you must first watch this first hour episode of Canadian Trashbinpickers" before we are permitted to show you evil American cultural imperialist dog movie.

Re:A tepid defence

[micahraleigh]

Your proposal throws gasoline on the fire.

Poorer countries don't have content because their government regulates broadly and makes it hard for people (businesses) to produce content.

So they try to dig themselves out by regulating things *more*?

Re:A tepid defence

[dryeo]

Who said anything about forcing people to watch anything? Maybe forcing Netflix to carry the NFB catalog, which is basically free. I've always had the freedom to watch American programming (well sometimes with Canadian ads injected but I think that was the cable company, Rogers at the time) though usually the Canadian channels got the prime channels on cable.

Screwed

[Anonymous Coward]

This is what we get for allowing corporations to own our politicians.

If you don't believe me, just look at the donors of politicians. All of these politicians in Ontario are getting big bucks from national media syndicates in order to shut out foreign companies and their stronghold over internet resources so that they can make a buck.

If the average person's vote still mattered, then people would be able to vote these jerks out of office.

An American's opinion

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to sound harsh, but Canada is a shithole and I would move to North Korea before I'd consider going up north.

Re:An American's opinion

[TheRecklessWanderer]

lol of course posted by a coward. It's ok Mr. Troll, we don't want you here either, so something for everyone.

Re:An American's opinion

[quantaman]

Not to sound harsh, but Canada is a shithole and I would move to North Korea before I'd consider going up north.

Some people think Canadians are extraordinarily nice for how we deal with people like this, the truth is we simply have different ways of dealing with problems.

Consider the topic of justice and how to deal with bad people. The US is big into angry retributions and capital punishment, making sure people are punished harshly and everybody knows it.

Canada on the other hand simply tries to put bad people in a place where they don't bother anyone, and when someone does have to be punished we don't talk about it as much. In fact we're big believers in rehabilitation. Quite often we'll give the guilty something they really really want, hoping that in time they'll realize how terrible it is and discover the error of their ways.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I understand your anger and I'm sorry, we both know the US has been responsible for some terrible things, global warming, the Iraq War, NSA spying, etc, the list goes on for a while.

But sending Justin Beiber was definitely overkill.

Re:An American's opinion

[Em Adespoton]

Shh... you're supposed to agree with him! We have a reputation to downplay!

Re:An American's opinion

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to sound harsh, but you're a raving jackass who doesn't know anything about my country, and I'm quite happy you'd never live here.

Re:An American's opinion

[quantaman]

Not to sound harsh, but you're a raving jackass who doesn't know anything about my country, and I'm quite happy you'd never live here.

Not to sound confused, but which country are you talking about?

Re:An American's opinion

[quantaman]

Nm, I did specify 'we' when referring to Canada so you're likely referring to the US. Which would be odd because unlike Lithuania or Kyrgyzstan the one thing you can be assured of is everyone does know a ton about your country.

Re:An American's opinion

[HornWumpus]

The worst kind of 'knowledge'. The false kind that you are convinced is true.

Now go back to the trailer park. Lehey is trying to get you evicted...I know something about Canada too.

There is nothing wrong with your television set.

[ColdWetDog]

Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your television set. You are about to participate in a great adventure. You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to – The Outer Limits.

Just a bit before their time.

Cancon... feh.

[dskoll]

I'm Canadian and I'm completely fed up with Can-Con rules here. CBC Radio is pretty decent, but CBC TV is crap. If Canadian TV producers wanted Canadians to watch Canadian shows, here's an idea: Try making good shows once in a while.

(Funnily enough, my favourite TV channel is... TVO (TV Ontario), which is funded in part by the Ontario government, and which produces excellent kids' shows and great adults' shows like The Agenda. But for the most part, Canadian shows are crap, apart from documentaries and a few comedy shows, and the shows produced by private broadcasters are usually much worse than the ones produced by public broadcasters.)

Re:Cancon... feh.

[Anrego]

Indeed.

Interestingly one of my favorite Canadian programs ("Made in Canada") spoofed the TV/media industry and regularly made fun of how sub-par Canadian content was.

The CRTC is fighting an un-winnable battle using stupid means. Through population and economy, the US can produce more and better (or at least more popular) content than we can. This is just a reality. We've produced some good stuff, but we simply don't have the mass to compete and probably never will. Requiring broadcasters to dedicate certain amounts of time to content that no one will watch and that can't even pay for itself isn't going to fix this problem. Trying to make competing content less accessible in the hopes that people will break down and stop ignoring Canadian content is just gonna piss people off.

