 |  | 
sparkypika
join:2003-07-26
Canada | Now do classical gas! "So we'll march day and niiight by the big cooling tower... they have the plant, but we have the power!"
This comment adds nothing to the overall discussion. | |
| | | dardin
join:2002-11-19
Tucson, AZ | Re: ISP's can filter anything they want They are not providing service to anyone. So why do you state they are providing service to the Union?
They are not hosting these Union websites, other hosts are. | |
| | 
HockeyDude
Born To Run
join:2003-01-22
Brooklyn, NY | What if its in a place where there are no alternative service providers? So ISPs should be allowed to have a monopoly and do anything they want? | |
| | King75
King Of All And Nothing
Premium
join:2004-07-31
Stevensville, MD
clubs: | I thought Unions were usually conservative mainly being white male middle class people as such who tend to be conservative they want better pay and lower taxes. This is a conservative view point isn't it? | |
| | | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want said by King75  :I thought Unions were usually conservative mainly being white male middle class people as such who tend to be conservative they want better pay and lower taxes. This is a conservative view point isn't it? Well that's what they tell their members then they turn around and give money to the most socialist political candidate they can find, while dropping hints that the company is lying about their profits.
Unfortunately for them their members are starting to wake up and jump ship...especially when they realize that they don't have to belong to a giant union to participate in collective bargaining.
Hopefully the trend continues and something new rises from the ashes, a "Union" whose purpose is to help their members get the best possible wages within reason; excising their current objectives of recruiting members to fill the coffers (by making management and non-union shops the enemy) and getting certain people elected to office.
--
Misfits lost in the dryer, take heart
Maybe there's a place up in sock heaven. | |
| | | | 
Titus Pullo
I came, I saw, I slept
join:2004-06-26
 ·Embarq
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want It's painfully obvious that you know nothing about the history of the middle class and the role of unions to that end. I find your line re "wages within reason" interesting; reasonable wages relative to what? Do you have a metric for reasonable? Part of the reason unions have fallen from public favor is the unrelenting attack from those who oppose them. Ask yourself why any business, with plentiful labor pools and high profits, would fight to kill unions?
But it's of no matter; the health care crisis in our country makes unions a non issue. Toyota just moved potential southern-state American operations to Canada for two reasons: they couldn't afford the extensive training that bubba required (part of which is due to their no-union history having created scads of untrained and untrainable workers), and health care is provided in Canada. Both are a direct result of the very mindset that wishes unions dead: Bottom-liners and top 1%'ers that want a nation of lower class consumers rather than an educated middle class -- people like that are contrary to profits, aren't worker-droids, and know the history of worker exploitation in this country.
You're simply creating, selling, and marketing the very rope that will hang you by killing unions, denying there's a health care problem, and cutting education.
Good luck.
--
"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppose." -- Frederick Douglass | |
| | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want said by Titus Pullo :I find your line re "wages within reason" interesting; reasonable wages relative to what? Meaning, demanding major increases in pay when the company you work for is on the verge of collapse would be unreasonable and counterproductive.
But counterproductive is the status quo with the major labor unions. They'd rather sabotage the nonunion contractors work areas (as opposed to a protest), force union members to protest (when the union members don't want to do the job in the first place), whine about Walmart (rather than encouraging their mostly minor members who work at the supermarkets to provide better service), and protect workers who can't/won't do their job from being fired or even placed in other jobs where they can/do but don't particularly enjoy ("I'm not working to slow, you're doing all the work cause you working too fast" - a coworker); than actually do anything that makes sense. All this is just from personal experience. Hell they aren't even willing to wage a proper protest; everyone lounging around in chairs talking like they're having a little get together with the friends at home.
Maybe the reason I see it this way is because I have enough self respect to be willing to quit if I'm mistreated and I've been smart enough to create an environment where I can do so and survive. Too bad most people have no idea how to put money away for when they need it, and lack the will to give up their cable TV to make it last; so they've created a situation where they are chained to their current employer due to their short sightedness and lack of self control.
I think it's telling that just a couple days ago the AFLCIO announced that they were pissed off that the other unions were stealing members.
