Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Businesses Communications Government Network Networking The Almighty Buck The Courts The Internet

Canada Rules To Uphold Net Neutrality (www.cbc.ca) 65

According to a new ruling by Canada's telecommunications regulator, internet service providers should not be able to exempt certain types of content, such as streaming music or video, from counting toward a person's data cap. The ruling upholds net neutrality, which is the principle that all web services should be treated equally by providers. CBC.ca reports: "Rather than offering its subscribers selected content at different data usage prices, Internet service providers should be offering more data at lower prices," said Jean-Pierre Blais, chairman of the CRTC in a statement. "That way, subscribers can choose for themselves what content they want to consume." The decision stems from a 2015 complaint against the wireless carrier Videotron, which primarily operates in Quebec. Videotron launched a feature in August of that year, enabling customers to stream music from services such as Spotify and Google Play Music without it counting against a monthly data cap as a way to entice people to subscribe to Videotron's internet service. The decision means that Videotron cannot offer its unlimited music streaming plan to subscribers in its current form -- nor can other internet providers offer similar plans that zero-rate other types of internet content, such as video streaming or social media.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canada Rules To Uphold Net Neutrality

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    How about just get rid of data caps. My300/100 connection is uncapped with Bell. Why can't it be that way everywhere in Canada?

    • by slazzy ( 864185 )
      Personally, I'd like to see more municipalities running fibre lines from houses to central access points. Once there are enough houses connected to an access point there could be real competition for service. The last mile problem is still a big one in 2017. Something needs to be done about mobile competition too, although it's harder with frequency limitations.
    • Exactly! We don't pay for a fixed amount of data, we pay for transfer rates/bandwidth. I pay for a 60Mbps uplink, not for 300GB/month. If using all my bandwidth all day for 30 days is a strain on the network, then the ISP is advertising something they can't provide.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      How about just get rid of data caps. My300/100 connection is uncapped with Bell. Why can't it be that way everywhere in Canada?

      That's what the CRTC is trying to do with this ruling. By having all traffic count towards your cap, consumers will reasonably demand that their caps be increased. And given that caps are relatively cheap, then raising them costs very little additional money to the iSP.

      By doing this ruling, they're making sure users of Netflix etc., who may have been zero rated start demanding that

  • so if you have iptv from bell it will kill your cap? just from there TV system being on?

    • by Anaerin ( 905998 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @10:57PM (#54274065)
      No, because the IPTV is an Intranet service, on the ISP-local network, not an Internet service, hosted on the wider internet. So when you access your Bell IPTV, it doesn't go to the internet and doesn't add to your internet usage.
      • by green1 ( 322787 )

        This gets to be a tough subject. Where I live you have 3 options for TV service:
        - Satellite (sucks once you get used to modern cable/iptv offerings)
        - Cable from the cable company
        - IPTV from the phone company

        From an end user perspective, the Cable and IPTV offerings are identical, but behind the scenes they are very different, cable is it's own path and doesn't exist as an IP service on the customer's network, but IPTV does.

        If you stop allowing zero rating of the IPTV service, you put the phone company at a

  • by Tough Love ( 215404 ) on Friday April 21, 2017 @12:17AM (#54274317)

    Or move there. The difference is starting to move into the embarrassing zone. Check your kevlar vest at the border, and oh, if you forgot to buy your travel medical it won't cost you $30k to get back home if you happen to break your leg running away from a moose.

    • With Canada doing everything right while we do everything wrong, I was wondering if we could pull the Canadian border down to the Mexican border.
  • How I read this.

    The ISP's lobbied for the ability of data Caps, then they wanted to selectively take advantage of not using Caps for their own services for a competitive advantage for their own benefit... Live by the Cap, Die by the Cap I say! They want to have their cake and eat it...

    For the most part, 2 or 3 companies own everything in the Canadian telecommunication world, so them doing this (other than international impacts) really is a more less level playing field between them. That said, there are oth

  • There are others, to be sure, but the fact that AT&T is building FirstNet as a dedicated network for law enforcement and "first responders" illustrates a fundamental flaw in net neutrality. Not all content is equally important.

  • Interesting that Facebook is lobbying FOR net neutrality in the US but argued AGAINST it in Canada. I guess they're sufficiently entrenched in zero-rating deals up north.

Who goeth a-borrowing goeth a-sorrowing. -- Thomas Tusser

Working...