jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Strong law needed to put an end to this once and for all
Bell wants to ruin the internet, Rogers wants, Comcast etc. Even rumours that some smaller ISPs want Nebuad etc.
Even if the CRTC sides against bell in the throttling of competitors issue, Bell will still fuck Sympatico customer, so will Rogers etc.
And what we have seen so far is just the beginning of a "throttling" gamme that will only increase until the internet become like cable: à la carte access, and the vast majority will only buy basic access to the net,giving them access to hotmail , microsoft.com and google. You want more ? you pay more.
This cannot be fought item by item. The government MUST step in and put an end to these shananigans once and for all. Make the law very solid and set a very clear diection for a long term definition of an ISP as a simple access to the whole internet without "sevice management" that blocks some services and allows others based on what you pay. |
|
yawn
@videotron.ca
| said by jfmezei  :Even if the CRTC sides against bell in the throttling of competitors issue, Bell will still fuck Sympatico customer, so will Rogers etc. eh, i bet the competition wholesalers will remain throttled. Even in the unlikely event the wholesalers are not throttled, do you think Bell would continue throttling their own customers as they leave in droves??
1+1=? |
|
Rastan
join:2007-04-25
Canada
·TekSavvy Solutions..
 ·VBUZZER
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to jfmezei
I'm going to quote George Carlin. "Garbage in, garbage out."
If you want better laws then vote for a better party! Who in their right mind (pun intended) thought that the Conservative government wouldn't cave into U.S. demands and begin their own war against file sharing?
Judge the political parties by their actions, not by their words. |
|
KPaul
join:2007-02-08 | reply to jfmezei
I love that answer, people who vote for the hacks then complain when they do garbage like this...
hellllllllllllllllllllllo 21st century future |
|
jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Just a reminder that the majority of canadians did NOT vote for the reform party (or whatever name it is using now).
The Reform party is at least true to its roots and policies. It is no surprise that George W Harper is implementing his uncle Bush' policies because those are the policies Reform has always had. A number of naive people voted for a party called "Conservative" not believing that such party would ever implement Reform policies. But the party itself is true to its roots.
Consider the Liberals who are voting against their own principles to keep Reform in office because being without a leader, the Liberal party would be decimated should an election occur now.
This is not a healthy democracy. Enough liberals should defect to NDP/Bloc to give those 3 parties the balance of power. You'd then see the liberal party kick Mr Somnifère out and select a real leader so it would be ready for an election. |
|
anonymousse
@teksavvy.com | absoluement |
|
Stewy
Premium
join:2007-12-12
Kitchener, ON
edit:
July 7th, @12:05PM
| reply to KPaul
said by KPaul :I love that answer, people who vote for the hacks then complain when they do garbage like this... I don't think anyone votes for who they like, they vote for who they despise the least.
We take one step forward and get pushed back three. The CRTC will side with Bell mark my words.
I'm saying this because I have lost all faith our system of governance due to corporate greed, government mismanagement and corruption and our judicial dysfunctional incompetence.
jfmezei please forgive some of us for being apathetic towards trying to fight the system, it just seems that we're fighting a losing battle on every front.
The inmates are running the asylum. Now I know what this means. |
|
Rastan
join:2007-04-25
Canada
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·VBUZZER
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to jfmezei
Although some people were swayed by Harper's promises, I don't believe that most of them were naive. Most people vote for the party that will look after their own interests. Conservative governments favour big business and wealthy people and I doubt that those parties agree with our stance on file sharing and the Internet in general. |
|
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Rastan
said by Rastan :I'm going to quote George Carlin. "Garbage in, garbage out." If you want better laws then vote for a better party! Who in their right mind (pun intended) thought that the Conservative government wouldn't cave into U.S. demands and begin their own war against file sharing? Judge the political parties by their actions, not by their words. Problem is, all of these parties have their own agendas and affiliations. Sure right now we'll be screwed with the DCMA, next election there will be a new party but then what will that bring?
We're getting pushed around by our own Government but as long as we keep fighting we can make it bearable and unfortunately no matter who we vote in we'll have to keep on our toes to fight for our country.
--
"If bullshit was money this guy would be richer that Bill Gates." - quote by olebiker on Mirko Bibic |
|
gola
@teksavvy.com
| reply to jfmezei
The problem with file sharing is that is has become so easy to pirate anything you want; it's crazy!
The internet, with bittorrent, has become like a supermarket of "warez". Tv shows, movies, games and music are as simple as a trip to the pirate bay or mininova.
What I'm saying is that it could not last for ever.
Don't get me wrong, i do not support the dmca, because I find it's much easier to get a copy of my favorite show off eztv than to tape it. And I hope it stays that way.