--
Misfits lost in the dryer, take heart
Maybe there's a place up in sock heaven. | |
| | | | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| As a Canadian living in Los Angeles, I do agree that health care coverage through taxes is an incentive to corporations due to the expensive nature of U.S. 2 tiered health care system. Give it long enough, and Canada's system will end up in a similar situation. Toyota has had a plant in Canada for many years, as does Honda, GM, Ford, and Daimler Chrysler. I have been inside GM Engine plant as a contractor, and can relate to some of the union mentality, especially among the older workers. | |
| | 
G_Poobah
join:2004-01-17
Schenectady, NY
| *sigh*
If they are filtering, then they are NOT AN ISP. Period.
ISP = "Internet Service Provider". By defition, if you are an internet service provider, you give me an IP address, and I can go where I want. If you filter sites, then you are a Limited Filtered Web Access Provider.
What Telus is doing is showing the world they are NOT AN ISP. That means they have ZERO legal protection from someone suing them for copyright infringement, hacking, identity theft, etc. Granted, they can do the filtering (probably a marketing doofuses idea), but by showing the world they CAN and WILL block a site, what's to stop ANYONE from suing them to block any other site. Slippery slope indeed.
--
Grand Poobah | |
| | | 
badisp
@sprintbbd.net
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want Ya, I agree.
Even if I did not care about the Union or even like the Union at all. If I was a customer I would be thinking to myself, "what site are they going to block next or in the future"?
What right does a ISP have to deceide what website it is ok or not ok for me to view?
Very bad move.... | |
| | | 
WhyADuck
Premium
join:2003-03-05
| Finally someone gets it! The question is, do ISP's want to be a "common carrier", which basically passes along the data and makes not attempt to inspect or filter it, or do they want to hold themselves out as being able and willing to block any site at will? If the latter, then they should not be surprised if organizations like the RIAA and the MPAA demand that they start blocking access to certain sites. Also, given Canada's "hate speech" laws, I would not be at all surprised if the government presents its own list of sites it wants banned. Pretty soon Canadians (at least those in Telus territory) will have to find proxies in other countries if they want to be able to surf the entire Web.
It seems to me like Telus is opening themselves up to considerable legal difficulties with their actions. That's not to mention the increased problems they are likely to have with their union because of this - after all, by this action they are showing that they do not believe in fair play, and such actions are likely to further any spirit of mistrust between the parties. | |
| | | |
badisp
@sprintbbd.net | Re: ISP's can filter anything they want Very well said. This could create some serious backlash like that. | |
| |
Orwell1984
@fdn.com
 from:
John Galt
| So when your paper boy delivers your morning news with articles he doesn't like cut out that's ok to? | |
| | | 
Krispy
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-11
the stix
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want said by Orwell1984:
So when your paper boy delivers your morning news with articles he doesn't like cut out that's ok to?
Just to play devil's advocate...what about if the newspaper decides not to print the article in the first place (which I'm sure happens all the time)?
--
you can lead a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink...you can put a man through school but you cannot make him think --ben harper | |
| | | |
Orwell1984
@fdn.com | Re: ISP's can filter anything they want That would be equivalent to the website owners not putting info on the site.Telus might own the network they do not however own the packets being transmitted across it. | |
| | 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| said by GOLFnSUN :ISP's can filter anything they want and if you don't like it - switch providers. Why should an ISP provide services to those(unions) that are working against it. Just some more liberal claptrap that now thinks a business is obligated to assist those seeking it harm. So, what you're saying is, businesses that are ostensibly in the business of providing information flow should be allowed to determine what their customers are allowed to see and hear on any given topic?
By way of example, what you're saying is, if Time/Warner was in the middle of a questionable dispute with a business partner, that any news outlets they controlled should be allowed to simply omit coverage, or they should be able to edit the news coverage of the broadcasters they carry on their cable systems (CNN, MSNBC, local outlets, etc.)?
At least think through the potential consequences of the garbage you spout.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
| | | KUppiano
Karl Uppiano
join:2003-02-02
Ferndale, WA
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want The mainstream media filters and contrives news all the time. Only the technology has changed. I used to work at a local radio station where the news director would simply refuse to post stories he did not agree with. He didn't even realize he was doing it.