I love Canada, but sometimes you have to accept reality.

Re:Cancon... feh.

[meta-monkey]

You don't have to be the biggest company around to make quality TV people actually want to watch. The BBC is on this one tiny island yet they produce a dozen shows Americans (and others) gobble up. Top Gear alone is the most-watched "informative" show in the world. Hundreds of millions of people watch it. Doctor Who, Sherlock, etc etc.

Canada can make fewer, higher quality shows if they're able. But they don't seem to want to try.

Re:Cancon... feh.

[HornWumpus]

Be fair. 'Trailer Park Boys' was good, if a little too embarrassingly real for some Canadians.

Such clickbait

[XaXXon]

They want to regulate Canadian media consumption -- the same way they've been doing for decades.

Seems like a big non-story.

Re:Such clickbait

[Anonymous Coward]

They've been doing it already, so we should just let them do it even more? Makes perfect sense. Totally not worthy of any attention or discussion. Look away, nothing to see here...

Love it or Hate it

[Anonymous Coward]

Love it or hate it, the CRTC is very democratic and accepts public, government and industry input to get the big picture before making policy. The cost of producing a youtube channel vs a sitcom with many actors vary greatly. Obviously cable is dead and all new content will be over the internet. Will there be a subscription for each sitcom? Or will they be grouped together in a package? Will there be a tariff on outside content to support new Canadian content?

Re:Love it or Hate it

[Anonymous Coward]

Please tell me you are being sarcastic....

" the CRTC is very democratic and accepts public, government and industry input to get the big picture before making policy. "

The CRTC is a revolving door for industry insiders to move between the CRTC and high paying jobs at the very entities they are suppose to regulate.
They don't give a sh*t about the public, if they did they would actually do something to address the problems instead of just dancing around them.

Coincidentally...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the extra regulation on foreign video services while exempting Canadian services has absolutely NOTHING to do with Rogers and Shaw attempting to gain entrance to the market with their crappy showmi.com video service.

Fix it: http://youbroketheinternet.org/

[Anonymous Coward]

We need to get involved and support the various groups working toward a solution to these problems. Particularly those putting it all together in once nice and convenient package. Besides http://youbroketheinternet.org/ check out libreCMC.org. They're 'developing' an embedded OS (removing the non-free bits) without proprietary bits. This is essential to maintaining our privacy and security, but going farther in ensuring that every bit at a hardware level has been freed and working toward ensuring users can actually buy the hardware. Right now we need both the software to run on top of that OS, the hardware (actually being available, as hardware changes frequently and you rarely know what your getting is the the same thing somebody else told you to get), and a software stack that runs on or even comes with the hardware. 'simple' self-hosted, anonymous, encryption (virtual meshnets), secure non-revocable naming system (non-centralized), personal clouds, personal emails, encrypted decentralized phone systems, etc.

Fuck You Canada

[Anonymous Coward]

Go back to shoveling Poutine slathered with Maple syrup into your fat little pie holes and leave my internet alone. Better still, maybe "new media" can collectively just tell you to go fuck off as well and refuse to serve content to your Backwater Hick Nation leaving you to watch educational videos about logging and the Life of Beavers or whatever it is your "media companies" produce -- because as far as I know, it's Hollywood that does the majority of film and media production in your Country and it's our "new media" that your plaid shirt festooned populace flock to.

Re:Fuck You Canada

[Skidborg]

You do realize that the most this is going to result in is Canadians getting bunch more "this video is not available in your country" messages, right?

Wriong Ministry

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want to turn control over to a Ministry, choose the right one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuQ4SJWECBY

You have no power here!

[Anonymous Coward]

You have no power here!

Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this mean that the net has to be 10% Canadian now?

Pretty weird thought, eh?

Ontario

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds to me, just like everything else in Ontario these days, that this is just an attempt by the current government to raise cash flow. That's the real problem here. Everything that has been done 'for us' in the last few years has actually been a rather veiled attempt to hide this fact. The government even has a name for the policy: "Revenue Generation Tools" In this case, the 'chicken tax' is on foreign media content. I would bet that this indeed is the result of industry pressure, as the big cable entities here have just announced that they want you to use their shiny new service instead of someone else, as we all need to be told how to do things by our great schoolmarm...

