Yet a further example of

Yet a further example of politicans and un elected appointies not acting in the public interest. My only recourse, it seems, is to keep filing complaints with the compromised CRTC and the industry(sic) minister.

user pay

Sorry you use you pay. The cap Shaw is imposing is 60 gigs I think, correct me if I am wrong. We check out europe, its capped for home internet and has been for some time. I dont see why my parents who likely use less than 2 gigs a month should pay the same amount as someone playing world of warcraft between streaming internet radio all day.

Sorry those that don't use much should not be subsidizing those that use a lot. If you argue having a cap stifles innovation, creativity and makes people more efficient than, I would argue that if they are more efficient they can then afford to pay more for the use of this resource.

As far as the overage charges obviously that is BS. I would be happier if those bumbs that control our access simple gave us a fair price on rates and we paid for what we use. My parents could pay minimal or even make be subsidized by the hogs. Since access to the Internet has pretty much become a right why canot we make the first say 1 or 2 gig free for surfing the net, learning, reading teh news (the TYEE) whatever and if you want to use more for youtube, internet radio netflix and other media than by all means go for it but you pay for what we use.

buy saying we have unlimited of something we of course don't think about our usage rate. If electricity was free I would be inclined to leave all the lights on, not make my house energy efficient. By puting a cost on the use of the resource we creat innovation as people invent ways to lessen this cost.

example blackberry cell phone pass all data through their servers where it is compressed something like a third. If one wants to pay less for a lower tier of data use on a cell phone one might consider blackberry over other manufacturer/operating systems. This just seems healthy.

However the article is right by pointing out the abuse of market leader position by imposing a BS high over charge. Cost plus 10% profit. We can't dictate to companies what they are allowed to sell for though thats a bit of a slippery slope.

a better way

When you look at the enormous amount of dirt cheap (content cost excluded) no penalty no limits network capacity consumed by Big Telecom's television offerings now all integrated with broadband IP, the nonsense about bandwidth limits becomes a sick joke. The Bell/CRTC imposed tariff is 1000 times the cost of providing the capacity.

We could do something about it.

BCHydro or cities like New West with public owned power could be an example to the nation on how to give 1 gbs broadband access for a few dollars a month.

With modern dirt cheap equipment especially combined with the communication's requirements of smart meters, power utilities could easily provide a one gigabit per second ethernet pipe with internet access into every household/business at a fraction of the cost of current Big Telecom offerings.

The cost of a fiber to the block network would be a small fraction of fiber to the home - less than $20 a household/business to the block level wired/wireless N access point plus subscriber connect costs of $100 for Cat 6 copper to most subscribers and fiber to the rare more distant ones, $50 for Phoneline/Powerline, $50 for a WiFi mesh repeater or zilch to the customer's wifi card. $1 a month would suffice for O&M.

Smart Phone/ATA based VOIP would cost nothing (Google Voice or City network access) nor would basic cable (see ivi.tv)

The FCC now recognizes that low speed smart meters would be a component on the broadband network they envision. The small incremental cost of the high speed network over the low speed smart meter net power companies are planning, pays for broadband network for a extra few dollars a month per subscriber.

None of this is going to happen under Canwest/Gordo but with activists infiltrating the Abbot and Horgan campaigns maybe we can git er done. Mayors like Robertson, Wright and Corrigan should be reminded that are there to support the citizen not Big Telecom with its massive campaign donations and unions.

Big Telecom makes 3000% profits on broadband with their ancient antiquated equipment. They could cut their fees to 3% of current level - $1 a month ADSL - and still make money.

Another way to do it.

We pass legislation requiring Big Telecom as a condition of licence to install a bulk purchased $200 a unit outdoor dual band wireless units on every street block in every neigbourhood in Canada serviced by the top of line $50 a month average 30 Mbs highest speed innernet service Big Telecom offers. Each unit would supply 50 roughly households.