Furthermore, if it is true that a massive DDOS is in the works, I would take preventative measures. | |
| | | |
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want said by KUppiano :The mainstream media filters and contrives news all the time. Only the technology has changed. I used to work at a local radio station where the news director would simply refuse to post stories he did not agree with. He didn't even realize he was doing it. Yes, but that's PRODUCTION of content, not delivery of others' content. Telus isn't making websites, they are filtering their content from view. In this way, it's more akin to a cable service running all the news outlets they carry on a delay and blipping any stories they don't want their subscribers to view.
It's ethically questionable, at best. At worst, allowing such practices to stand makes a mockery supposedly open society.
said by KUppiano :Furthermore, if it is true that a massive DDOS is in the works, I would take preventative measures. In the case of a suspected DDoS in the offing, it's a matter for police investigation. Otherwise, it's just a little "too convenient" an excuse for silencing your opponents' views.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
| | | | | KUppiano
Karl Uppiano
join:2003-02-02
Ferndale, WA
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want In the case of the news director, it was not the production of content. We got our content from the UPI wire. The fact is, filtration was done on a daily basis. First by hand, and ultimitely by machine. UPI gave us the tools to filter. By region, by subject. It is just a different granularity now. If I wanted to, I could set up a conservative ISP that blocks all liberal content. Or vice-versa. People would pay for that. In fact, I feel a whole new industry coming on. I'm looking for startup capital if anybody is interested.
ISPs, like newspapers and broadcasters can filter anything they want. True, the ISPs should be up front about their agenda, but so should the mainstream media. They're not, though.
I will re-iterate, if I were running a business, I would take whatever measures necessary to keep it online. If I thought a DDOS was in the offing, I would take all necessary countermeasures with absolutely no apologies. It would beat the heck out of the number of apologies I'd have to make when hordes of users can't connect. I might call the police too, for all the good it would do. | |
| | | | | |
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: ISP's can filter anything they want said by KUppiano :In the case of the news director, it was not the production of content. We got our content from the UPI wire. The fact is, filtration was done on a daily basis. First by hand, and ultimitely by machine. UPI gave us the tools to filter. By region, by subject. It is just a different granularity now. If I wanted to, I could set up a conservative ISP that blocks all liberal content. Or vice-versa. People would pay for that. In fact, I feel a whole new industry coming on. I'm looking for startup capital if anybody is interested. Terribly interesting, and all, but not germane. Telus is primarily a transport, not a content aggregator. If Telus has their own portal for their customers for which they create and aggragate content, then editorial decisions for said portal would be equivalent to your newspaper example. As such, Telus is more equivalent to a cable system operator. If they are selectively preventing customers from accessing content based primarily on the fact that it comes from a source they'd rather silence, it is, in fact, wrong. They are acting in their own PR interests rather than the interests of their customer base.
If Telus employed networking engineers worth a rat's ass, they'd be able to both protect themselves from the supposed coming DDoS attacks, yet still provide access to the Union-related web sites. The fact that they don't is simply proof that they are simply interested in silencing opposition.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
| | | | | |
Orwell1984
@fdn.com
| No they are still producing content by deciding which stories to carry and aggregating them. What Telus is doing is more akin to the delivery boy then taking that newspaper and removing articles from it. Newspaper=website ISP=delivery boy. Now if the spin Telus is using as an excuse is true then I can't blame them for attempting to stop a DDOS attack from a whole 3 websites(I thought it took an army of zombies to DDOS an ISP but I am just an ignorant shlub not a big time corporation so what do I know) | |
| | | | | | | KUppiano
Karl Uppiano
join:2003-02-02
Ferndale, WA
1 edit | Re: ISP's can filter anything they want said by Orwell1984:
No they are still producing content by deciding which stories to carry and aggregating them. What Telus is doing is more akin to the delivery boy then taking that newspaper and removing articles from it. Newspaper=website ISP=delivery boy. Now if the spin Telus is using as an excuse is true then I can't blame them for attempting to stop a DDOS attack from a whole 3 websites(I thought it took an army of zombies to DDOS an ISP but I am just an ignorant shlub not a big time corporation so what do I know)
Actually, I think the newspaper/delivery boy argument is a straw man. The only reason it appears to work is that it has worked that way for so long. The newspaper could fire the delivery boy if he further edited their content. There is no such relationship between the web sites and the ISPs.
