It's Good To Be A Monopoly: Bell Canada Tells ISPs To Shut Up And Accept Traffic Shaping

from the what-are-you-gonna-do? dept

Tue, Mar 25th 2008 6:08pm — Mike Masnick

Remember how Bell Canada had decided to start traffic shaping without telling any of its ISP resellers? Well, in a meeting with those resellers, the company both admitted it and told them there was nothing they could do about it, even if it meant that those ISPs were violating their own terms of service and promises to customers. It's good to be a monopoly, you see. Since those ISPs have nowhere else to go, Bell Canada is able to do whatever it wants to the network, and if those ISPs don't like it, they're pretty much out of luck.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: canada, telcos, traffic shaping
Companies: bell canada

24 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Nick, 25 Mar 2008 @ 7:07pm

Alarms
Hopefully legislators in America and the rest of the world will look at this and realize the importance of net neutrality. Also, here's hoping Canada wises up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nasch, 26 Mar 2008 @ 8:38am
  
  Re: Alarms
  "Hopefully legislators in America and the rest of the world will look at this and realize the importance of net neutrality."
  
  This isn't about net neutrality. NN doesn't mean forbidding traffic shaping, it means forcing ISPs to treat everyone equally. That means that with NN they couldn't provide an improved performance to one web site (streaming video provider, etc) that paid more for it, compared to another who didn't. But if they want to shape all traffic the same for all providers, that is not a NN issue. Net neutrality means being neutral to who is providing the content, not neutral to what kind of traffic it is.
  
  I'm not saying this doesn't suck, I'm just saying it's not a violation of net neutrality. *Good* traffic shaping would prioritize things that need low latency (eg VOIP). This is bad traffic shaping, because it throttles traffic that the ISP doesn't like.
  
  IMO, if their network cannot handle the traffic they're getting at flat-rate fees, then start charging by the MB and use the money from the heavy users to build out the network to the point where it *can* handle the traffic. That is of course a pipe dream, but it would be a fair solution.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff, 25 Mar 2008 @ 7:36pm

Nowhere else to go?
Where do you get no where else to go? There are alot of network service providers in Canada. My company has 100M link with Cogent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gurney, 26 Mar 2008 @ 8:54am
  
  Re: Nowhere else to go?
  But Cogent doesn't sell DSL. So it doesn't help.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- James, 26 Mar 2008 @ 1:13pm
  
  Re: Nowhere else to go?
  The point is that Cogent leases its bandwidth from Bell to provide it to you, and now bell is degrading the performance of resellers such as Cogent. Bell owns the infrastructure so until a law is passed that they have to play nice in the sandbox with all the other kids, Bell will do as it pleases with its infrastructure to make its service in the eyes of the consumer look best.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- K Xeron, 13 May 2008 @ 12:37pm
  
  Re: Nowhere else to go?
  "Where do you get no where else to go? There are alot of network service providers in Canada. My company has 100M link with Cogent."
  
  Okay, this is one thing many people (even many network administrators) sadly miss the point of that annoys me greatly:
  There is plenty of bandwidth/NSPs within the internet infastructure, you could have multi-gigabit at your office/datacenters, but it means nothing, and I do mean absolutely nothing, if you're an ISP that can't get your bandwidth to your customers. In North America, there's usually only 2 options when it comes to wired connectivity to homes: Cable or DSL (FiOS doesn't count yet due to it's lack of proper coverage), both of which are already controlled by incumbents (Bell is an incumbent). To get bandwidth from your customer to your company's network, you have to rent out the lines from the incumbents because laying your own would be cost prohibitive.
  
  Now, the situation here, is that the competing ISPs who purchase bandwidth from Bell to the last mile, are being THROTTLED even when said ISPs are using their own connectivity to backbones and NOT bell's.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2008 @ 7:37pm

Early termination fees are just another in a long series of corporate misdeeds levied upon a nearly defenseless public.

Pay an attorney and find out if the early termination fee is still binding. Then let us all know the result.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wondering, 25 Mar 2008 @ 8:02pm

Complain to?
Anyone know if any Canadian authority has any control over this? I saw one mentioned at dslreports, but they don't seem to have any control over this. I am wondering if there is any group, which can change this, that I could complain to?

Not that it really will change anything, but I at least want to do my part.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2008 @ 8:18pm

Facts on socialistic socities.
Wow, that was fast.

See kids, this is what socialism does to you. Take a look at the (sic) market-friendly society up north.

Do some research on and ask yourself is the right one for you?

What's Ross Perot and Ron Paul up to these days? I ask only because these guys seemed to be right on the Federal Reserve years ago.

Then today Hillary proposed a $30B bailout from the Federal Reserve today. Can you believe it? The thing is that it's missing a few decimal points. If it was closer to $3T, it might fly. But of course, she doesn't want to tell anyone how bad the shit has dropped.

FYI:
$3T looks like this:

$3,000,000,000.00

...and buys a whole lot of gasoline, I may add.