There are 13 Million households in Canada so total cost would be about $50M less than Big Telecom spends annually buying booze for compliant CTRC members, "journalists" and politicians. $50M financed at 10% plus $50 a month for the network with 50% broadband penetration works out to about two bucks a month per subscriber.

Only corrupt politicians stand between the people and dirt cheap universal broadband access. Give them a call and ask why.

profiteering

yep, it's profiteering and at our expense. You know how Canadians have the most expensive cell phone coverage in the world?

Deja vu, that's where Canadian internet will be in two years.

Stephen Harper's conservatives changed the mission statement of the CRTC, dramatically limiting its ability to serve the public interest.

And now thanks to the CRTC latest decision, it's a non-competitive internet market. CRTC has just killed the competition from the independent providers.

So the monopoly providers will charge whatever they like in the usual confusing array of special deals, one-time promotions, extra charges (remember cell phones?!) and try to herd us back to tv and their products (another clear conflict of interest).

Another great reason not to vote for Stephen Harper.

If 'we' switched off for a year.....?

Could 'we' disconnect for a year?

At some point the most effective way to save money will be to disconnect from the world!

Apart from bare profiteering....

...this is about maintaining their walled gardens, specifically around television and telephony.

With everything digitized and travelling around on ubiquitous TCP/IP networks, I don't need Bell or Shaw acting as an intermediary/retailer between me and the live stream from ABC, PBS or the CBC. I should be able to consume that stream from the source, and Bell, as the infrastructure provider should just get the hell out of the way.

Similarly, I don't need Telus acting as a telephony intermediary between me and my friend in Europe, I just need their data pipe, and a means for my friend and I to resolve paths between our phones. Skype or other VOIP services would suffice just as well.

Granted, unless I'm connected to a public sector pipe (CANet, or a University, etc.), the big telcos have got me. So maybe the question is not whether the CRTC should allow metering, but whether they should be empowered to set appropriate rates in the public interest, just like provincial utility commissions.

Any time a legislative body makes and obviously bad decision

that will adversely affect the citizenry, the only question worth asking is, who got paid?

Governments and business organizations rip us off again

CRTC is clearly become the arms length pawn of politicos be they government or lobbyists for corporate bodies. Why so little comment from our elected politicians? "Nothing we can do," they say. Blame in circles, pointing fingers and taking no responsibility - that is my take on politicians in Canada. Since they fear organized opposition from citizens in whatever form that it takes - let's give it to them. Demand that prior to any policy that impacts the majority of citizens that an online binding referendum be conducted by Elections Canada. Finally reverse these stupid money grabs from Canuck consumers.

How will MSM report on this?

Given that the mainstream media are financially linked to or owned by of these telecoms, how informed will most Canadians be about it? Control of information is the most potent method of controlling the public in democracies, and Canada seems to be on the path to democratic serfdom.

But if Tunisians can throw out an entrenched despot who was robbing them for 20 years, why can't Canadians get angry enough to reverse a decade of bad policy? Are we that complacent?

Let's frame these fees as a corporate-imposed tax. Taxes seem to be the one thing that people will protest.

Usage charges - FOR USERS.

So I guess this means - if the province follows suit - that the BC Liberals will dump their practice of funding P3 contracts like the Sea to Sky highway with shadow tolls that are paid by all taxpayers AND NOT JUST BY THE WEST VAN ELITES WHO USE THE ROAD AS THEIR PRIVATE ACCESS TO WEEKEND SKIING?

After all, what's sauce for the goose ought to be sauce for the gander.

Thanks for the like to the petition David.

Whoops!

That should be 'link' to the petition.

I hope everyone signs it:

http://openmedia.ca/meter

Internet losers

@John Armstrong... Precisely... And how do you think they got paid? Why could that be campaign donations.

Someone in Ottawa told me that CRTC is comprised of 16 members, 11 (including the chair) of whom have been appointed by Harper. So much for elected reps... Transparency? Definitely not in this government.

3000% Profit on Broadband ?