By the way, I'm not saying I would like it if my ISP started filtering my content. But I don't like mainstream media bias, either. But there was not a damn thing I could do about it until very recently. | |
| | | | | | | |
Orwell1984
@fdn.com | Re: ISP's can filter anything they want You are right. That is why I dislike analogies and should know better than to resort to them.The point I am trying to make is that I feel my ISP has no more right to filter my content without my permission than the delivery boy. | |
| | | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| said by KUppiano :Furthermore, if it is true that a massive DDOS is in the works, I would take preventative measures. Re-read that. I doubt the unions are talking about launching an actual *DDOS* attack.
It sounds to me like the company is calling a LEGAL STRIKE an "Attempt to Deny Voice services" because the employees aren't showing up for WORK.
IE: "They don't show up for work, so we can't provide the services to our customers those employees are responsible for..." They seem to be calling THAT a "Denial of Voice Service Attack"!
As if... "You don't show up for work, so therefore you are a .... Terrorist!!!"
Maybe, with a few more pro-business deregulations bills like we're passing left and right here in the US, then these "employers" can finally get back to the good ole days of chaining workers to their machines, or having wages exactly equal what they charge them for food and a bunkbed.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| said by GOLFnSUN :ISP's can filter anything they want and if you don't like it - switch providers. Yep! There's the intelligent response. Of course, people with this opinion already block anything they don't agree with anyway, at least in their minds.
Question: Just how many ILEC's and Cable companies you have serving you anyway? What? 1 each? So, how many times can you switch providers before your essentially out of choices?
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
|
Krispy
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-11
the stix
| Huh? According to DNS and registrar look-ups I can't even see that teluscabs.ca or telussluts.ca even exist or are registered to anyone (internic.ca tells me I can buy those domains today) so unless I'm severely under-caffeinated and doing something wrong I wonder how much of this article is valid at all.
--
you can lead a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink...you can put a man through school but you cannot make him think --ben harper | |
| |
Krispy
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-11
the stix
| Re: Huh? I see now that the article has a typo throughout the article for the one domain, it should be telusscabs.ca, note the double s. Another registry search for telussluts.ca and telusluts.ca turned up nothing...great proofing on the article!
--
you can lead a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink...you can put a man through school but you cannot make him think --ben harper | |
| rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| I asked this before ... but I didn't get responses that addressed my question. So -- I'll try to be short and ask it again...
Is it legal for the electric, water, sewer or phone companies to terminate service to a business that is in competition or in some conflict with them? (Granted, it's hard to be in competition with the first three but...)
I don't think we yet consider "Internet" access as a utility but ...
I'd also like to comment that if we don't yet consider it a utility, then I don't want any USF slush-fund fees going to deliver it to rural or impoverished areas. If it's not a utility, it's must be an "optional" part of society and we shouldn't have to make sure the haves fund the have nots. | |
| |
bored2tears
@advancedtool.com
| Re: I asked this before ... As a company and network owner I'm under no obligation to allow traffic to or from any given place on the internet.
I block connections from IP addresses that I feel are going to send me spam. I block connections from addresses that I have reason to believe are compromised. I block connections from many sub-nets just because they've been problems to me in the past.
I also block connections from my network TO those IP addresses and sub-nets. This is for the protection of both my network and my network's users.
It is well within my rights (and responsibility) to protect my network from harm, direct and implied. Telus is doing nothing wrong if that's the case. If those websites are plotting a DOS attack on their network or their infrastructure (phones and call centers apply here) then they are well within their rights to limit or eliminate communications to and from their network based on that. I would not expect them to do otherwise. I would think of them contemptuously if they didn't.
Beyond that the union has been offered more money and better terms. They no longer have to swing hammers etc so they can be comm people like they wanted. Telus has even offered to retrain people currently paid to swing hammers.
Uhh.. DUH?!? Get back to work for gods sake. | |
| | | 
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:
 ·VOIPo
| Re: I asked this before ... So you are trying to say that if you get an internet conection through one ISP, it is ok for them to block access to any competitors web site or any content they don't want you to see.
So if they are an ISP that is oriented to one political party belief, and they happen to be your only choice of provider, and they block all web sites and content to the opposing party, then it is ok??
Dude, you need to get a serious grip then..
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
| | | |
bored2tears
@advancedtool.com
| Re: I asked this before ... No "dude" I didn't say that. I never referred to political parties, affiliations or any such thing. I referred to people doing harm to my network or planning to inflict such harm on my network. Nothing more, nothing less.
