Slashdot Mirror
Canada's CRTC Declares Broadband Internet Access a Basic Service (www.cbc.ca)
New submitter jbwiebe quotes a report from CBC.ca: The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has declared broadband internet a basic telecommunications service. In a ruling handed down today, the national regulator ordered the country's internet providers to begin working toward boosting internet service and speeds in rural and isolated areas. With today's ruling, CRTC has set new targets for internet service providers to offer customers in all parts of the country download speeds of at least 50 megabits per second (Mbps) and upload speeds of at least 10 Mbps, and to also offer the option of unlimited data. The CRTC estimates two million Canadian households, or roughly 18 per cent, don't have access to those speeds or data. The CRTC's goal is to reduce that to 10 per cent by 2021. To achieve that, the CRTC will require providers pay into a fund that's set to grow to $750 million over five years. The companies will be able to dip into that fund to help pay for the infrastructure needed to extend high-speed service to areas where it is not currently available. The fund is similar to one that subsidized the expansion of local landline telephone service in years past. Providers used to pay 0.53 per cent of their revenues, excluding broadband, into that fund. Now they'll pay the same rate on all revenues, including broadband.
So our sat plan has an option of unlimited data*.
*data slowed to 56K speeds when you hit your fap cap or for an added $150-$200/mo you can get 50 down / 10 up all the time.
The CRTC is an even more toothless cur than the FCC is in the US. Nothing will change except the artful choreography with which the telecoms will dance out of the way of doing anything substantive. This is what they pay the politicians (in Canada and the US) to do for them, and they are getting their money's worth from the spend.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
This is a reality I'd love to live in but I doubt it will happen the way the CRTC envisions. Currently I am paying 70$ per month for *UP TO* 1.5 mbps down, 512 kbps . On average a speed test pulls 0.08 mbps down and 0.03 mbps up. If my ISP won't even give me the speed they advertise what makes the CRTC think they will provide 50 mbps as advertised?
It says they have to provide it. It doesn't say for how much. I guess they could technically provide this by offering the option to run fibre straight to the user's home. It may cost tens of thousands of dollars, but they'd be providing the requirements.
So if internet access is a basic service, logically by extension their ISPs should be considered common carriers?
Twinstiq, game news
Providers used to pay 0.53 per cent of their revenues
One dollar earned, that is, 100 cents, means 53 dollar to pay. There must be something wrong in this sentence.
About 15-20 years back?
Didn't the Internet companies at the time take payments, pay out a bunch of HUGE bonuses that year, and then did fuck-all to improve infrastructure?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Exactly!
That $750M fund that's supposed to grow in five years will all be paid by the current and future subscribers, as ISPs will pass on the buck to us.
They did in the past with other fees that were community infrastructure building. And I guess they figure community should pay for the community building. ISPs are only part of the community when it comes to profiting from it, or getting some other or benefit without giving back.
In Canada the major telecom companies (telephone, cable, satellite, wireless) collude like a mafia don's wet-dream. We pay outrageous rates for data regardless of its delivery method (cable, fibre, wireless, satellite) for slow download and even slower upload transfer rates. I recently augmented my cable ISP service with wireless ISP as a connectivity backup. In general, the wireless Internet service is no worse than the cable Internet service although the same price gets me 5 GB wireless and unlimited cable. The wireless service has tiers so as I use more than 5 GB I pay about CAD15.00 more for each upstream tier. If I dumped my cable Internet service then streaming videos (CraveTV, YouTube, and education / professional training) would get expensive pretty fast. The area in which I live is urban but not sparsely populated compared to Montreal, Toronto, or Vancouver. There should be plenty of wireless bandwidth available to enable the wireless carrier to decrease the cost to the consumer; the service is HSPA+ (on a good day) and most (95+%) of my Internet usage is education, professional training, and career related. I am willing to pay CAD75.00 per month for true unlimited data (wireless) and based on past usage the typical bandwidth "consumption" tends to be less than 50 GB a month. Today the 50 GB costs CAD110.00.plus taxes and fees. By the way, CAD75.00 is the current 10 GB data usage price plus taxes and fees.
Looks like someone's cheque bounced, and the CRTC ain't happy about it.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
Here on PEI we get 1.5 Mbps out in the country. Yup, Megabits, not bytes.
And we pay the same rate for it that I did for that speed back in 1997 in urban Ontario.
Bell was under contract to have faster internet in place here 6-8 years ago and never got around to it.
How they'll be forced to move forward, who knows.
At least an independent company out here is laying out wireless pods as fast as they can to give rural users a better choice.
For many years, I had a paltry 12 megabit DSL service. One day it went out and the company said it would take FIVE days before a tech could come out to look at it. I told them that that was unacceptable and I switched over to cable modem on the grounds that a) I would be getting 100 megabit and b) it would be slightly cheaper. What I didn't realize is that I was only given 300 gig per month of data which I burned through in about 2-3 weeks. I quickly figured out that this is how they are screwing over their customers. Internet-based TV would be pretty much impossible. But even so, I discovered that my DSL provider has a data cap too. It's 600 gig per month though. I live in a fairly rural city and none of my urban-dwelling friends have data caps at all. Having high bandwidth with a low data cap is like owning a Ferrari when you live in Manhattan. You might be able to go really fast for a couple of blocks but that's it.
Home and business Internet service needs to be related as a utility in the US. Obama has been trying, but the typical Republican douchbaggery have fought him every inch of the way so that Time Warner/Comcast can continue to make money hand over fist.
I don't respond to AC's.
Hi - I work for a Canadian ISP (much like Teksavvy). Something to watch out for in a big way with any 3rd party Canadian ISP this year: Fiber to the Premises. Keep reading..... Looks like CRTC and the big boys are going down a path where all 3rd party ISP's need to run (or connect) to each serving area independently and individually. What does this mean? Well, for the smaller 3rd party ISPs (most of them) it's not financially sustainable (impossible) for us to cover all the metro regions -optically- to the customer. Today we have aggregated circuits that go back to the big guys (like Bell/Rogers) that covers entire provinces with a single optical connection (the NNI - network to network interface), now we will need hundreds of (very expensive) NNI's to be able to cover all of the subscribers. They call this "disaggregated". CRTC is going down the disaggregated path to permit optical interconnect. The technology exists where all of this can be 'clean' and 'aggregated' just like before. If disaggregated access for ISPs is mandated, you're going to see far fewer options to connect from 3rd party ISPs for FTTP. This is a big deal. Again, watch out for this and support 'aggregated' for the small ISPs. This disaggregated approach stemmed from something called CBB - now the big boys are using the disaggregated approach to slow all the little guys from gaining access. More fun. What ever your thoughts are on monopolies vs 3rd party 'leeches' of the network, remember the tax dollars built up the infrastructure and the companies that can afford to lay the infrastructure down. The smaller companies pretty much have no hope of doing this in established areas sadly - it's not all money - some of this is politics keeping us out.
Also a basic services is asking electors to vote against the voters in their district because someone on our team clicked on an email from Russia (that was also sent to the other side, which knew enough not to click on it)
Back when we built the giant railroad, I think it worked the same way.
Mass infrastructure projects tend to have this bizarre social calculus where the hat is passed around during the daylight hours, and then the bat makes its rounds (among the free riders) after sunset, i.e. these projects are pretty much always designed to get you coming or going.
The golden goose is classified as ATU 571. Do tell us what classification number your story falls under concerning where all this money originates.