Massive Damage

The State of Net Neutrality in Canada

Well, to be fair, this time it’s not really my random thoughts. I’ve been keeping up with the issue for quite some time (because it’s an important issue), so I figured I would take this opportunity to share a few articles that I think are important for people who want a rundown on things like net neutrality, usage-based billing, and the sad state of broadband in Canada (especially when you compare our broadband services to those found in other countries).

Data caps are motivated by competition: So by now, anybody who has been keeping up with the whole Bell/CRTC issue knows what Bell’s defence is: they are supposedly being forced to impose data caps upon indie ISPs like Teksavvy because they are facing serious congestion issues. In other words, their network cannot handle the supposed troves of people who are downloading movies off of Torrent sites every night. However, this excellent article by Michael Geist points out that Bell actually offers different data caps in Ontario and Quebec, despite the fact that both provinces are part of the same network. The hypothesis here is that Bell is offering different data caps in different regions in order to respond to different levels of competition. The entire argument of “congestion” takes another dent when you consider how independent ISPs are already proposing a pricing scheme in which they are charged based on the peak network traffic. Dr. Geist points out how this scheme would actually be a superior method of handling congestion, since a network can only become congested when the simultaneous demand becomes sufficiently high. The raw amount of gigabytes consumed over a monthly period doesn’t give you a realistic indication of how much congestion the network actually experienced during that month. However, this approach apparently isn’t good enough for Bell, and they want independent ISPs to purchase a flat amount of bandwidth every month, and then pay extra whenever this amount is exceeded by its users (in a fine that would ultimately get passed down to the users themselves). In other words, Bell wants to handle congestion with a strategy that would stifle competition. Convenient, no?

The CRTC is not protecting us: This ties into the previous point about Bell and their usage-based billing policy. Back when Bell first announced that they would be imposing usage-based billing on their wholesale customers (and back when all hell broke loose), the CRTC initially approved the decision, despite the fact that they’re the ones who are supposedly protecting us from ISPs and their unfair business practices. In fact, it was the Conservative government (of all people!) who had to threaten to forcibly overturn the CRTC’s decision. You know that you’re failing pretty damn badly when even the Harper government looks at your blatant disregard for honest customers with distain. In a lot of ways, the United States has it a lot worse than Canada, at least in terms of government ineptitude. However, you have to give the FCC credit: at least they’re trying to protect the Internet for its users. That seems to be a damn sight more than what the CRTC is doing.

Lawful access billing and its effect on competition: The Harper government - in all their malfeasant glory - has proposed the Lawful Access bills. This legislation would require ISPs to have infrastructure in place that would allow the government to monitor the Internet browsing of all Canadians without the need for a warrant. This legislation is pretty awful for reasons that are hopefully apparent, but privacy is not the only thing that suffers from this legislation. The Lawful Access bills would be detrimental for ISP competition as well, since it would force smaller, less financially prosperous ISPs to purchase additional equipment. This potentially expensive equipment would be used to store and monitor the Internet traffic of every customer who uses the network. This is a cost that would ultimately get passed down to the customers themselves (paying to be monitored… ironic, no?). Higher prices would inevitably end up driving some customers away, and back to the bigger ISPs who can easily afford upgraded equipment without having to lean on their users.

Canada vs the world in broadband service: As I eluded to earlier, it isn’t looking good. If you look at the average download speeds for a collection of different countries, Canada comes in at a rather embarrassing 36th place. In all fairness though, we aren’t doing a whole lot worse than the United States (31st) or the United Kingdom (29th). Oh, and if you think that’s bad, just wait until you look at the rankings for upload speeds! We rank 64th in the world, behind Mozambique and Kenya. And as one final slap in the face, when you look at the value proposition for broadband access, Canada ranked 25th out of the 30 countries that were examined. Pop quiz: would usage-based billing increase our standing or decrease our standing?

I didn’t compile those articles because I want people to get depressed about the current state of affairs. Rather, it’s important to be vigilant and not place your faith in the institutions that have been supposedly put in place to protect us (the CRTC). Furthermore, you shouldn’t place your faith in the government that is supposedly put in place to provide for us (Harper and company). I’ve been following the net neutrality battle (and the usage-based billing battle, as they are one and the same) for over two years now, and I have a feeling that I will be reading articles about it for years to come. It’s an ongoing battle, and whether you agree with me or if you think I’m full of shit, it’s important to make your voice heard in this debate that will eventually shape the Internet for future generations.