Perhaps you would like to point out where in my post you found such statements, I would be most interested to see where this took place. | |
| | | | |
ropeguru
Premium
join:2001-01-25
Bridgeport, WV
clubs:
·VOIPo
| Re: I asked this before ... Ok, point taken... But I would have to see proof after the fact that they were indeed planning on a DoS atatck or some other malicious effort. If Telus cannot provide that proof, then they should be fined and held accountable for false alligations and the people that made the decisions to do this should do jail time.
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
| | | | | |
bored2tears
@advancedtool.com
| Re: I asked this before ... I would hope they maintained proof of what they're saying much like I keep track of my attack logs, or refer to the SBL/XBL listings in regards to all of my network blocks.
I don't know that I feel as strongly about you as to consider jail time, but in that regard we each have our own opinions. Something else to bear in mind is that these opinions are based on US influences and Telus is a Canadian outfit. While laws are similar to the US, there are some nuances that may or may not apply there. | |
| | | | | | | Affliction
join:2004-02-19
Delta, BC
| Re: I asked this before ... Telus has been placing the blame for every random service outage since the strike began squarely on the union, and every single time the evil employees slice a line in Burnaby or rip down a pole in the backwaters of God-Knows-Where BC, it later turns out it was really just a random act of vandalism unrelated to the union, or a falling tree. | |
| 
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | Been there... »Telus Filtering Pro-Union Website
...done that. At least give a news item 4 days to digest before repeating it like cable whining about FIOS deployments and FF whoring gets. | |
| 
actor90
Phillies 2008 World Champions
Premium
join:2003-07-21
L.E.H.T., NJ
·Comcast
| No One Wants "Big Brother" I am no fan of unions. Most of the time they take dues from hard working people and give them nothing in return. I see it as a legal shakedown. Now, that being said, if you call yourself an ISP, internet service provider, then you are obligated in my opinion to offer complete access to the internet. Let your customers decide what they wish to see, and not see. Telus in the end will hurt it self more by making itself out to be "big brother" then anything a disgruntled union can say on a website. If I were a Telus customer I be shopping around for a new service provider.
--
Whatever doesn't kill us, makes us stronger... | |
| | NXX5
join:2005-07-26
Calgary, AB
| Website Blocking First of all, it's nice to find a place that has people on both sides of the debate.
These websites that have been blocked from telus were not blocked to censor your internet experience. At least that is what the company says. Telus says these websites have posted or may post in the future pictures of "scabs" crossing the picket line (I have heard nothing about DDOS attacks, i'm sure that is pure rumor). Telus is well within their bounds to protect their employees to the fullest extent of the law. I wouldn't expect otherwise from any other corperation.
If consumers don't like the fact that they cannot see this material, yes a change in service providers is needed. If there are no other ISP's in the area, well, that's business, supply and demand. If enough people demand another ISP then i'm sure it will happen. Mabye not the High-Speed ADSL you want. But oh well, life is tough.
That's enough for now.
Loyal Telus Scab. | |
| | |
freedomtoread
| Re: Website Blocking It is censorship plain and simple, I have been following the voices for change site since this began. From the start the admin of the site did not want pictures of scabs posted or any threats. The site is clean. If something illegal was posted then telus should seek lawful support instead of breaching section 2 of the charter of rights aswell as sections of the telecommunications act. Here is a lawyers take
»www.michaelgeist.ca/
DDOS my ass any idea how much bandwidth it would take to dos a telco the size of telus??? very funny | |
| | Affliction
join:2004-02-19
Delta, BC
| Re: No One Wants "Big Brother" Most of the time they take dues from hard working people and give them nothing in return.
Except for little things like job security, wage protection, fighting for wage increases... you know, stuff that workers would consider to be in their best interests. I'd much rather be in a union that serves to protect me from my employer than be left wide open to layoffs, mistreatment and wage cuts. | |
| | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
1 edit | Re: No One Wants "Big Brother" said by Affliction :Except for little things like job security, wage protection, fighting for wage increases. You're assuming you're gonna get those things. Why don't you ask the workers in a union grocery store what their union does for them, besides take their money on the promise that they'll get health care after 2 years...you know...after most of them have to quit to go to college.
