http://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2017/2017-104.htm
Canadian lawmakers doing us Canadians a solid by protecting our agnostic data rights. This is what I have been dreaming of for years but I never thought it would ever be passed into law.
Give it a read and come to your own conclusion of course, the policy also allows ISPs to charge differing rates for data as long as it treats all data the same which is questionable.
1 Like
I do not like the way it affirms data caps.
I haven't read the whole thing just now, but doesn't that statement contradict itself? When they can charge differing rates, not everything is treated the same... or did I misunderstand you? If they were treating everything the same, it would in turn also cost the same, no?
I think the 'treat all data the same' means that ISP's can't institute a system where THEIR services don't count towards the data cap.
For example, if AT&T has an internet streaming service, they could have it so that their streaming service doesn't add up towards a cap. Whereas if you watched Netflix, it would add to that cap.
This has been known to happen before, hope that makes sense.
Yeah regarding data caps it makes sense.
But charging differently for different services effectively makes them non-equal.
It's like when Comcast was blocking Netflix, then Netflix payed a huge fee and suddenly everything was OK. Just now that cost is given to the customer directly, and not to the services. It's kinda the same though.
It's a misleading statement to be sure but what I meant as an example is that they can charge more for peak hours of the day
Comcast now includes Netflix in one of it's 'TV" packages.
The conflict of interest of where an ISP can separate "TV" and Movies from internet service, yet treat content not included in their TV packages as competition, is something consumers need to fight.
Oh well, a little like how electricity costs less at night then...?
No, it has nothing to do with that.
Not at all similar, it is stating all data no matter where it originates is to be treated the same/ have the same value. Meaning if they have a streaming service the data (bandwidth) you utilize using their service is to be treated with the same priority. Where the differing rate comes into play is with providers like Shaw communications who have their own streaming service similar to netflix. What this means is that they may choose to not have data used with their service count towards your data cap. What it DOES NOT permit is for their streaming service to be made artificially quicker ala the fuckery comcast played against netflix. Ie. Shaw / Telus / whoever your provider is may not throttle the bandwidth of a competitor's service. They must provide the same speeds.
Basically it means the only incentive that your provider may use to cause you to use their service over their competitor's is via bundles/ data cap not via making a competing service unusable.
What I found hilarious about comcasts throttling of netflix/ youtube is that when they adopted that practice I did a cursory search of comcasts IP ranges I then promptly blocked them all on my end, such that I wasn't able to connect/ was rejecting connections from those ranges. What was funny about this is youtube/ Netflix stopped having buffer issues. Comcast's Dynamic IP Ranges
Yes you're in the right mindset it's more that ISPs can do those sorts of activites if they are a viable business practice that attracts customers.
"Under the framework set out above, ISPs may implement differential pricing practices without prior Commission approval, with an expectation that any practice that is implemented is consistent with the evaluation criteria. Upon receipt of a complaint, or in the case of a Commission-initiated investigation, the Commission would look to these criteria and the specific facts involved to determine whether the differential pricing practice will be permitted." -CRTC
So an ISP can charge for peak hours but that may drive away customers and those customers also have an option to file a complaint to the CRTC against your business practice and say it creates an un-fair business enviroment
Mh well... sounds ok-ish in theory, if the commission actually does anything in the end that is... no differential pricing in the first place would be better though.
I'm not completely certain, but I think T-Mobile had some issues doing stuff like this in Germany a while back. They bundled Spotify I think, which wouldn't count to their datacaps, they had to take that out fairly quickly though. Funny thing is they just started something like this again a few weeks back, just with more services...