Recently we went through a bunch of this with the OLG (Ontario Lottery and Gaming)

The provincial government, having cash flow issues, asked the OLG just how they could maximize gambling revenue for Ontario coffers, and they were promised a plan that would raise revenues by something like 3 billion dollars by giving OLG a total monopoly on gambling. The plan involved eliminating a long standing arrangement between horse-racing tracks and the OLG for casino space, with the intention to close the racetrack casino's (absolving OLG of any requirement to share revenue with the tracks) and open city-centre casino's that were fully under the control of OLG. Fortunately, the cities basically said "WTF?" and said no way, the backlash from the horse-racing industry was huge, and they backed down on all of this.

Problem number two: They forced every little mom-and-pop raffle, or the Optimists or Lions clubs who raise money this way, into a morass of regulations and licensing, and a requirement for OLG to bless every ticket sold with the OLG logo once they were sure they were going to get their cut. In my hometown, the Lions (who do more for the local community than the government, no-kidding) held car raffles every year, with the money going into general revenues for the Club and supporting all of these local initiatives. Due to the changes in regulations (basically OLG wanted to know *exactly* what the revenues were going to be used for, and would not take "General revenue for local projects" as the answer) this had to end. I think they were able to get around this somehow, but no more car/truck draws, ending about 50 years of tradition.

So what happened with OLG? The big plan to boost gambling revenue for the province was a bust, and fell flat by about a billion-and-a-half bucks, a bunch of OLG'ers got sacked, and lately the government wants to download the whole thing to either Bell or Rogers in an attempt to turn it all into a strict cash-and-regulation proposition. I suspect that overall the OLG management were pretty "cost-inefficient" in a business where even a small percentage of cash-flow is huge and can hide such things. I used to work in the industry, and OLG did not have a good reputation even 15 years ago. I wonder what percent G-tech takes on revenue for technical management of the current system these days, because if yet another third party gets involved, that's another line item off the bottom line which means either they raise ticket prices, or pay out less to span the shortfall. Such is lottery math, on the business side. Selling your soul so that all you have to worry about is cashing the (now smaller) cheque and having someone to blame ("Not our fault anymore!") is a cowards' way out, but seems to be the rallying cry.

I know this drifted off-topic, but the Ontario government has been shady enough lately that despite the last election, the general murmur is that a lot of people think that there should be criminal charges laid for some of this. And the real issue: You can't take anything they say at face value, because they think we're silly enough to believe them without question. Indeed they flip-flop on enough issues, or have enough "Ooops, we're sorry, we'll just have to move on from here then..." moments that belief is hard even when motivated to do so.

For those that remember, i

Beaver Packets

[Anonymous Coward]

Return of the Beaver Hour, Anne Murray, Gino Vannelli, Geddy Lee, Andy Kim, Dan Akroyd, Rick Moranis, Matt Frewer doing a computer generated version of a certain very popular Prime Minister, Jus Reign, AK Amazing, SuperWoman and Rupan Bal...all on the Exploding Pizza Network.

It gets weird up north, doesn't it?

AKA turning the internet into crap for Canadians

[EmperorOfCanada]

I would simply VPN my router through a server/service I set up in some other country and forget that this regulation even existed.

Next week he will introduce measures to support the VHS tape industry.

At least he will now be remembered as one of the stupidest politicians of his generation. It is good to be remembered for something.

With a minimum of swearing...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Ontario government is a damn gang. I grew up out West, and now I live here in Ontario. They regulate the shit out of everything, and the effect is that 1/3 of people work for the government doing sweet fuck all. It's going to be a pleasure circumventing whatever bullshit these morons try to cram down my throat. Bring it, bitches.

CBC online

[EmperorOfCanada]

We already have a great example of this being a bag of crap. CBC created an online music service that has been a financial disaster. So let's look at a Canadian Netflix. It would be endless drivel from Mary Walsh, Rick Mercer, Cathy Jones, All year Anne Murray Christmas specials, and over acted Gordon Pinsent nostalga crap. Who the hell would pay for that crap? Oh and I forgot about the minorities. They would then send a huge amount of that money to add content by aboriginals with everything having an injection from whatever Toronto minorities have the most influence. So as programs were made they would insist that the full rainbow of Canadian multiculturalism be on display in order to get some funding, low levels of funding so the lighting would look florescent and the sound would be hollow and everything would look like it was filmed on 1980s Betamax.