Seth ... can you please provide a source for this information ?

who's who at the crtc

@Phay

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/INFO_SHT/G2.HTM
A list of appointees.

3000 %

Go to

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/04/time-warner-c-1/

and look at the chart from time warner's 2008 annual report 8.4 million customers, $4.2B revenue, costs $146M . Works out to a cost of a little over a buck a month a customer. When you look at the tiny bit of mass produced equipment required on top of existing , television, telephony applications it's easy to see why.

money

So this explains why Telus's stock price went up so much.

Just another case of Bell Greed

Bell Canada should be renamed the "WeSaySo" corporation. They raised telephone rates for the past 20 years more than they've raised rates in their whole existance as a telephone company. They have taken these profits and purchased television networks to become a communications MONOPOLY. Without Bell; information cannot be processed in this country, there is no voice, no internet, no TV. If the CRTC was truly created to be a watch dog for the Citizens of Canada, they've failed miserably. Not only will internet metering hit Canadians in the wallet, it will also drive more internet based businesses, and call centres who use VOIP to communicate to move more and more operations overseas.

This is small part of a much BIGGER problem. Canada has the same population as the State of Florida, and a land mass bigger than the whole United States. We have too much land, and too few people to subsidize it. We're like a bachelor living in a 10 bedroom mansion, Country-Poor, much like House-Poor. We are taxed to death, Service charged to death, and there really isn't any more room for growth. Canadians can't afford to be Canadians anymore. Canadian Banks are expanding in the US. TD Bank has more branches in the USA now than they do in Canada. Banks like TD, BMO, and RBC are expanding bigtime into the US because the growth potential in Canada is now at ZERO! Bell can't expand into the US. Bell still however wants to "do lunch with the big boys". IMO, unless Canada and the US merge, or sheds off much of it's land, life as a Canadian will continue to get tougher and tougher. Corporate Greed got us into this mess, politicians and corporations sleep in the same bed. As far as a comment a few points back about why Mom and Dad should pay less..than their neighbours, that attitude has been around for the last 30 years, Seniors on fixed incomes should pay less than everyone else, and it's a crock of BS. EVERYONE is on a fixed income, and everyone is being stretched to the limit.

helping those in need

[UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIM REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

Caps

I wonder why the CRTC is also not enforcing usage based billing for TV? You know, you get 5 hours of TV / month with your package and when you go over each additional hour costs you $10, premium channels extra.

Does Shaw actually count as a Telecom Provider though? My understanding so far was that the ruling only applied to the likes of Bel and Telus, not cable providers?

To rely "market

To rely "market competition" to set prices to provide optimum benefits to consumers is stupid when the competition is monopolistic. Too bad we don't have utility regulation of the pipes (to ensure consumers pay no more than incremental cost, plus whatever extra is needed to recover a regulated rate of return. Would also need to separate the "pipeline" aspects from content.). Anyway, we're stuck with competition that may be economically "efficient" -- but allocates the lion's share of gains to the providers rather than consumers.

You have as commissioners of

You have as commissioners of the CRTC have broken the public trust by giving Internet Service Providers rights to charge Canadians 3,000 percent increase in corporate fees (taxes on internet useage) to all Canadians. Given your collective decision as apointees of Stephen Harper's government it is clear that you are in collusion with business in "ripping off the majority of Citizens". Thank you for showing me the true colours of all politicians and their appointed lackeys - especially Stephen Harper and his Tories. The Liberals, Particular Québécois and the New Democratic Party have not done their job to defend the rights of all citizens. And these are the same apologists who say they can do nothing about the excessively high fees that Telus, Bell, Rogers (their spin-off koodo's, Virgin, & Fido) charge. Huh do we have to be prisoners to our corporate sociopath's?

Usage Fees - YES, Ripoff charges - NO

Skeletor, you got it right. The issue is not usage-based charges (which these are NOT), but the ubiquitous system the ISPs have developed which see us forced to accept a "package". In other words, we are forced to pay for MORE than we use. And if we should happen to guess wrong, the overage fees are USURIOUS.

