Slashdot Mirror


Bell Canada Wants Pirate Websites Blocked For Canadians (www.cbc.ca)

New submitter wierzpio writes: According to Rob Malcolmson, Bell Canada's VP of regulatory affairs, Canada is a safe haven to internet pirates and the only solution is to create a federally mandated blacklist of pirate websites. Unlike the existing blacklist in the U.K., Bell's plan appears to involve no judicial oversight. "Engaging in extrajudicial attempts to block access to sites, I think, raises all kinds of Charter of Rights and Freedoms issues," argues Michael Geist, a University of Ottawa professor and internet law expert. Quebec also wants to block sites. The province recently introduced a provincial law that would force internet providers to block users' access to online gambling sites not approved by the government. It argues the legislation is necessary to ensure internet gambling companies maintain responsible gaming rules.

136 comments

  1. What could go wrong by pablo_max · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmm, the government and private companies putting together a list of sites they consider "prates" and blocking them from your view.
    Certainly no potential for abuse here.

    1. Re:What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would never fly in America, unless you could also block the acclaimed and pathetic and failing New York Times. And CNN. And MSNBC. And NPR, Reuters, BBC, anything foreign, and basically only allowed NASCAR and nazism.

    2. Re:What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      proposed by canada's version of comcast, no less.

    3. Re:What could go wrong by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

      As someone who lives in the UK where they are already doing this I can tell you it totally works. There are most definitely not loads of proxies to get around the 'blocks'. VPN totally isn't a thing either. Yes this is worth doing and will solve the issue once and for all, job done... :|

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    4. Re: What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I can't tell if this is sarcasm or genuine.

    5. Re:What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lived in Central America for four years. When I moved back to the UK I was horrified by the number of blocked sites. I suppose if you lived here that whole time the gradual increase in blocked sites would be less noticeable. Then I got a sim card and fount the mobile phone network was even blocking Tinder ( which is probably a good thing)

      The UK has way too much control over what their citizens can view or download.

    6. Re: What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see why Canada insists on doing that. Most content is US property: use it as a bargaining chip! Don't want our wood, milk and planes? Well we don't want to use our precious law enforcement resources to protect your IP.

    7. Re:What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would you think that ? they try to make it fly in europe at this very moment . Total government control in the name of what about the 12th ferrari for the producers of GoT this year ? cuz terreriztz disguise as downloadmom these days. contempt and abuse of resources ,hindring the system and all that, if only i were the superjudge this would all be over soon and it would go for the real crime and the psychos like legalist extortion trolls ... sending mass communication to a batch of people hoping some will pay up sounds like something i heard before whats wrong with slashdot ... i can't get on it unless i google it "within last 24 hours" then follow that link i guess that means "whats wrong with all my machines AND my phone here" doesn't it ? 0_o ... first time i notice i can get back on it through google so its the hackers on meth and the hellgian stasi or the trump squad again ? i'm sure it wasnt the koreans this time rated O(mg) for partially off-topic

      I thinks yu shld learn, learn that way of writings and talk-talks that is English.
      cuz that whats wrong with slashdot... bunch of ignorant lazy ones.
      You're not DELIBERATELY making your posts impossible to understand, are you?

    8. Re: What could go wrong by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 2

      Canada is not insisting that, nor are the people living in the land called Canada insisting that. It's Bell that's asking that. And we didn't ask them to ask for that. No thanks Bell. I want a free and open Internet, and I certainly do not want the likes of Bell deciding what I can and cannot read. 'And no, I do not pirate: I rent my movies and I pay for my software et al. -- Free as in Freedom Internet.

    9. Re: What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shira law

    10. Re:What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially with a company like Bell at the helm. Everyone I know hates them with a passion.

    11. Re:What could go wrong by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 1

      Don't British people want freedom? Isn't there a political party there that is anti-censorship?

    12. Re: What could go wrong by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      never

      That word doesn't mean what you think it does.

    13. Re: What could go wrong by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Don't British people want freedom?

      Well, let's see: when, exactly, did they give up their inherent rights to personal freedom and self defense?

    14. Re: What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd put it somewhere around 1649-1660 but it's hard to be exact, since I'm a shitty historian. But by 1660 it had been clearly established that the people of England don't care about anything, especially themselves.

    15. Re: What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they firewall the site, not just reply non-existent in their DNS servers?

      DNS is trivial to get around. Firewalling increases hassle to workaround it.

    16. Re:What could go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? I'm in the UK as well. Google "Pirate bay proxy", click on a link and choose a proxy. Some are broken but I've never had to try more than the 5th on the search results to find a working one. And all of those are failing to connect because of SSL issues rather than actually being blocked by ISPs.

