Did you know that Bell Canada is taking the CRTC to court for its decision that it should continue to allow third parties acces to their networks, for both phone and Internet access? That’s explains why they’ve been traffic shaping. They don’t want competition.
On the heels of the recent discovery that Bell Canada has been throttling their wholesale ASDL connections, the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) has issued a cease and desist motion demanding that the telecom stop imparing “speed and performance of the wholesale ADSL access services that it provides to independent ISPs and other competitors.”
In the application filed late yesterday, CAIP has claimed that Bell’s actions have impacted performance “to the point where the quality of the service has been degraded beyond recognition.” It therefore seeks to curb Bell’s anti-competitive ways, but it also wants to “ensure the technological and competitive neutrality.”
Yes, they used the word “neutrality.” A word both the CRTC and the Conservative government would much prefer to do without.
The CRTC has long avoided getting involved in a true debate on the issue, but with the CAIP demanding their involvement they will have to set a precedent, in one form or the other.
As for the government’s stance, Industry Minister Jim Prentice refused to give a straightforward answer when the issue came up in question period on Wednesday, courtesy of NDP MP Charlie Angus. Angus asked:
“What steps will the Minister of Industry take to ensure that consumers who paid for access are not going to be ripped, that badly needed competition will not be squeezed off, and send a message to the telecom giants that they have no business monkey wrenching with the free flow of information?”
To which Prentice gave a brief and dismissive politispeak answer stating “[a]t this point in time we will continue to leave the matter between consumers on the one hand and Internet service providers on the other.” The simple fact that he did not outright condemn this action or, at the very least, express concern about it, is deplorably revealing of the Conservative’s position: being comfortable with the idea of letting telecoms manipulate Internet traffic as they see fit instead of looking out for the free flow of information.
The whole (albeit short) exchange can be seen on YouTube.
It’s equally deplorable to hear Prentice use the lack of Internet regulation in Canada as an excuse. After all, regulation in this matter falls under his jurisdiction, and he’s been rather chilly at the prospect of tabling any kind of legislation or spearheading a proposal. The government knows that Canadian public opinion is on the opposite end of the spectrum from the telecoms. And since lack of regulation allows the telecoms to have free reign over their networks, it’s sadly apparent that Jim Prentice and the Conservative government are more interested in protecting private interests than those of their citizens.
But as one of Canada’s largest telecommunications companies falls under attack by Canada’s largest ISP association, it will be very difficult from this point on for the government to not get involved. They will, sooner than later, be called to position themselves clearly in this particular issue, which will be quite telling of what the Conservatives have in store for net neutrality in the future.
Michael Geist: CRTC To Face Net Neutrality Issue as CAIP Demands Bell Cease and Desist Its Throttling Practices
Globe and Mail: Prentice mum on ISP throttling debate
NDP: Internet "throttling" a consumer rip-off
Broadband Reports: Bell Canada Redefines 'Satisfaction' and 'Fairness'
YouTube: NDP MP Charlie Angus on Net Neutrality
Two interesting, albeit distressing bits of news coming from two economic powerhouses, both located in Asia, both screwing around with online rights.
Japan has become the first country in the world where its ISPs will actively hunt down “copyright infringing file-sharers” and effectively pull the plug on their Internet access. Government legislation gone bad? Hardly. It’s Japan’s four major Internet service providers who decided collectively and independently to go ahead and police their networks, apparently due to government inaction on the situation (they had cited privacy concerns over such patrolling) and, you know the drill, pressure from the movie, music and software industries.
This is the perfect example as to why decent network neutrality legislation needs to exist in Canada before our own ISPs go vigilante like these did, without regard for moral and legal considerations. Not to mention the precarious precedent this act sets, as countries like France and the UK have been thinking (our country probably too) of enabling the same type “solution” to file sharing, and will most likely be observing very carefully so as to not reproduce the same mistakes within their own borders.
