• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Canada Imposing Usage Based Internet Billing?

obs said:
Uh oh, people paying based on how much they use? People who use 1GB of bandwidth no longer subsidizing those who use 100GB. Oh the humanity!
Click to expand...

see that's where you're misinformed though.
The higher usage customer have never been subsidized by lower usage customers.
Bandwidth does not cost an ISP anywhere near what they charge for it already. Adding more cost is not justifiable using an economic argument.
 
S[H]ady;1036764180 said:
see that's where you're misinformed though.
The higher usage customer have never been subsidized by lower usage customers.
Bandwidth does not cost an ISP anywhere near what they charge for it already. Adding more cost is not justifiable using an economic argument.
Click to expand...

Bandwidth isn't free.
 
Such bullshit. CRTC is the most corrupt ruling board. Most of the members are ex-telco employees; talk about conflict of interests.

There's no way this benefits the canadian public at all, and that's what it should be about.
 
obs said:
Bandwidth isn't free.
Click to expand...

no but it cost them almost nothing and they want to charge 100x the cost to consumer
also, having everyone transfer that 100GB in a day is more taxing on their systems/servers than everyone doing 100GB in 30 days which is why charging ppl an actual bandwidth cap (bandwidth actually means the rate of which data is transfer and not the total amount you transfer in a month) makes sense but a cap on how much you transfer in a month doesn't really make sense
 
FragMagnet said:
Unfortunatly there is a lot of arrogance up here :(

Since you were insulted by one Cdn., please accept an apology for him, from another ! :D
Click to expand...
I'm Canadian, heh. I'm just sick of our politics!

Q-BZ said:
I've known plenty of nice Canadians. Beautiful country. I should try and visit it sometime. :)
Click to expand...
Yes, you should. It is a beautiful country.

obs said:
Bandwidth isn't free.
Click to expand...

Right, well, the cheapest cable package in my area (6/2) costs 49.99$/mo. I'm assuming this will be the price for their lowest tier of "high speed" data usage as well, or something close by. I'm also assuming this lowest tier, on par with Roger's lowest, will be around 100GB/mo. Run the math... Bandwidth isn't free, you're damn right, but it's certainly not anywhere near 50c a gb.
 
Jeremy C said:
Sure isn't. But since the cost per GB is less than the smallest denomination in US currency, the argument of subsidizing is ignorant.
Click to expand...

Would love to see your statistics backing this up.
 
I sent an e-mail to Steve, hoping he'll update this posting. Someone posted a reply ont he first page to a Digital Home article, but they have a new posting today and ask their site visitors to e-mail their local MP's, file an online complaint with the CRTC, etc. which I feel would put much more weight than signing an online petition. The article can be found here:
Digital Home: Usage Based Internet Billing: What can you do?

What Can you do?
The Digital Home forums are filled with Canadians complaining about Usage Based Billing (UBB). Readers complain about the scandalous pricing for usage insurance plans and they complain about the recent CRTC decisions which force Third Party Internet Access Providers to pass these rates onto consumers.

In addition to complaining, some readers encourage others to sign online petitions which they believe will somehow stop UBB.

The truth is that signing online petitions and complaining on Internet Forums and blogs will not do a damn thing to stop Usage Based Billing.

The fact is the Federal Government now has 90 days to “review and bury” (term used by the industry meaning the legislation is accepted by the government) the CRTC decision or they can send the decision back to the CRTC and tell them it’s not right.

If Canadians really want to stop UBB, the time is now. Instead of complaining on blogs or signing petitions, do the proper thing. Phone, mail and email your MP. Here is the link which lists all 305 Members of Parliament. Click on your MP and you will find a phone number and an email address. Send them an email to complain and when you’re done, email James Moore, Minister of Heritage Canada ( Moore.J@parl.gc.ca ) , email the Minister of Industry Tony Clement ( minister.industry@ic.gc.ca ) and contact Stephen Harper your prime minister at ( Harper.S@parl.gc.ca )

When you are done that, goto this link and make a complaint online to the CRTC.
Click to expand...

So I urge Canadian readers of HardOCP, in addition to signing the online peition, please to the steps that Digial Home posted (quoted above) so that further pressure can be placed on our government! If 250 people can cause the CRTC to file a request into the review of Dire Strait's "Moner For Nothing" banning by the CBSC, just think what thousands could do!