      The blockage attempts in the UK are a complete joke.

  2. Just think off the copyright holders! by Z80a · · Score: 2

    Don't sound as convincing as "Think of the children", but probably will be enforced anyway.

  3. Canuck Nannies Are The Worst Kind Of Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just can't help themselves in controlling your lives.

    1. Re:Canuck Nannies Are The Worst Kind Of Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just can't help themselves in controlling your lives.

      There must be something in the water of the English Commonwealth (the former British Colonial Empire including the home country).

      First England, now Canada. Who is next? Australia? New Zealand?

  4. Sigh. by ledow · · Score: 2

    They should just ask DICE to run them for them. That'll take them down rather quickly.

    Sourceforge and Slashdot have been doing the old "front-page-only" trick for a few days in a row now.

    You made TheRegister too: https://www.theregister.co.uk/...

    But not a mention on here?

    1. Re:Sigh. by hyades1 · · Score: 0

      A lot of people who have mentioned it are getting down-modded for "Off Topic". A cynic might suspect the Lords and Masters here don't want to talk about it, and they don't want anybody else talking about it either.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    2. Re:Sigh. by ledow · · Score: 1

      Ah, nothing like a techy news site trying to stifle the news of their public techy failures.

    3. Re:Sigh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should just ask DICE to run them for them. That'll take them down rather quickly.

      Sourceforge and Slashdot have been doing the old "front-page-only" trick for a few days in a row now.

      You made TheRegister too: https://www.theregister.co.uk/...

      But not a mention on here?

      Yeah, so much for the "reliability and redundancy of the cloud" ... a power meltdown knackers the entire web site!

      All the DEVOPS theory in the world can't save your web site from incompetent administrators that do nothing about redundancy.

      I guess the Sourceforge and Slashdot admins will severely soil themselves when the mega-earthquake hits Northern California.

  5. Ah, canuckistan.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Poutine eating pushovers. Go fuck a maple tree.

    1. Re: Ah, canuckistan.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. The amount of invading sand monkeys "adopted" by Canucks is staggering.

    2. Re:Ah, canuckistan.... by ls671 · · Score: 1

      Hmm.., are you creimer's uncle by any chance?

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  6. Judicial oversight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, the UK blocklist has judicial oversight? I though judicial oversight was only used in places like China.

    Over here in Denmark, there is no judicial oversight, the block list is controlled by private interest groups, and getting off the list is nearly impossible. Last time the list was leaked, it had several legitimate companies.

    1. Re:Judicial oversight? by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 1

      Censorship is so wrong.

    2. Re:Judicial oversight? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Ah, the worst features of public and private censorship combined! No accountability and sweeping coverage. How efficient of you.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  7. And what could actually go right ? by DrYak · · Score: 1

    And conversly, given the current age,
    where technologies such as VPNs and Tor exist,
    what do they expect to actually work ?

    Basically people will just browse to http://uj3wazyk5u4hnvtk.onion/ instead of https://thepiratebay.org and completely ignore whatever restriction the local government is trying to put.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:And what could actually go right ? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      They won't even do that. just go to google, type pirate bay proxy and go to the first one that comes up.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    2. Re:And what could actually go right ? by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Which will cause even more problems than it solves. People will go through great lengths to get around the blockages. Installing various nefarious programs or visiting web sites promising to deliver content and then just infecting their computer. I'm not saying pirating is right, but I've seen it happen time and time again, where people who want content that isn't easily available will do really stupid things directed by websites that promise the content.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:And what could actually go right ? by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      Basically people will just browse to http://uj3wazyk5u4hnvtk.onion/ instead of https://thepiratebay.org and completely ignore whatever restriction the local government is trying to put.

      Bell Canada knows that the majority of us Canadians aren't savvy enough or motivated to even find pirate sites in the first place, never mind installing TOR and/or using a VPN. This smacks to me of the attention-getting, politically-motivated posing that one expects from the media empire mouthpieces of companies like Bell. That "no judicial oversight" caveat seems ripe for all kinds of abuse that may have nothing to do with combatting piracy per se.

      OTOH, maybe there are more pirates here in Canada than I thought, although I don't know any outside of my tech-centric friends.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    4. Re:And what could actually go right ? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What can go right? Easy. Bell Canada can brag about stopping piracy, and by disposing of any stupid due process doesn't need to do much work.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. Sounds to me like the company should be broken up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bell Canada doesn't want to lose its monopoly teat on IPTV services. So of course they don't want any competition. Legal or otherwise. It's easier to claim they're going against the 'pirates' first.

  9. We are smart EH?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Canada there are many statutes in law keeping the internet open and not liable for the content it distributes. Bell is both a content owner/host, distributor and internet provider. The CRTC provides protection for the consumer so that one company does not have a negative impact for the user and keeps these areas separate.