The one thing that i'm sure of is that American's still download with the dmca in place. It will be the matter of who will police the new law. If the law passes and we see a slew of civil law suits, I think that the Canadian public will be outraged, because unlike the states, money is not the only thing that matters up here, or at least I hope so. |
|
globus999
join:2008-05-15
| reply to jfmezei
Much that I will like to see a "strong" law, I am *very* pesimistic. I have *never*, *ever* seen a "strong" law in Canadian history. It is always a mish-mash of some sort, bland, toothless and brain-dead. There was some point for such laws in the past, but not anymore. What is happening is that the curtains are finally coming down and the "real" puppet-masters are showing. A lot of people will get *VERY* brain-washed. Too bad. Canada used to be nice.... |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to jfmezei
There wouldn't even be independant isps, if the crtc didn't regulate the telco's had to lease out the last mile.
As long as independant ISP's have to rely on the last mile from the major telco's/cableco's it won't be good.
There's a reason they had to regulate the line sharing in the first place, it costs too much to lay down all that copper and only get a fraction of the customers.
I don't think the telco's/cableco's will ever like sharing their lines. |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| When you've been granted a monopoly it's no longer your decision to make. Monopoly's a regulated for a reason.... to set fair share guidelines to be able to allow competition to conduct business.
If Bell wasn't a monopoly, all sharing/access/IP/throttling/etc arguments would be worth holding, but fact is they've been giving a golden key to two provinces (ON/QC) and have an obligation to being common carriers for it. Anything else, through whatever argument they might give, shouldn't be accepted. If they can no longer do the job, then someone else who can do this job should be granted monopoly rights.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by R0CKY : If they can no longer do the job, then someone else who can do this job should be granted monopoly rights. Dream big homie : ) TSI will be our new big brother! |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| LOL... Not saying TSI should be the next big brother, but where we're heading in the next months to come requires some serious hand holding from our friends at the CRTC and on Parliament Hill.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
LucyintheSky
@teksavvy.com
moderated:
July 7th, @11:50PM
| reply to jfmezei
quote:
"This is not a healthy democracy. Enough liberals should defect to NDP/Bloc to give those 3 parties the balance of power. You'd then see the liberal party kick Mr Somnifère out and select a real leader so it would be ready for an election."
Anyone who thinks the Liberals/NDP are the answer has issues far beyond what Net Neutrality entails. They will do NOTHING but make the situation worse. Instead of sending you to the gallows, they'll send you to the ovens. You'll die slower, but dead is dead. |
|
Candoo3
join:2005-01-24
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by LucyintheSky :
Anyone who thinks the Liberals/NDP are the answer has issues far beyond what Net Neutrality entails.
Hmmm .... strike off the PC's for the current job they're doing, and strike off the LIB's and NDP. Holy bat$hit, we're out of parties  |
|
Stewy
Premium
join:2007-12-12
Kitchener, ON
| reply to jfmezei
said by gola :
The problem with file sharing is that is has become so easy to pirate anything you want; it's crazy!
What I'm saying is that it could not last for ever.
What most don't understand is that more and more it's all coming at the cost of OUR civil liberties and right to privacy. The last thing we want as a society is a state/corporate controlled internet. With the use of DPI and DPC the state and the corporate world now has access to mass surveillance. Another example is the latest judicial ruling giving Viacom access to every IP and username that has ever VIEWED a youtube video.
Every day this country is looking more and more like a Totalitarian Corporatocracy where every aspect of your life is controlled by government and corporations. The definition of totalitarian corporatocracy is like this.
Where a state and corporations in unison regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life through the state controlled mass media, a central state-controlled economy, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror tactics.
1 - Let's see, we have the CRTC wanting to control the internet which is mass media. There's talk of net censorship.
2 - We now have monopolistic corporate control over the communication spectrum.
3 - We now have a judicial system siding with corporate control of media which is a form of fear and intimidation tactic all in the name of *cough* copyright.
4 - We now have DPI and DPC for mass surveillance in the name of network management.
5 - Your free "discussion and criticism" of the state and corporate world better not contain any slander, profanity, defamation or copyright infringement, even if you posted on the internet anonymously.
I'd like it to be funny but it isn't, did you ever think 10 years ago that it would be like this. Just imagine for a second or two where this will be in 10 years from now. |
|
Black Moon
join:2005-02-01
Scarborough, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to jfmezei
I agree, JF, but it's not gonna happen as long as the mentality of the people is not changed to favour a regulated environment over a deregulated one controlled by 'market forces'.
Which leads me to ask the question: why is there no local loop unbundling in Canada, like what is being done in Europe, Japan etc? The US experimented with it for some time, but abandoned it for reasons I don't quite understand. Rocky? anyone? |
|
jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Stewy
re: no more parties to vote for.
In the end, it is up to citizens to get involved and force a government, no matter what party it may be, to respect the wishes of the citizens.
The party we had on Ma 27th on Parliament hill is a good start, but there will need to be a lot more done to get the government to act on the need to ensure the internet remains a free and democratic network not controlled by anyone.
Or, we could just resign ourselves to the fact that legacy businesses will take over the internet and ruin it, and then we can start Internet 2 that would be completely outside the legacy telco's jurisdiction (for instance, using municipal networks). |
|
