Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category CRTC Orders Public Disclosure of Bell Traffic Data
Public's right to know outweighs Bell's privacy concerns
05:18PM Friday Jun 20 2008 by KathrynV
tags: Video · competition · business · bandwidth · networking · Bell Sympatico · TekSavvy Solutions Inc.
Last month the CRTC asked Bell Canada to show proof of the bandwidth congestion that causes them to engage in the practice of throttling. That data was provided in a confidential document which the CRTC has now ordered that Bell must make available to the public. The CRTC has stated that the need for public disclosure outweighs any privacy claims that Bell is trying to make and has set a deadline of June 23rd for that information to be revealed publicly. Bell representatives say that they’re in the process of reviewing the CRTC order but that they don’t suspect they’ll have any trouble complying.

Related:
  1. Bell Canada Must Prove Congestion Claims
  2. Industry Laughs Off Bell Canada Congestion Claims
  3. Bypass Bell Canada's Throttling
  4. Bell Canada: Throttling Aids Innovation
  5. Bell Canada Devises Backup Plan To Kill Wholesale Competitors
  6. Bell Outlines Plan To Cap Wholesalers
  7. Telus Says Bell Should Pay For Throttling Dispute
  8. TekSavvy Offers Connection Tweaking Contest
Forums » CRTC Orders Public Disclosure of Bell Traffic Data
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast

No problem complying means they will show congestion

If Bell sees no problem complying with the order, then that means the data they will supply will absolutely show congestion. And that will cut off at the knees those complaining about throttling being an anti-competitive action instead of a network management action.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY

Re: No problem complying means they will show congestion

And we all know that Bell's new music store service, along with its speed updates, are a result of congestion... right.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
Metairie, LA
clubs:

said by TK Junk Mail See Profile :

If Bell sees no problem complying with the order, then that means the data they will supply will absolutely show congestion.
I will not go into the merits of your childish conclusion, but I think it is exactly what makes us honest people worry. I also have absolutely no doubt they will show congestion. I also have no doubt that the statistical data released will be completely unverifiable.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
If you've been following this issue, the throttling of third party ISP's has already been proven to not be a congestion issue-- they pay for their own bandwidth. Bell's just throttling the last mile.

Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

News posting is a bit flawed...

1) The document wasn't confidential, just heavily redacted
2) The CRTC did not order Bell to reveal all of it, just three particular redacted sections
3) The CRTC is not a court, there is no "court order".

milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H2Z

Re: News posting is a bit flawed...

It may not be a "court order" per se, but the CRTC can definitely issue "orders."

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME

Lets see

If they really disclose any traffic issues, or 'make up' traffic issues that are based on services that are being created (i.e. competitive online video ) or are projecting future bandwidth usage (i.e. we will need this much next year to supply higher data rates/online video/etc. and we use this much today... if we curb todays usage, we can manage tomorrows consumption with little investment on bandwidth).
--
Canada = Hollywood North

mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Trenton, ON

Re: Lets see

"I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today"

Simmpy...

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast


edit:
June 20th, @05:36PM

Bell has bigger fish to fry - SCC gave OK to sale of Bell

Bell of Canada senior mgt has bigger things to worry about than this nothing issue. The Supreme Court of Canada just OK'd the sale of Bell & it's corporate owner to a Canadian teachers pension fund and 2 US investment groups. They will be spending most of their time figuring out how to save their jobs or get golden parachutes in place.

»news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080620/ap_···e_sale_6
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

Bellundo

@teksavvy.com

Re: Bell has bigger fish to fry - SCC gave OK to sale of Bell

The BCE deal is toast. No bank in the world will lend them money not at 10 percent or at 20 percent interest. They can sue and sue but it won't get them anywhere. The deal was doomed to fail from the start... end of story.

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast

Re: Bell has bigger fish to fry - SCC gave OK to sale of Bell

said by Bellundo :

The BCE deal is toast. No bank in the world will lend them money not at 10 percent or at 20 percent interest. They can sue and sue but it won't get them anywhere. The deal was doomed to fail from the start... end of story.
Evidently the deal isn't doomed, as you claim.

»news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080621/ap_···_sale_14
The last hurdle to the deal also looks to be gone as the banks said they would proceed with the deal. The banks are slated to provide billions in financing to complete what is a US$51 billion cash and debt takeover.

Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland and Toronto-Dominion Bank, the four banks that have committed to financing the debt portion of deal, issued a statement saying they expect the transaction will close "in accordance with the Definitive Agreement between BCE and the sponsors. We continue to negotiate the financing documents in good faith with the sponsors and stand behind our original commitment to the transaction."

--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page

Maynard G Krebs

@teksavvy.com

The CRTC didn't go far enough


The CRTC should have also ordered that CAIP (the complainant in this matter) should be allowed to install their own monitoring equipment (or contracted with an independent 3rd party eg. IBM or HP consulting divisions) for 30 days at up to 10 locations of their own choosing within Bell's network to verify the accuracy of Bell's numbers.

joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
Gainesville, FL

Re: The CRTC didn't go far enough

said by Maynard G Krebs :

The CRTC should have also ordered that CAIP (the complainant in this matter) should be allowed to install their own monitoring equipment (or contracted with an independent 3rd party eg. IBM or HP consulting divisions) for 30 days at up to 10 locations of their own choosing within Bell's network to verify the accuracy of Bell's numbers.
Why is there any reason to assume any of the parties are acting in bad faith before the data even being disclosed?
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0

a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY

Re: The CRTC didn't go far enough

Knowing Bell, HELL yes!!!

mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Trenton, ON
Bell Canada Pointy haired guys = Jim Prentice = Real Honest people!

fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing

Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Sports Chat
Question
said by joako See Profile :

Why is there any reason to assume any of the parties are acting in bad faith before the data even being disclosed?
An answer
said by a333 See Profile :

And we all know that Bell's new music store service, along with its speed updates, are a result of congestion... right.

--
Female monkeys often utter loud, distinctive calls before, during or after sex..

rec9140
Provoice just DO it

join:2003-07-29
Mulberry, FL
·RoadRunner Cable
·Internet Junction ..

said by joako See Profile :
Why is there any reason to assume any of the parties are acting in bad faith before the data even being disclosed?

Corporate Ethics 101 in 2008, thats why.

The lips are moving on the suits mouths, means the lies and BS are flowing!

Any data released is going to follow the simple rule:

You can make statistics say anything you want.

Even more so with business trick, er, operating procedure #1a bury agencies, the public, and watchdog groups in enough paper they probably won't find what they need before the deadline.

I am for an all out geek guerrilla raid on Bell and any other ISP pulling this crap and have a good beat down on some execs.
--
Lorem ipsum ei pro stet equidem labores, at enim animal expetenda nec. Ea vix argumentum dissentiunt, usu esse ridens ex./ / Ban all copyright, trademarks, and IP laws!

KILL EM ALL

@teksavvy.com

What about Rogers???

What about Rogers?? They are pulling the same thing as Bell, they should put them both on the same block.

Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil

Re: What about Rogers???

Bell resellers buy their own bandwidth and therefore Bell doesn't have the right to throttle that bandwidth. Rogers resellers directly resell the cable internet service, Rogers bandwidth included, so when they throttle, it's part of the deal.

chronoss2008
Premium
join:2008-03-29
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico


edit:
June 21st, @03:31AM

Bell LOSES EITHER way

no if they prove congestion to the degree where they must shape to 5% of speed they were contractually obliged then it actually doesn't cut off at the knees anything.

In fact it gives positive proof for ANY class action lawsuit to prove they were grossly negligent and KNEW before hand that when you signed a contract that they could not fullfil it

Then it becomes what does 384Kbit cost on average aorund the world versus the cost that each user on the bell network pays.
Then damages to that minus lawyer fee.

AND if they have say 6 million customers and have to pay back 1000 to each customer or even 500. That is from 3 billion to 6 billion.....

So in effect they could bumble this and let caip win or get mauled in some serious civil actions.
Ya think what the choice will be?

Also it wold prove that bell stole canadian tax payer funds to build a network that it did not and that might even lead to some action by the gov't to recoup monies invested.

P.S. in effect it gives caip back what it paid for ( the cheaper option to bell and sympatico can shape its own people until they have no customers OR get at building that network up - going from 5 megabit accoutnsales to 7megabit also seems a bit stupid )

V Bobarino

@teksavvy.com

Re: Bell LOSES EITHER way

WTF?

I'm so confused!

chronoss2008
Premium
join:2008-03-29
go back to your cave osama
Forums » CRTC Orders Public Disclosure of Bell Traffic Data


Tuesday, 07-Oct 04:29:20 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9 years online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com.