Meanwhile, over in China, YouTube was cut off from public access on Sunday after a series of protest videos in Tibet surfaced on the video sharing site. The videos were of the Lhasa demonstrations and other similar support protests abroad. China’s track record on Internet filtering goes on in less-than-stellar fashion, letting their 212 million Internet users know they can’t take the heat. Just another reason to boycott the Olympics.
Update: Turns out Google News and CNN are being blocked by the Chinese government as well.
TorrentFreak: Japanese ISPs Agree to Ban Pirates from the Internet
Wired: China Blocks YouTube Over Tibet Videos
According to the The Songwriters Association of Canada, adding a $5 fee on your Internet bill would solve all legal issues pertaining to music downloading off P2P networks.
Their proposal is an amendment to the Copyright Act, which they call the Right to Equitable Remuneration for Music File Sharing. Simply put, everyone with an Internet connection plunks out an extra five bucks a month. The money is then managed by a consortium of artists, songwriters, music publishers and record labels, which would then redistribute the funds through a monthly license fee to creators and rights holders in Canada.
In return, P2P file sharing would be made legal across Canada and will render the need for DRM obsolete.
While I’m glad to hear some input directly from the voice of a creator’s association (rather than always from the business end), I’m not keen on the universal price hike for all users. It’s this “everyone’s potentially guilty” approach which drove the recording industry to its current tactics and it’s kind of heartbreaking that the songwriters association has the same basic attitude.
Not to mention some people like, well, my mom, will outright refuse to pay such a price considering they don’t even know what P2P is. To which I must agree. However, it would be comforting to know that songwriters would be on the recieving end of the cash. Then again, the cynical part of me leads me to believe that if ever a deal like this was put through, the actual songwriters would end up chewing on the smallest piece of the pie, as usual.
Realistically, a fee like this would undoutebly change my behaviour. If I’m paying a flat mounthly amount to allow me to download as much free music as I want, what’s my motivation to keep buying albums? This proposition has the potential to bury retail for good, so how will it affect the iTunes, Puretracks and Zuniors of the world?
Existing music sites like iTunes and PureTracks would continue to be licenced directly by Creators and rights holders and would continue to develop the attractive “value added” services and security features that keep them distinct from file sharing activities.
Something tells me Steve Jobs won’t enjoy the idea of being a “value added” service to the industry. And Apple will be only one of the opponents of such an amendment.
I’m quite unconvinced about the whole idea. Is this really the best solution to ensure music creators get their fair share?
TheStar.com : Could $5 a month save the music industry?
A PROPOSAL FOR THE MONETIZATION OF THE FILE SHARING OF MUSIC FROM THE SONGWRITERS AND RECORDING ARTISTS OF CANADA
Michael Geist has sources; his sources are telling him that a potent group of business associations and individual companies are banding together to oppose Jim Prentice’s DMCA legislation, and major players like Google and Yahoo! are adding their logos to the banner. The Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright will stand for, among other things, expanding Canada’s fair dealing (i.e. fair use) rights and rational enforcement of copyright penalties.
Alongside the two search giants is an impressive collection of media and telecommunications players who are not going to sit by and let the music lobby get its way.
They include:
The International Intellectual Property Alliance, mouthpiece of over 1,300 American media companies (including RIAA and MPAA members), can continue to pressure Canada into complying, but it’s obvious that our homebased interests will have nothing to do with DMCA-style legislation. So, moreso than ever, the Conservative copyright reform will have to prove if it’s out to protect the interests of Canadian companies, or those from abroad.
Michael Geist: Business Coalition for Balanced Copyright Speaks Out Against Canadian DMCA
Canada a top copyright violator, U.S. group says
Another strong voice has thrown its weight against Industry Minister Jim Prentice’s copyright reform bill. The Canadian Association of Broadcasters, which represents Canadian private television and radio broadcasters, has had a rather enlightened moment in regards to copyright reform. This is what the CAB president, Glenn O’Farrell, had to say:
“Rather than adapting their business models to the opportunities presented by evolving digital media, the [record] labels are engaging in what is essentially an abuse of the principles of the Copyright Act.”