    It is the copyright laws in Canada that are outdated. It is too costly to go through the courts for every case. A ticket and fine out of court system would be a better setup.

    1. Re:We are smart EH?! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Thing is, it's fairly easy for a police officer to tell if I'm speeding and issue a ticket. It's a lot harder in general to see if I'm violating copyright.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  10. Sorry for offtopic by advocate_one · · Score: 1

    but there appears to be no information at all as to why Slashdot was completely borked this week...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    1. Re:Sorry for offtopic by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      This was mentioned in threads on some earlier posts https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/27/faulty_data_center_takes_out_sourceforge/

      It would be nice to have a geeky article about how things went wrong.

    2. Re: Sorry for offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If this happened on hackernews they would.

  11. And then by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    They'll mark sites like netflix, hulu, CBS All access and Amazon, because someone told them to block them.

    It's not like their citizens actually have rights or freedom. Just ask the guy from TVAddons for Kodi:

    http://cordcuttersnews.com/now...

    1. Re:And then by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      We only have Netflix and Amazon Prime in Canada. Well, those two and CraveTV, of course. Would be funny if Bell blocked CraveTV.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  12. What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if they manage to stop downloading, why would anyone buy Bell TV when Netflix is so much cheaper? Are they going to ban Netflix too?

    Their next step will be to confiscate and ban all reading material. Obviously, anyone who reads is stealing money from Bell Canada.

    1. Re:What's next? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      CraveTV is Bell's answer to Netflix. They seem to think that TV is only for TV shows.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re: What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ban Netflix? The Canadian Government just paid Netflix $500 million to help push "Canadian content".

  13. CPCC already get paid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Canadians just got free access after that, after all it's a levy not a tax.

    1. Re:CPCC already get paid by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 1

      You remember that, eh? Me too.

    2. Re:CPCC already get paid by mark-t · · Score: 1

      That levy is for private and personal use copying only, and should not be taken as being a kind of general payment for the right to share copyrighted content without permission.

    3. Re:CPCC already get paid by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Audio only.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  14. This could get interesting by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    Canadians are a pretty tech-literate lot when it comes to entertainment. If Bell gets what they want, I would expect to see significant push-back in the form of increased VPN use. Then Bell will be back trying to get VPN's outlawed.

    Bell might want to watch out. In some respects, it could almost be considered a monopoly. Certainly it is a scumbag of a company, and it is heartily detested by a huge number of Canadians. If I were in government, I would be very careful indeed about what I gave them, and what the consequences might be.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:This could get interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bell *is* a monopoly, along side with Rogers and. Telus (triopoly you could say, but I see them all as one and the same, like a Hydra). They have divided the market and are continuously colluding on all aspects of telecom and media distribution, content and pricing

      Canadians are too dumb to actually do anything about it, while CRTC being a regulatory body which almost never gets anything done for the consumers since it's generally headed by a former exec from the industry (what conflict of interest?)

      So this will most likely happen and there will be a small outcry but at the end won't make a difference.

    2. Re:This could get interesting by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Then Bell will be back trying to get VPN's outlawed.

      Don't a lot of businesses require vpn's in order to work from home? Would a vpn ban amount to making it impossible to telecommute?

    3. Re:This could get interesting by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Canadians are a pretty tech-literate lot when it comes to entertainment. If Bell gets what they want, I would expect to see significant push-back in the form of increased VPN use. Then Bell will be back trying to get VPN's outlawed.

      Not necessary. Netflix has been quite successful in maintaining a block list of VPNs. No reason Bell couldn't do the same.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    4. Re: This could get interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix blocks VPN's to their servers. How the fuck would Bell block and limit VPN'S not using Bell as a server and not being accessed?

      Learn what a fucking VPN does.

    5. Re: This could get interesting by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for saving me the trouble. ;-)

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    6. Re: This could get interesting by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Netflix blocks VPN's to their servers. How the fuck would Bell block and limit VPN'S not using Bell as a server and not being accessed?

      Learn what a fucking VPN does.

      I should have been more specific and said Bell or other ISPs. Since your data passes through them, they can most certainly block it.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
  15. A better way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Malcolmson's head on a silver platter.

    Simple, effective, and far less illegal.

  16. I completely agree by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 1


    I think we should all get behind this initiative from Bell and block all the bad websites.

    Can they propose a method that does not involve becoming an isolated, non-democratic and dictatorial regime?

    You see so far, even countries like North Korea cannot block access to anything it likes...so how will an interconnected, development and democratic country like Canada mange that?