Here is the original e-mail I sent Steve:
Hey Steve,

I just wanted to update you on the news posting about Canada imposing usage based internet billing.

I read two tech websites, overall I use HardOCP and for Canadian specific tech news, I read a site called Digital Home (www.digitalhome.ca). They made a posting today regarding this issue, that I feel would have a much bigger impact then signing an online petition that you posted.

The exact link for the article is:
http://www.digitalhome.ca/2011/01/usage-based-internet-billing-what-can-you-do/

In the blog posting, it gives links for people to contact (call, write or e-mail) their local MP (Member of Parliament) which is the same thing as your representative). There are also links to contact the Minister of Heritage Canada, Minister of Industry and our Prime Minister. Finally, there is also a link to file an online complaint with the CRTC (who recently made the decision that ISP’s can pass on internet usage costs to their customers).

Although I think an online petition is a great idea, I have taken a law course which involved tackling a local bylaw issue. As I found out first hand, while an online petition is a good initiative, it unfortunately doesn’t hold the same wait as someone calling/e-mailing their MP, filing an online complaint with the CRTC, etc.

A good example was a recent complaint that was made regarding the Dire Straits song “Money for Nothing” and the fact that it uses faggot a number of times. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) received just ONE complaint and they have banned the original version from the radio. Well, 250 people filed online complaints with the CRTC, and they are asking for a separate tribunal to review the banning (something that wouldn’t have happened, had people not complained).

If you don’t feel like posting a link to that article, please let me know and I will e-mail you the links to contact local MP’s, CRTC, etc.
 
Forgot to mention that the federal government now has 90 days to accept the judgement or review it. So please don't wait on this!

I also just checked my internet plan and I pay $37.00/month which is a bundle pricing (TV, internet and phone) which is regularly $47.00. On this plan, it allows me 60GB/month of transfer. If I want more (100GB/month), I'll have to pay $47.00 (bundle price). I don't do a lot of torrent downloading (if my PVR missed a recording, I'll download the show), but I do use Netflix and Steam (downloading and palying), which I'm sure could easily put me at my cap.
 
the problem is here we have Rogers(Cable) and Bell, (Telephone)

Bell and Rogers both offer highspeed through DSL (Phone) and Cable, but things like netflix/skype take away from their other business, of cable or satellite TV and home phone services. unfortunately our spineless government caves into these clowns all the time. and to top it off any small DSL reseller, is using "Bell" lines (paid for by tax dollars many years ago) or they resell rogers service (aka Gogeco etc)
 
Putz said:
the problem is here we have Rogers(Cable) and Bell, (Telephone)

Bell and Rogers both offer highspeed through DSL (Phone) and Cable, but things like netflix/skype take away from their other business, of cable or satellite TV and home phone services. unfortunately our spineless government caves into these clowns all the time. and to top it off any small DSL reseller, is using "Bell" lines (paid for by tax dollars many years ago) or they resell rogers service (aka Gogeco etc)
Click to expand...

lets not forget about shaw here
not only are they a cable company that does cable tv and cable internet but they also own global tv and ppl watching shows on the internet is cutting into the amount of viewers they get for shows on global tv like simpsons, family guy, house, etc. and the odd old movies they show every now and then
 
Keep in mind, those companies are based in Eastern Canada. Here in Western Canada, we have Shaw (cable) and Telus (DSL). Although I do agree with your statement that services take away from their offerings. At the end of the day, its a quick and easy cash grab.
 
obs said:
Would love to see your statistics backing this up.
Click to expand...
The marginal cost of transferring an additional GB is about 1 cent. To put the whole thing in perspective, this Netflix explanation will do:
... Wired ISPs have large fixed costs of building and maintaining their last mile network of residential cable and fiber. The ISPs’ costs, however, to deliver a marginal gigabyte, which is about an hour of viewing, from one of our regional interchange points over their last mile wired network to the consumer is less than a penny, and falling, so there is no reason that pay-per-gigabyte is economically necessary. Moreover, at $1 per gigabyte over wired networks, it would be grossly overpriced.
Click to expand...

That cost structure to the communications monopoly in Canada would be similar It often does not even provide that bandwidth to the "last mile" (more expensive than backbone traffic), but still charges grossly exorbitant rates over what it costs. It's a total scam to charge so much for bandwidth and pretend that these are just costs being passed on.
 
obs said:
Would love to see your statistics backing this up.
Click to expand...