Basically what this twerp is thinking is that he could somehow bend reality and make us choke down the same crap that we were force fed in the 70s; a time when we basically had no choice. But don't think that Canadians will take the Beach Combers for 1 second when we have tasted Netflix.

But the most ironic joke is that let's say that he managed to force Netflix to add a bunch of third rate Can-Con excrement; the Netflix algorithms would realize that nobody wanted it and automatically stop recommending it to us. A few things might actually not sink like a turd like maybe old episodes of Kids in the Hall. But I don't think that the Littlest Hobo would ever show up in the "Popular on Netflix" column.

So what this really boils down to is that this asswipe is going for a cash grab so that he can wield some power as he dribbles out some money to those who kiss his ass and finance his party to his satisfaction.

The first thing that came to mind...

[Anonymous Coward]

... AnD F#(| YoU!
(caps intended)

CRTC needs to die

[Anonymous Coward]

Holding back Canada since forever

Australia here.

[Anonymous Coward]

government Wants To Regulate the Internet.

Didn't the USA government demand the same 3 years ago? And the Chinese about 10 years ago? Australia has invisible censorship for our safety; of course.

But there is also the matter of cultural imperialism. We've imported the war on terror/drugs. Every year, the foreign controlled channels replace another 3 Australian words with American ones. Last year we got mom, cookie, flip-flops. This year we got American prudishness: Bare breasts have essentially disappeared from Aussie television. The late night (usually American) movie is the exception.

Regulation doesn't stop perceptions and culture being manipulated. The current leader of the country is on television every night screaming "Muslims are terrorists". It's the Aussie version of the "two-minute hate". I worry the next step will be broadcasting some middle-eastern city being bombed into rubble, like the USA networks did every night about 11 years ago.

RED LINE

[Anonymous Coward]

The Internet is the red line for the hacker community. Attempts by government or coproprations to control it is being viewed by the hacker community as a military attack, and many will respond in kind.

Re:There is nothing wrong with your television set

[phorm]

Oh how I miss those.

Movie industry

[phorm]

The industry is even worse though. It's always pissed me off that they can make the DVD's in a country where it's the cheapest possible, then slap on "region codes" to prevent you from buying it from said country so they can jack up the local price.

Old Media Had It's Chance to Adapt

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead it threw a hissy fit. Netflix is the only reason a new model is even viable. If they had wanted to, they could have moved into the streaming market, instead they decided to try and do everything they could to stop Netflix without trying to compete.
They had their chance, and 20 more, while Netflix has been building itself up despite their best efforts to destroy it. Old media deserves nothing. They can lick Netflix's boot and hope to be given a chance to piggyback on them.

Re:Bitch Mc Wynne fails again

[Murdoch5]

This isn't a troll comment, she actually is the worst thing to happen to Ontario ever.

Ontario Regulating the Interenet - ie Netflix....

[MindlessGenius]

Lets be real here....

Netflix is a huge threath to every one elses business model.

- You can watch an entire movie without a single commercial.

- You can practically enjoy every movies in Netflix's inventory for one low monthly price!

- You can watch that movie more than once and you can pick when you watch it at your leasure.

This is forcing the bandwidth providers to a minimal standard of performance for bandwidth, and quality of service delivery, and it's chipping at their monopoly over content delivery since they also own the major Television broadcast services like with Rogers and Bell who are both...

All I can ear here is the local Canadian industry and the leading local bandwidht providers screaming at the top of their lungs at our government via lobbyists and those nasty smelling guys in suits who service the needs of the rich elites they call lawyers...

They are all shouting lets stop Netflix... At all cost!

Our system, is the real problem here. Corporations now have way too much control over policy. The population have no say, no voice, at least not a voice that matters to politicians...

Even when the government appears to be legislating on corporate behaviours they are simply working to ensure the feeding of the largest predators the best scraps of meat...

Noam Chomsky: Can Civilization Survive Capitalism?
http://www.alternet.org/noam-c...

How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful - Noam Chomsky and Glenn Greenwald "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

This is exactly why.

[DarthVain]

Because jobs (and political donations). Although it seems most the jobs that Rogers creates are minimum wage call centre jobs...