    Having considered the above and weighed the possibilities I suggest we just ignore Bell and carry on with our lives. This seems to be the easiest and cheapest to implement. In fact if the Canadian government paid not heed to it either that would be best for tax payers as there are more serious matters to attend to.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  17. DNS by stud9920 · · Score: 1

    In Belgium, they enforce that on ISP level by sending DNS response redirecting to a site from the ministry of justice telling you that piracy is bad mmkay.

    Thanks to Google Public DNS it's only an issue for unrooted phones, which are not the best device for piracy anyway...

    1. Re:DNS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rooted phones are arguably less secure than unrooted phones, especially ones with custom roms that have who knows what backdoors built into them. You're talking about phones that have already been "exploited" and who know's what extra crap came alongside the exploit.

    2. Re:DNS by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      You don't need a rooted phone. You can easily change the DNS Settings on your phone to use whatever DNS server you want, or you can connect through a VPN if you so desire. What kind of phone are you using that doesn't allow you to change your DNS Server?

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  18. Tireless lobbyists by gotan · · Score: 2

    We've had this debate, at least in my country, I think four or five times now. Canada is probably no different. It's always about blocking content someone or other wants blocked opening the door for censorship. Sometimes the approaches are a little different, be it some kinds of illegal content, terrorism etc.

    There is always strong lobbying by the content industry that wants the mechanisms in place and some law that eventually can be extended to cover what they really want. Standing on the sidelines are religious communities that want blasphemy banned or other content they consider to be "dirty".

    The first few times these attacks on civil rights met a strong reaction, there was a big discussion and the attack failed. Nevertheless the lobbyists simply start a new attack a few years later and the public just grows tired of having the same discussion over and over again.

    Also the politicians either stay completely clueless regarding the subject or the bribes are just raising. Otherwise it's unexplainable why the lobbyists aren't simply ignored when they start the same debate after they've lost it previously. In my opinion politicians supporting such crap should be constantly hammered with accusations of corruptness until they leave politics.

    Web blocking isn't the only debate where this happens, wire tapping, IP-logging, the cryptowar, it's all like:
    "Not again, we had this debate already."

    --
    "By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
    1. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      In this case, Bell is the content distributor, the lobbyist, one of the largest Telcos and also a crown corporation.

      I think there should be a movement to silence Bell on this issue as they have a clear conflict of interest.

    2. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In this case, Bell is the content distributor, the lobbyist, one of the largest Telcos and also a crown corporation.

      I think there should be a movement to silence Bell on this issue as they have a clear conflict of interest.

      Bell is a content distributor, lobbyist and a very large Telco (one of the big Three - Bell, Telus, Rogers).

      I cannot find a listing that indicates that Bell currently is a crown corporation. Would you be able to provide a source to your assertion that Bell is a crown corp?

    3. Re:Tireless lobbyists by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Crown corporation? I think not. Perhaps you can find a citation?

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    4. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look we're going to have this debate until you make the right choice. What bit don't you understand? Do as you are told.

      I'd like to say it's for your own good, but no-one would swallow that.

    5. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Whoops, yeah, that's strictly wrong.

      Bell Canada has a complex history with special statuses and stuff, but it's not a crown asset. Flub on my part.

    6. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      Would you be able to provide a source to your assertion that Bell is a crown corp?

      Nope, I goofed. I'm looking for some of the more interesting references on the juicy bits of the history, but no, it's not government-owned.

    7. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your point is still valid, they have a clear conflict of interests as they are rights holders of several media assets and also control distribution (internet / IPTV). It's a pervasive problem in the media these days and nothing seems to be being done about it. maybe because we're too worried about what the football players or the BLM or the muslims are doing?

    8. Re:Tireless lobbyists by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Also the politicians either stay completely clueless regarding the subject or the bribes are just raising. Otherwise it's unexplainable why the lobbyists aren't simply ignored when they start the same debate after they've lost it previously. In my opinion politicians supporting such crap should be constantly hammered with accusations of corruptness until they leave politics.

      The problem is the voters: the voters are supposed to see that these representatives aren't working for them, and vote them out. They don't do that, so they just wait until the small minority of activists aren't paying attention so they can push the legislation through.

      Ultimately, the blame lies with the voters.

    9. Re:Tireless lobbyists by dryeo · · Score: 1

      They've probably absorbed an ex-crown corp or more, perhaps like Telus here who were created from BC Tel and whatever Alberta's phone company was called.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  19. hahaha stupid sloshditty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah dumb admins, aslhdot is crapo now.

    Cant even change to dark backgrounds, white is so CORPORATE you dooshes.

  20. I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Don't you guys have a tax on media that effectively paid the rights holders for your now perfectly legitimate practice of copying things? I thought pirates couldn't exist in Canada... without boarding ships, raping, pillaging and making the crew walk the plank.