Go price some bandwidth from a supplier. Small firms will sell you a TB of data at $1.50/GB. This is bandwidth that has been bought/sold who knows how many times and includes it's fair share of markup. Now, someone like Comcast is using just a little bit more than that I bet, so there costs are going to be even lower.

I don't need statistics when there are these wonderful facts just a google search away! :)
 
Jeremy C said:
Sure isn't. But since the cost per GB is less than the smallest denomination in US currency, the argument of subsidizing is ignorant.
Click to expand...

Jeremy C said:
Go price some bandwidth from a supplier. Small firms will sell you a TB of data at $1.50/GB. This is bandwidth that has been bought/sold who knows how many times and includes it's fair share of markup. Now, someone like Comcast is using just a little bit more than that I bet, so there costs are going to be even lower.

I don't need statistics when there are these wonderful facts just a google search away! :)
Click to expand...

Keep on moving those goal posts.
 
Kenjuta said:
lets not forget about shaw here
not only are they a cable company that does cable tv and cable internet but they also own global tv and ppl watching shows on the internet is cutting into the amount of viewers they get for shows on global tv like simpsons, family guy, house, etc. and the odd old movies they show every now and then
Click to expand...

Bell = Telus, Shaw/Cogeco = Rogers, same companies on different coasts, but all lead up to the same groups of corrupt smacktards running each

basically they want us to pay per gb because skype takes away from phone bills, and Netflix takes away from cable bills, both of which these guys offer, so they will re-coupe that money with pay per use to deter people from using them.

too bad we didn't have an internet only based company who didn't need to use the lines offered by bell and rogers...id have no use for either at that point

to have DSL service Bell/Telus requires you have one of their lines installed and pay for a voice plan, even the basic is 30$ a month for a land line, and Rogers will require you have basic cable at a similar cost to offer you cable internet

techsavvy used to offer decent packages and not throttle p2p, but since bell owns(tax payers own) the lines they use, now they have to thottle p2p and bill based on usage
 
TechLarry said:
Why is the Government even involved in this?
Click to expand...
Because these are, for all intents and purposes, monopolies and should be regulated. Apparently "regulated" means "facilitated" now. I missed that news release.

S[H]ady;1036763779 said:
In my eyes this is nothing more than a way to stifle companies like Netflix from really establishing themselves in Canada.
Click to expand...
This is exactly right. Netflix alone is eating up at least half of my existing 120GP cap. I have been subscribing for two months.

obs said:
Keep on moving those goal posts.
Click to expand...
He has not. He quoted the numbers being charged by resellers, meaning it's a profit well over and above what they paid a lower-level supplier. Important point bolded:

Jeremy C said:
Go price some bandwidth from a supplier. Small firms will sell you a TB of data at $1.50/GB. This is bandwidth that has been bought/sold who knows how many times and includes it's fair share of markup. Now, someone like Comcast is using just a little bit more than that I bet, so there costs are going to be even lower.
Click to expand...
 
This is the Netflix effect. Netflix use is bringing down their infrastructure. This way of slamming the hand down on the table was inevitable.
 
The thing most of you non-canadians are missing, is the Government is not mandating the cap.

Bell Canada, who owns all the copper in canada (paid for by the crown originally) was ordered to provide access to the copper at a flat rate to 3rd party ISPs.

Bell then started charging it's own customers UBB, and limiting the internet with a 60GB cap, but this only applied to people who subscribed to them, and the other large players (rogers/shaw who own all the cable in canada) followed suit.

Now people are getting to learn of the 3rd parties who still supply unlimited internet for much cheaper prices, so Bell went back to the CRTC, and filed for 3rd parties to be billed at the same rate there customers are, to which the CRTC agreed. Then later said at a 15% discount. So it's not the government who did this, it's Bell. And soon Cable will be the same since Rogers filed for UBB on TPIA (The cable version of mandatory access to 3rd parties) and had it approved to come into effect July 1st.

We canadians are royally farked, since The 3 main providers (Bell/Shaw/Rogers) also own 90% of the television, own 99% of the copper, cable and fiber, and are the only source for Phone, Internet, and Television... and have no reason at all to want to do anything with the internet that takes away from there profits (aka netflix over there on demand systems, unlimited bandwidth caps when they enjoy 25GB or 60GB, Hulu instead of cable TV etc etc).
 