Looks like Mr. O’Farrell and I share the same brain on this one: the recording industry wants to move into the 21st century by clinging to antiquated business models; shoot down technology instead of embracing it; regulate to make up for their lack of foresight. Could it be the recording industry is risking to sink broadcasters, who still are their most preferred promotional tool?
Michael Geist: Broadcasters Claim Copyright at the Breaking Point
Glenn O'Farrell - Stop the copyright pile-on
Sides chosen in royalty tussle
Microsoft Misleads on Copyright Reform
IFPI Forces Danish ISP to Block The Pirate Bay
Educational Use of the Internet Amendment: Is it Necessary?
Following-up on something I mentioned last week, the Conservative government, who pledged for more transparency and accountability in government, has solidly messed up on their campaign promise to bring treaties to the House of Commons for debate before ratification.
Industry Minister Jim Prentice wants to get the Canadian version of the DMCA in so bad, that he refuses to place the WIPO treaty up for debate and will ratify it without any open discussion in the House.
From the article at The Hill Times:
According to the policy, this would mean that before the government introduces copyright legislation to implement two treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization, it is required to table the treaties in the House for debate and votes and hold a 21-day waiting period before introducing the copyright legislation.
However, the Conservative government´s copyright bill to implement the treaties has been sitting on the Order Paper and is expected to be introduced this week.
Moreover, Industry Minister Jim Prentice´s (Calgary Centre-North, Alta.) office confirmed last week that it intends to move ahead with the copyright legislation without first debating the treaties in the House.
Aside from the layers of hypocrisy this whole story unfurls, it’s obvious that Prentice doesn’t have the backbone to do it the right (ie: democratic) way: stand up to music and movie lobbyists from our country and the US to allow any level of copyright reform to be properly debated in Parliament. All this situation serves to prove is that Jim Prentice is the biggest tool of the entertainment industry in Canada today.
Prentice backtracks on treaty policy, copyright to be exempted
Prentice Backtracks On Treaty Policy
Alleged movie pirate Geremi Adam misses Montreal court date, warrant issued
U2 manager takes Internet providers to task
Canadian MP - Debate WIPO Before Copyright Ratification
Court delivers a blow to record companies on internet piracy
Verizon: We don’t want to play copyright cop on our network
Copy a CD, owe $1.5 million under “gluttonous” PRO-IP Act
“Free and Legal Music Downloads” is what flashes before you as you visit Qtrax, amidst a few front page photographs which include the likes of Daft Punk and Lily Allen. Hitting the “What’s On Qtrax” button features the Foo Fighters, the Wu-Tang Clan, Feist, and Alicia Keys. All this free music from big name artists is possible thanks to deals with all four major US labels, which allow Qtrax to claim they have over 25 million files (which is more than the iTunes Music Store); oh, and all this is funded on an ad sales model.
But there’s a snag, and a mighty one at that: although the Qtrax people have been stating that they have deals with all four major labels, they only have one settled with EMI (I didn’t know EMI had a 25 million strong music catalog!). Warner has flat out denied having a deal, Universal said their agreement has expired, and Sony/BMG has stated that they want a play limit on all downloaded files before getting friendly with the startup.
Oh, because, yeah, the files are all crippled with that damning Windows Media DRM, which means, no, they won’t work on your iPod. You know, the best-selling portable MP3 device which people everywhere, young and old own? Yeah, it’s best you suppoort a format that doesn’t play on those devices from the get-go. But they say a deal with Apple is on the way, though… just like those deals with Warner, Sony and Universal…
This one has “fail” plastered all over it. I love the idea of making music accessible to all, but not through a misleading corporation who controls how I use my music. I much rather pay for it and listen to it where, how and how many times I want.
A Limerick Ox is proudly powered by WordPress.