    1. Re:I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuGGNsE3_8Y

      RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    2. Re:I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Don't you guys have a tax on media that effectively paid the rights holders for your now perfectly legitimate practice of copying things?

      If you're referring to the blank media levy that you have to pay in Canada, the levy doesn't exist to legitimatize the illegitimate practice of media piracy, it exists to compensate the rights holders for personal and private use copying *ONLY*.

    3. Re:I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by dryeo · · Score: 1

      The levy is mostly on audio stuff like cassette tapes and CDR. After the courts ruled that the levy made all private copying of audio basically legal, they didn't pursue a levy on stuff such as DVDR. That's also why blank DVDs are cheaper then blank CDs

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    4. Re:I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're referring to the blank media levy that you have to pay in Canada, the levy doesn't exist to legitimatize the illegitimate practice of media piracy, it exists to compensate the rights holders for personal and private use copying *ONLY*.

      Except that, because it's applied indiscriminately -- nobody stops you and verifies that you're planning on using your spindle of blank CDs or DVDs to copy music as opposed to, say, creating data backups or making a copy of your photos to send to Mom -- it's effectively a punishment based on presumption of a crime. If the government is going to force us to pay for something that they're assuming we're going to do, they're basically giving their blessing to do it.

    5. Re:I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      You have it backwards. The only presumption with the levy is is that you will engage in the private use copying that the levy is for. There is no presumption of guilt whatsoever.

    6. Re: I thought pirates didn't exist in Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like racketeering to me.

  21. Follow the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone just paid Rob Malcolmson.

  22. DNS blocking by houghi · · Score: 2

    Most likely they will use DNS blocking, like they do in other places. Easy to just use an open DNS server. Plenty around, even if you do not want to give Google even more data.
    One of the lists

    Or just use your own DNS server, like bind. The latter would be not a real solution for many.
    Why is there no 'single PC' DNS server available? Only listen to localhost and does the resolving for everything that is not in the hosts file.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:DNS blocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out Unbound. You can run it on your local Windows PC as a service. Or if you want to make it available to your LAN, run it on your OpenWRT router.

      It is a bit silly that a correct implementation of a DNS resolver is all you need, but that won't last: They'll learn and improve their censorship infrastructure.

    2. Re: DNS blocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pi-hole.net

    3. Re:DNS blocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just use your own DNS server, like bind.

      A personal DNS server is slow. Very slow if your internets is congested.

      An ISP's DNS server benefits from the caching done for 100k+ users.

      You're better off setting up a personal DNS server that queries your ISP's and spots bogus NXDOMAINs and fire off the request to a backup server instead. Unfortunately, I am not aware of any software that can do that.

    4. Re:DNS blocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not better off with a solution that doesn't exist. A personal DNS server works and isn't slow. Compared to TLS handshake and HTTP turnaround times, DNS lookups are lightning fast, even on slow connections. An ISP's DNS server may have a cache filled by the requests of 100k+ users, but it also has 100k+ users. All in all, there is no speed penalty from using a local recursive resolver. And it's a solution that exists, which beats any all solutions that don't.

  23. ok time to look for independent provider... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Freedom of Internet at its best!!!

    1. Re:ok time to look for independent provider... by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 1

      Freedom of Internet at its best!!! 'Worth saying twice.

  24. Censorship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When did Censorship become accepted practice? Not that anyone should support these illegal businesses...

  25. Translation by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    The Bell Canada VP has friends in the Canadian edition of MPAA and RIAA.

    1. Re:Translation by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Bell Canada is pissed off that Canadians won't subscribe to CraveTV to watch Star Trek: Discovery.

      Canadians are pissed off that Bell Canada got Star Trek: Discovery, instead of Netflix Canada.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Translation by fred6666 · · Score: 1

      People always complain when Netflix doesn't get X.
      If Netflix had every show, the price would be $100/month instead of $14

    3. Re:Translation by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Netflix got the rights for ST:D for all other countries on the planet, except the U.S.A. (CBS kept it for themselves since they're the ones making it) but Bell Media was able to get the rights instead of Netflix? We suspect a dirty deal somewhere. After all Bell has tentacles in media, TV, internet, etc. They are in a constant flux of conflict of interest but the CRTC doesn't do shit.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:Translation by fred6666 · · Score: 1

      Netflix has more content than CraveTV. So they probably made more dirty deals than Bell.

      Netflix's strategy is clearly to become a monopoly. They already started raising prices.

    5. Re: Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moron, Netflix is a competitor to CBS All Access. Try common sense, first.