--
Misfits lost in the dryer, take heart
Maybe there's a place up in sock heaven.
| |
| | |
Orwell1984
@fdn.com | Re: Rogers did the same I had not heard about that. How did it work out for them? | |
| 
alanhdsl
Premium
join:1999-10-09
Phoenix, AZ
·Qwest.net
| If it's 3 sites, it's not a >DDOS Blocking three websites isn't going to protect against a distributed attack. It's unlikely such an attack would come from the hosting services used by the web sites anyway.
Their complaints seem to be (a) confidential information being posted to the sites, and (b) sites being used to coordinate harrasment of Telus (for example, having everyone call the customer service phone number at once). That's in a way a DDOS, but on their call center not on their internet service.
If laws are being broken regarding the confidential information, they should persue it from a legal standpoint rather than by censorship. | |
|
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| What is this denial of service nonsense... Of course that kind of terminology makes it sound like there was some plot to hack/engage in illegality to bring down the network.
That is rubbish. The telus spokesman as much as admits this in the article:
"Moreover, he says, “they were plotting to impact operations. They were plotting not denial of service, but the equivalent in the telecom world.” The plan, he says, was to coordinate a flood of calls to Telus’ customer-care and contact centers, swamping the operations that, among other things, appear to be massively understaffed because of the picketing,"
Impacting operations is not, in and of itself, illegal. In fact, that is what a strike is intended to do. Nor is trying to organize people to phone call centers to make life unpleasant for the company illegal.
They were not trying to stop something illegal, they were trying to disrupt the ability of the opposition to use the organizational tools the internet provides.
Just because they give it a name that implies something nefarious, doesn't mean that it is something nefarious. | |
| | |
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| ... I realize telus is a canadian company, but since many people posting here are american and some of them are asserting that these companies have the right to do whatever they want, I want to continue the broader debate.
In the US former(at the time acting) fcc chairman Michael Powell, a key advocate of industry deregulation made a speech, in february of 2004, talking about the importance of maintaining the openness of the internet.
One of his key guiding principles was:
"Freedom to Access Content. First, consumers should have access to their choice of legal content."
If these companies are free to do whatever they want with their property, which clearly flies in the face of one of the main principles powell saw as necessary to maintain the open internet, then we need to renew debate about:
1. Whether this society should be dismantling common carrier concepts and requirements.
2. Whether for profit corporations, particularly in an environment of growing concentration/diminishing competition, should be acting as gatekeeper for fundamental infrastructure that is becoming central to the political and economic life of society.
If it is their right to do this, if they have no social obligations, then should we be relying on such companies for basic infrastructure development? | |
| |
meyoueverybody
| Re: ...telus Here is a torrent which is telus management drunk and making rude sexual comments, goes to what telus execs really are like
»thepiratebay.org/search.php?q=telus
(it may say zero seeds but it wrong)
get it while you can, telus is bound to try and censor it to | |
| Affliction
join:2004-02-19
Delta, BC
3 edits | The TWU has every right to strike Consider this. For the last half a decade, you've been reading the business papers and seeing the same thing, over and over and over. The economy looks good. Biggest economic growth in the G7. Stocks are up. The dollar is up. The GDP is up. Everything is up.
According to Telus itself, strong growth in earnings, revenue and cash flow justifies huge increases in salaries. The company reported earnings of $658 million for 2004, compared to $324.4 million in 2003. As a result, Telus executives have given themselves huge pay raises this year.
Darren Entwistle (Telus CEO) Compensation*:
2003 - $4.25 miillion, 2004 - $6.55 million (54% increase)
George Cope (Telus Mobility CEO) Compensation*:
2003 - $3.58 million, 2004 - $6.74 million (88% increase)
Robert McFarlane (Telus CFO) Compensation*:
2003 - $1.3 million, 2004 - 4.05 million (300% increase)
* all figures include salary and stock options
Telus' bargaining unit employees wage increases:
2001 - 0%, 2002 - 0%, 2003 - 0%, 2004 - 0%
Indeed, Telus employees' wage growth has been well below the rate of inflation for the last two decades. The new agreement that Telus is attempting to foist onto its employees is also well below the rate of inflation. The sheer notion that this strike is unjustified is unmitigated crap. If they don't solve this by the end of August, I'm switching to DCCNET. | |
| | | |
|
|
Telus Blocking Multiple Union Websites
·
ISP's can filter anything they want