MrLonghair said:
This is the Netflix effect. Netflix use is bringing down their infrastructure. This way of slamming the hand down on the table was inevitable.
Click to expand...
Canadian ISPs have had wired Internet usage caps for much longer than Netflix has been streaming into the country. It's easy to find lowered caps going back to at least 2005. It's been a money maker to charge for overages or upsell into higher cap plans.
 
saturnjct said:
Don't forget that in the proposed rates, subscribers in one province (Quebec) will pay 2.5 times more for each GB over their cap compared to a subscriber in another province (Ontario).

Take a look at "docs-1043246-TN 7181 - APP - Bell Canada - Attachment 1.xls" in Bell's tarrif application http://www.crtc.gc.ca/public/8740/2009/b2/1043233.zip
Click to expand...

Quebec also gets a higher cap, 6M DSL service and under in Quebec gets 60GB while in ontario it's only 25GB.
 
obs said:
And high use customers subsidizing low use customers is?
Click to expand...

Do you honestly believe that a current customer paying for a high speed connection with a 100gb cap, and who is only using 2-3% of that, is going to see his rate go down ? Dream on ! I'd be surprised if it doesn't go up !
 
This is the stupidest thing Canada has ever done in my opinion.... and they usually do things a little bit smarter than us, but this one takes the cake.

Beyond stupid Canada, seriously... why does it seem that a lot of governments around the world don't have ANY TECHNICAL PEOPLE?!? It's simply amazing the stupid things countries are doing with internet laws lately... beyond ignorance!
 
FragMagnet said:
Do you honestly believe that a current customer paying for a high speed connection with a 100gb cap, and who is only using 2-3% of that, is going to see his rate go down ? Dream on ! I'd be surprised if it doesn't go up !
Click to expand...

No, I think there will be cheaper plans with smaller caps. You know, like AT&T did with their tiered plans.
 
Also, the government forcing ISPs to charge a certain price is as stupid as all price controls.
 
and ontop of all of this, the government of canada WON'T allow companies like verizon or Sprint and T-mobile to come into canada, because it would hurt Canadian companies profits.
 
obs said:
Keep on moving those goal posts.
Click to expand...

I guess I need to break it down further for you.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_34/b4192038586570.htm

key point from this article:

The average price websites pay to stream video fell 40 percent to 45 percent in 2009 and is on track to decline another 25 percent this year, estimates Frost & Sullivan
Click to expand...

and more importantly

Frost & Sullivan says Akamai charges a customer like Netflix about 5 cents for an HD movie, compared with about 3 cents for standard definition. "We're right on the cusp of rapid adoption" of HD, Sagan says
Click to expand...

3 cents for an SD movie stream. Average size of one of these movies depending on length and bitrate is between 1-3GB. We'll go right in the middle and say we've got a 1.5GB movie that costs 3 cents to Netflix.

3/1.5= 2 cents be GB cost to Netflix. Now Akamai needs to make their profit in that 2 cents. I think you can figure things out from here.
 
risqu3 said:
and ontop of all of this, the government of canada WON'T allow companies like verizon or Sprint and T-mobile to come into canada, because it would hurt Canadian companies profits.
Click to expand...

The companies are allowed, so long as they do it as a canadian subsidy company, with 51% canadian ownership on the board.

Sprint and AT&T both have been in canada and pulled back out because it wasn't worth it for them.
 
The whole reason many of the smaller Canadian DSL providers exist is because they offer unlimited internet bandwidth. Does the CRTC even realize how much this ruling will affect them. I got my pitchfork ready, who's with me?

On a side note I'm with Videotron and they recently announced they will be increasing monthly download limits with some internet plans instead of reducing them as others have planned.
 
obs said:
No, I think there will be cheaper plans with smaller caps. You know, like AT&T did with their tiered plans.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that, I think it will be more like Rogers wireless current data plans, $30 for 500mb, $35 for 1gb, now if you go over, the charge is per 100mb. Now of course if you pay a $5 premium a month to make the plan dynamic, and based on your usage they will slip you into the most economic plan for your volume per month. Sounds fair right ? I nearly did it, assuming the price structure would go up at $5 per 500mb, but it doesn't ! instead after 1gb the charge jumps to the next tier which is $55 and is over 4gb, and that is what they will charge you for using 1100 mb on a 1gb plan, and now since the CRTC has accepted this organised theft, and is forcing any competition to charge 85% of what Rogers/Bell does, everyone will get hooped by this, even their low use clients. If you believe otherwise, good luck !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top