    6. Re: Translation by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      There's no such thing as "CBS All Access" in Canada. Try your own tip and use common sense first.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  26. jasa maket by oggii14 · · Score: 1

    visit : jasa maket

  27. Bell Canada can go jump in a Great Lake by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 1

    I really really despise the idea of Canadian companies censoring the web on me -- yes to a free Internet -- free as in freedom and an open Internet. And no, I do not pirate: I rent my movies and I pay for my software et al.

  28. Establishment Thinking v. Invisible Hand by gachunt · · Score: 1

    Canadians have few options for TV. It's basically Bell, or one cable company (the 3 big cable companies have carved up each city, so they don't compete against the other)

    With high prices, limited selection of channels, and ongoing high rental fees for boxes (required for each TV in the house) it's not surprising that Canadians are pirate-friendly.

    Netflix has proven that customers are willing to pay for content when the price is right.

    Pirating and cord-cutting should be the canary/coalmine to Bell that they need to adapt, but instead, they continue to ignore the silent protests of their customers.

    And how far will Bell go? Last year, the Bell president snitched on his own daughter for using a VPN

    1. Re:Establishment Thinking v. Invisible Hand by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Well, they are trying and already have something in place. Of course, when they introduced it, you needed to be a Bell satellite subscriber to even sign up but after a few months they removed that requirement. Unlike Netflix Canada, however, they only have a handful of movies. They seem to have all James Bond movies, the classic Blade Runner movie and... that seems to be it. If you like TV shows from the 90's, however, there's plenty of those (Seinfeld, Cheers, etc). They also have Star Trek: Discovery and all the older Trek series.

      I'm guessing the main reason they're fed up with pirates is that they have Star Trek: Discovery on CraveTV but Canadians are pissed off that it's not available on Netflix Canada (unlike every other country besides the U.S.A.) and most don't want to subscribe to another streaming service besides Netflix.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Establishment Thinking v. Invisible Hand by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      As your own link shows, Netflix has gone to some lengths to block customers who use VPN services to get around their geo-blocks.

      This isn't a problem for me: I canceled my Netflix subscription. I suggest everyone else disappointed with Netflix's service do the same. You can get all the content you really need on BT.

    3. Re:Establishment Thinking v. Invisible Hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sad thing is, everybody is blaming Netflix. They don't really care if you use a VPN. The only reason that they are blocking VPNs is that Hollywood and the others are demanding it. If Netflix doesn't comply, they won't be able to license the content. Netflix doesn't have a choice.

    4. Re:Establishment Thinking v. Invisible Hand by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Netflix doesn't have to do a good job of it. They can do a half-ass job to show "we're trying!", but they're not.

  29. Québec by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Québec also wants to block sites. The province recently introduced a provincial law that would force internet providers to block users' access to online gambling sites not approved by the government. It argues the legislation is necessary to ensure internet gambling companies maintain responsible gaming rules.

    Loto-Québec also wants to block sites. The provincial crown corporation recently introduced a provincial law that would force internet providers to block users' access to online gambling sites not approved by the government. It argues the legislation is necessary to ensure internet gambling companies pay their fees.

    FTFY.

    I can't even remember the number of times I read "Offer not valid in Québec" in the rules of contests I wanted to enter. They have crazy high requirements so most companies don't even bother and just say we can't participate.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Québec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, these "requirements" are not crazy at all, and are just common sense.
      The actual law: http://www.legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/showdoc/cr/S-13.1,%20r.%202

      From section #4:
      The conditions regarding the appropriate lottery scheme must appear on the ticket together with:
      (a) the name of the lottery scheme;
      (b) the date of the awarding of prizes;
      (c) the selection and wager of the participant;
      (d) a verification number; and
      (e) the period during which holders of winning tickets must claim their prizes.

      Section #6: Don't sell the ticket at a higher price than what can be won
      Section #10: Don't screw your customers or yourself
      Section #13: Don't screw your retailers

    2. Re:Québec by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1
      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:Québec by Stephen+Battleware · · Score: 1

      You can't have both a free (free as in freedom) Internet and censorship. I want a free internet.

    4. Re:Québec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I can't even remember the number of times I read "Offer not valid in Québec" in the rules of contests I wanted to enter. They have crazy high requirements so most companies don't even bother and just say we can't participate

      Quebec has its own gambling laws and this affects the type of "offers" you mention, this is why.

      This is also why gambling sites and Quebec get a special mention here. "Distinct society" indeed - one I'd be embarrassed to be part of or associated with. I'm saying this as a French-canadian (living outside of Quebec and proud of it).

  30. Lemme get this straight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I pay joe shmoe cable company a monthly fee to watch tv and that's ok.