No one would complain about usage-based fees if they were reasonable, linear, and equally applied to ALL demand-data crossing the wire. Netflix, Shaw movies, VOIP, digital TV, you name it.

The real problem is twofold:

1. we have allowed ISPs to become content providers.

2. we have allowed ISPs to package their services, for "reduced fees".

Both are anti-competitive and against the public interest. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the CRTC to fix it.

And please, bandwidth is measured in bytes per second or the equivalent - it's the data transfer rate. To use the term to refer to data volumes is another deliberate ISP lie.

There is lots of deception going on in the digital services world, but getting indignant about usage-based billing is to complain about the side-show.

Focus on the real issue - ISP and Cell phone contract-based billing practises.

Sorry you use you pay.

Sorry you use you pay.
=======

What about home phones and TV? If I watch more than you or talk more on the phone should I pay more?

Austria

My wife lived in Austria for six months and her most accessible and affordable Internet was a wireless method that used the cell phone network. The modem cost at least $100 and every two gigabytes of throughput cost 20 Euros ($CDN 32). Wired DSL meant an expensive installation, high ongoing fees and long delays by the phone company/ISP.

We used Skype voice to keep in touch. Technical issues and the higher cost of video, because of the data throughput, meant we stuck with voice only.

Its really quite simple

1. Phone Shaw or whoever is supplier.
2. Cancel please
3. Go to public Library

canadians pay more, yes

after living in jamaica for like 5 months; i couldn't believe how cheap it was for the cell phone service alone. i got used to never have to add credit on my cell to receive calls or text. only needed it when calling out. and get this, i was getting 1000 mins for less than 10 bucks canadian for my international calls. my friends and family here in canada would let me call them as it was cheaper for me out there.

we are way behind :P i can see why big telco giants are afraid those foreign companies ever comes to canada!

For All Intents and Purposes, Bell Owns the CRTC

People always argue with me about this, but it seems that the CRTC just exists to provide positive legislation to un-demonize (exorcise?) every gouge the respective Canadian telecom monopoly holders decide to take.

Everyone signed up with tier 1 ISPs in Canada have been subject to usage caps for years. This is not "breaking" news by any means.

The CRTC needs to go away, or at least become an elected body. That way it wouldn't dedicate itself to ruining Netflix, inflating service charges, and allowing ISP's to destroy net neutrality.

The big players

Clearly, the big players want to reserve some of that bandwidth as they become more content providers than bandwidth providers. Presumably, that's a more profitable business model.

We have to tell the CRTC we are not happy with this approach. This is like where someone buys a rental property. Their tenants help them buy the property. Should we be cross-subsidizing the big telcos and ISPs new business ventures? NO.

a few comments

Since when has the CRTC not allowed the big comm companies from gouging the public?

Long distance and out of the country, USA and Central America, rates are well over 1000% of cost. In Nicaragua, with a $20 purchase of a cell phone, you get $20 worth of phone calls @ 6 cents a minute anywhere in North America.

Throttling back and now charging more for internet use just puts more money in their pockets.

These corporations have been whining about their federal and provincial taxes and now have one of the lowest tax rates in the developed world. They have received on an annual basis reduced corporate taxes and further tax loopholes.

Just who is paying for those so called business lunches. Just who is in whose back pockets these days? And now they are government sanctioned.

Our government representatives should put an end to this granting of another money tree to the big comm companies.

Shame shame shame

Restructure the CRTC

It is time to drastically restructure the CRTC so consumers' voices are heard. I read on their website the consumer comments were "virtually unanimous" in opposing Bell's application for usage-based billing, but apparently to no effect. The CRTC's record has been one of making decisions that benefit the big telecommunications companies at the expense of consumers, and it is time for that to be reversed. The CRTC in years gone by has forced consumers to pay for the capital costs of the big companies to extend their internet connections and justified it by saying public policy warranted it. Well, now that the big companies are making big profits, it is time for the public investors to get a dividend.