Canada’s big bad Telecom

 

 I saw Big Telecom’s army of lobbyists, eye to eye, at a hearing last week.   

It was amazing and sickening to hear them argue that Canadians should be blocked from affordable Internet access options.  They are powerful, but we have a new crucial opportunity to fight back. Josh Tabish  OpenMedia

.

Big Telecom plans to use a crucial, rapidly-approaching hearing  to kill indie Internet services in Canada. If successful, they’ll be able to block you from companies offering affordable, next-generation Internet services, and continue to price-gouge Canadians

.

We’re facing a situation where, soon, your only choice could be between price-gouging Big Telecom giants – an unbelievable power grab for Big Telecom.

.

We know that Canadians pay some of the highest prices in the world for some of the worst Internet service.  And a big part this is because Big Telecom has been given gatekeeper powers before…

…a nd abused them.

https://openmedia.org/powergrab/

‘

Net neutrality” has been built into the fabric of the Internet since its creation — but it is also a principle that we cannot take for granted.  We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas.   So the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has to implement the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.” We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas,” “I believe the FCC should create a new set of rules protecting net neutrality and ensuring that neither the cable company nor the phone company will be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do or see online.” Obama said in a statement released by the White House.  President Obama’s call for “net neutrality” – the notion that any and all content should be treated equally by Internet providers – should cause the Federal Communications Commission to regulate broadband service like a utility as a way to protect consumers’ ability to access all content without a threat of connectivity being throttled. Us President Obama called for prohibiting ISPs from blocking or deliberately slowing any legal content. His proposals also include a recommendation to mostly ban paid-for “fast-lane” access, in which a content provider refusing to pay extra would be subject to slower Internet transmission and to  reclassify consumer broadband Internet service and regulate it as if it’s a utility – like electricity and water – as many consumer advocacy groups have asked for a similar strategy to protect unfettered access.  The simple, common-sense  rules include:

• No blocking.  If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it.  That way, every player — not just those commercially affiliated with an ISP — gets a fair shot at your business.
• No throttling.  Nor should ISPs be able to intentionally slow down some content or speed up others — through a process often called “throttling” — based on the type of service or your ISP’s preferences.
• Increased transparency.  The connection between consumers and ISPs — the so-called “last mile” — is not the only place some sites might get special treatment. The  FCC to make full use of the transparency authorities the court recently upheld, and if necessary to apply net neutrality rules to points of interconnection between the ISP and the rest of the Internet.
• No paid prioritization.  Simply put: No service should be stuck in a “slow lane” because it does not pay a fee.  That kind of gatekeeping would undermine the level playing field essential to the Internet’s growth.  An explicit ban on paid prioritization and any other restriction that has a similar effect.

Can Bell do it’s job and provide me now their proper services?

.