    I pay same joe shmoe cable company a monthly fee to watch tv on internet, and that's not ok?

    Is this a cake and eating it too problem?

    Can't you just block facebook?

  31. The reason why by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

    The reason why they're saying this is because Bell is a content provider and they refuse to lease rights to places like Netflix.

    --

    ---
    ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  32. Canada Copyright Laws Are Fine by HannethCom · · Score: 1

    Our copyright laws are not out of date. Actually a large portion of them are relatively new. The reason why there are so many restrictions on companies in Canada is due to constant abuse of the system. Sometimes the US refuses to do. It is the US copyright that is massively out of date. Bell is one of the reasons for the restrictions on companies. Also, what Bell calls piracy, and what the law calls piracy is very different.

    --
    Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
  33. FLQ to separate internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The FLQ will separate Quebecs part of the internet, and the provincial gouvernement will enforce french language laws on it. Make Bell Canader Eh Great Again.

  34. Bell is over priced so people got to streams by evolutionary · · Score: 2

    Bell, has always been aggressive on it's pricing and it's reputation in the government is not exactly spotless. They had a "internet security service" scam when by default they would give you a disk they told you to install (which I told people there is never a good reason to do with a legit ISP), that would install a remote access service and symantic antivirus, for which you would be billed an extra fee per month be default, whether you installed it or not (I can't remember the amount but I think it was ~$10 CAD). Analysis revealed this "solution" made people's computers LESS security as Bell in essence planed a back door for their technicians to use (their own, not MS's remote assistance). I remember advising people to remove the service, get their own antivirus (which was certainly less than $120/year) and cancel the "plan" that was by default tagged to their account. Several clients had taken my advice but 3 months later was still being charged. Each month out of the 3 when asked why the charge was still there,the support person said it was an "oversight". For a few of these I called Bell myself and told them if they didn't stop these charges and refund from the first cancellation immediately, there would be a class action lawsuit on their hands. As it turned out, the federal government took them to task for that.

    Another incident involved their new Fiber internet service. They got a slap on the wrist again by government regulators for false advertising, claiming their fiber internet deal was less than it was. (I never signed up as I never trusted them, obviously).

    My first and last experience with Bell as an ISP was when I got my own DSL modem, returned theirs (which they accepted) and they kept billing me an extra $5/month even when they acknowledged they had received their modem back. They said they couldn't cancel it as it was a required part of the deal (although they gave me an address to return the modem as I told them I now had my own). I cancelled their service. 3 days before the cancellation was finalized, I got a call telling me they would drop the fee if I stopped the cancellation. No go there.

    So Bell has a bad business for consumer all round and government divisions coming down on their so their credibility is questionable there.

    In addition, people are fed up with Bell's exorbitant fees for satellite tv fees.In Canada, Bell is the exclusive content distributor for HBO. They've had a deal for years. (Bell owns several phone company and at least one IPTV service). If you want to get say, "Game of Thrones" in Canada without using a "grey market" (it's not illegal to download restricted intellectual property, only to distribute), you have to pay them $60 basic fee, plus an extra fee to get a channel for extended HBO content including "Game of Thrones". HBO has a very nice Internet only service for $20 USD a month which I tried to sign up for. But it's not allowed in Canada because of Bell's deal. People are pissed and using streams. So bell wants to block that.

    --
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
    1. Re:Bell is over priced so people got to streams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > My first and last experience with Bell as an ISP was when I got my own DSL modem, returned theirs (which they accepted) and they kept billing me an extra $5/month even when they acknowledged they had received their modem back. They said they couldn't cancel it as it was a required part of the deal (although they gave me an address to return the modem as I told them I now had my own). I cancelled their service. 3 days before the cancellation was finalized, I got a call telling me they would drop the fee if I stopped the cancellation. No go there.

      They're clearly not tracking this. When I cancelled my Bell service and switched to another ISP, they insisted I return the modem I was "renting" from them, or they would keep billing me 5$/month whether I used it or not (by all means, I never wanted their POS but had no option at the time to either purchase it outright or provide my own).

      Long story short, they were supposed to send me a box and return address for me to send it back, but they never did--that ball's still in their court, now 5+ years after I switched.

    2. Re:Bell is over priced so people got to streams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bell is a terrible company ran by a bunch of hypocrites. They had to be forced by legislation to block the usage of cell phones that had been stolen from their clients. I had a friend once whose computer called a 900 number in the middle of the night, in the days of dialup, and although they received numerous similar complaints, they were unwilling to shut down the number that received the calls. I've had to pay to receive text messages that were obvious spam when I was using their cellular network. They're facilitators: as long as it benefits them, they don't mind if crimes are committed against their clients.