Hope the war was worth it. Haliburton relocated it's HQ to Dubai? Well... at least Cheney's out of the country when this mess is done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- BTR1701, 26 Mar 2008 @ 6:05am
  
  Re: Facts on socialistic socities.
  > FYI:
  > $3T looks like this:
  
  > $3,000,000,000.00
  
  Actually, it doesn't. It looks like this:
  
  $3,000,000,000,000.00
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- James, 26 Mar 2008 @ 1:19pm
  
  Re: Facts on socialistic socities.
  You need to learn what the definition of socialism is my friend. The government doesn't control Canada's internet service providers, it's simply that there are only a couple big players in this small pond. If we had 500 million people such as the US, it would attract more ISPs and there would be more options but alas we are only 30 million or so, so companies can't afford to invest in infrastructure and not be confident the masses would switch over.
  
  By the way, the US could learn a thing or two about social services if it weren't so paranoid.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Mar 2008 @ 9:11pm

#5 - I think you meant 3,000,000,000,000.00
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ScytheNoire, 25 Mar 2008 @ 9:15pm

I left Bell DSL because they started traffic shaping, and went to another DSL, who said they would never have traffic shaping, TekSavvy. Now Bell is going to force traffic shaping onto them? This just f'in' pisses me off. Glad I got rid of Bell, but damn annoying they are pulling this crap. I hope the government steps in and spanks Bell, and takes away their monopoly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
linuxamp, 25 Mar 2008 @ 10:19pm

Funny thing is that I'm all for net neutrality and I really hate being forced into a shaped network but I understand why it's sometimes necessary. I shape my own traffic at my gateway so that my VoIP traffic gets priority over other traffic that may otherwise degrade voice quality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- linus, 26 Mar 2008 @ 1:38am
  
  Re:
  The thing is .. its your choice to shape traffic and its not forced upon you. I also put guarantees on QOS on certain ip's and times of day, but only because I do it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Etch, 25 Mar 2008 @ 10:54pm

Its gettign bad
Fucking conservatives, they fuck it up wherever they are.
Lets hope the next government is at least Liberal, they both always end up cancelling each other out anyways!!

Roger's is also flexing its muscles.. almost as bad as Bell
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dnm, 26 Mar 2008 @ 2:49am

The thing about it...
The thing about all this though, is that it has nothing to do with the conservative government. This sort of thing is regulated by the CRTC. The CRTC has people who are on Bell's payroll on its deciding committee.

Bell is a blatant, defacto Monopoly, and they've got us all by the balls. Rogers too.

It's an absolute disgrace, and nobody seems interested in doing anything about it. These companies don't give a fuck about you, and as long as the CRTC continues to allow it, nothing's going to change it.

BTW, mr 'Anonymous Coward', we have issues with monopolies with our banks, phone companies, and cable companies, but it stops there. They're not government companies, and it ain't socialism. Perhaps MORE socialist than countries than say the United States, but at least we still have our constitutional rights. You could stand to look up socialism in a dictionary. This sorta thing sucks, but Canada's still the best country in the world.

Fellow Canadians, I suggest you start by complaining very loudly to the minister of commerce in your province, and federally, and your local and federal politician.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Mar 2008 @ 6:18am
  
  Re: The thing about it...
  Its not the CRTC. Its the Comeptition Beureau.
  
  The CRTC will take the complaint. But has nothing to do with billing, or anything else. It should
  
  However our government has been to busy kissing the us's assess with the DMCA, to see that they need to do something.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Twinrova, 26 Mar 2008 @ 3:59am

My reply
Hmmm...

So if my cable company does something I don't like and I want cable service without a dish stuck to my roof, I've got other choices???

If my electric company does something I don't like and I want to keep electricity but don't want a windmill* in my yard, I've got other choices???

If my water company does something I don't like and I want to keep water without lining my yard with buckets, I've got other choices???

If my gas company does something I don't like and I want to keep gas without drilling a hole in the ground, I've got other choices???

Stupid Canadians. ;)

*Carmel, IN forbids home owners from applying windmills in their yards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 26 Mar 2008 @ 5:11am
  
  If your internet access comes in through a dish, it's not cable service.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spuds, 26 Mar 2008 @ 5:34am

Ummmm...
You're missing the point, #13 Anonymous Coward.

Spuds
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ferin, 26 Mar 2008 @ 8:30am

Gotta love the arrogance
It always amazes me to see the arrogance displayed by these monopolies. The governments grant them literally thousands of square miles of land for cheap to string their networks along. They grant them right of way to keep their precious lines safe. They're handed a monopoly on a silver platter, then proceed to gouge customers. And instead of upgrading and building out their network to handle demand for speed, they just slap throttles on and celebrate another year of record profits. This kinda shit just makes me sick. Free market my ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mic, 30 Mar 2008 @ 6:01am

I think that ISP resellers and smaller ISPs together would have enough power to build a parallel infrastructure with the significant coverage. The question is whether it would be profitable for them - would customers value they unshaped and more expensive connection more then competitors shaped? I doubt that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Draw, 22 Apr 2008 @ 8:29pm

Founder Alexander Graham Bell is now shamefaced!
Fascism is what it's called. As consumers it is our duty to fight. Write the CRTC, local government, and use whatever means available to stop these companies from spoiling your fabric of humanity. Stay strong with assertive communication amongst ourselves. R & D verses monopolization and stagnation. I QUIT BELL, the company that used to care about its customers. BYE BYE BELL Canada
[ link to this | view in chronology ]