    3. Re:Bell is over priced so people got to streams by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Bell is always been like that.

      They still charge you $5/month for "touch tone service"! You can't even ask to remove it, either.

      And Bell was the primary driver behind killing gray market satellite services - there was actually a few Canadians who received US satellite service (paying for it legitimately - not hacked access) and Bell decided it was too much competition for their satellite TV and went all the way to the supreme court.

      They are one of the scummiest companies in Canada

    4. Re:Bell is over priced so people got to streams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      couldn't make it past the first sentence, so no idea whether your post was canon or tirade.

      tl;dr: its, motherfucker.

  35. Bell can do what it wants.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bell can do what it wants with their network, block the entire internet if they wish, and consumers can do what they want... like switch to a different provider.

    1. Re:Bell can do what it wants.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for the fact that many new housing developments are now only Bell or only Rogers, so no, you cant switch.

    2. Re: Bell can do what it wants.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why we need NN and more competition. Open up the last mile.

  36. I'd be cheaper to have a tax by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Have a tax that goes directly into the pockets of film studios and music labels. It would be cheaper for everyone than some kind of hair brained scheme to block servers based on some nebulous definition of "pirate".

    My guess is Bell wants to buy new routers and have the government pay for it.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:I'd be cheaper to have a tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada already has such a tax, charged on every blank CD and DVD sold that goes into exactly those pockets, therefore absolving us of liability for downloading (but not distributing so no-go on torrents, technically) copyrighted content.

      But of course they want their cake and to eat it too.

    2. Re:I'd be cheaper to have a tax by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I know they have the tax. But there is no law preventing the government from taxing you multiple times for the same thing.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  37. Wha? by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    It is interesting as Canadians already pay a tax on media and content that is supposed to subsidize content owners and producers allowing Canadians to make as many copies of content and distribute as they please.

  38. Semantics by phayes · · Score: 1

    So for Quebec,

    "maintain responsible gaming rules" means "gimme some of that money"...

    --
    Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    1. Re: Semantics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, from a government whose casinos have 60% payout ratios vs. 95% in Vegas.

  39. Safe to say I will not recommend Bell by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

    to any of my clients. Anyone else offering IT advice should do the same. Why would anyone want a crippled internet service?

  40. This wouldn't happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if freeloaders didn't suck and try to get paid content for nothing. You don't deserve shit for nothing dickheads!

    1. Re: This wouldn't happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't put this on pirates Ricky Bobby. They'd just find another excuses. Censorship is wrong no matter the reason.

  41. Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like to thank Rob Malcolmson, Bell Canada's VP of regulatory affairs, for once again reinforcing my desire to never ever give that evil mini-AT&T company another cent that I don't absolutely have to. For years I had no choice but to use Bell and started out not having much of an opinion on them one way or the other. Over the years, however, I came to despise them with the fiery heat of a thousand suns because of their prices, offerings, and especially their attitude and customer service. When I moved to Toronto a few years ago the first thing I did was drop Bell like a rock and went from extremely disappointed, sad and angry to very happy with my current TechSavvy service. Anyone still using Bell should immediately look into their alternatives because there are FINALLY some alternatives showing up out there now.

  42. Bell, always looking out for Bell's interests by Tool+Man · · Score: 1

    I don't think I can ever see a news release about Bell Canada that doesn't make me roll my eyes, and wonder how they get any customers at all. Everything they do, or say, screams their status as a pile of anti-consumer twats. They want to be a shitty ISP, a shitty telco, and a shitty content provider. Ever use the CTV streaming app? Dodgy, glitchy, and slower than hunting down a torrent of whatever show you could already legally watch. They're succeeding at suckage in spades, yet people still give them money. You can see why they want this, because of Bell Media.

    MTS in Manitoba was pretty good, but I'll watch vicariously as the wall of suck moves in.

  43. bell = DFU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bell Canada service is garbage , they're not even able to provide you correct billing , i've dumped them a decade ago and they are still crappy , me with my cisco debug screen in front of me : " radius authent not getting replies in my "show atm debug " , answer from bell employee " well sir this is ADSL not ATM " , me: could you please transfer me to client billing please " " bell canada client support how can i help you " me : i'd like to cancel my subscription

    1. Re: bell = DFU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You make no sense. You did Bell a favour.

  44. Censorship by xenobyte · · Score: 1

    Restricting and blocking access to certain information is pure censorship.
    Why has it suddenly become both okay and the thing to do?
    This is wrong on so many levels.

    --
    "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
  45. Translation by dkman · · Score: 1

    We'd like to keep charging customers, but reduce the services they can use to reduce their data usage. That way we don't have to invest in infrastructure and we can suck them like vampires.

    --
    I refuse to sign