Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Google targets Bell in CRTC letter

MATT HARTLEY

Globetechnology.com

Latest comment posted at 5:08 PM EST 09/07/08

Search giant urges federal watchdog to halt ISP traffic shaping, protect choice of end user ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Krusty G from Ontariario, Canada writes:
    Jerry - are you saying Google shouldn't pipe up? Because so far noone else has.

    Nobody, nada, not a single corporate player anywhere is trying to protect your information rights. And the CRTC has done nothing to protect your rights either, they just bend over and do whatever Ma Bell and Papa Rogers tell them. Everyone blabs about a free market, wish we had one here in Canada, competition for these dinosaurs would be nice. Hell, even a dissenting opinion would be nice.

    Seems pretty short-sighted of you to shoot down the one entity that is on your side.

    I say good for Google.
  2. Ivan Canarus from Toronto, Canada writes: For Google, whose innovative services based on Internet platform, the traffic shape and other Internet restrictions are a potential business threats. On the one hand, the Company is absolutely right, Canada is losing “facilitates unparalleled social, political, cultural and economic innovation.” opportunity, restricting the internet traffic. But in the other hand, the operators really concern about their investments made in infrastructure which used to content providers for providing their services. Google is generating amazing revenue using operator`s network for free. The regulator has to find a way to solve this conflict of interest.

    One of solutions is creating the National Service Network which will charge content providers for using local infrastructure. Please, follow by link for details: http://www.slideshare.net/ishmelev/national-service-network
  3. Harry Chuttani from Montreal, Canada writes: Finally a big player steps ahead to support us consumers who are being extorted by Bell/rogers on a daily basis. Go Google!!!.. Hopefully this will bring more attention from the authorities on this issue.
  4. ishmael daro from Saskatoon, Canada writes: I'm glad Google still follows (for the most part) their 'Do No Evil' policy. Net neutrality should be enshrined in law.
  5. Jerry R from Canada writes: Geez, I wish there was some kind of market competition that would weed out that kind of tomfoolery. If only there were other players...
    Haven't had any problems with Telus highspeed and 'market shaping'.

    I'm sure google is the perfect champion for justice for this cause for net-freedom. Just like a butcher supporting the fight against fur coats, lol.
  6. John Dallas from Ottawa, Canada writes: The problem we have is a lack of competition BECAUSE it is too EXPENSIVE to build the infrastructure required to support a completely neutral network. Everyone wants 1 Gbps for $20 a month and believe it is their right to have it. Even if our population density won't support it and our economy can't pay for it.
  7. Jordan Britnell from Toronto, United States writes: Truly amazing. Yet another Bell bashing company. If they only knew exactly how much traffic Bell sends their way... And for the record, every maor Canadian ISP is doing the same thing. Bell is just the most recent scapegoat. I'm sure Ted Rogers is giggling in bed every night. Until his company is the scapegoat of choice....

    Jabber.
  8. Wealthy CEO of a Canada Retailer, We sell everything 50% Higher in Canada from Canada writes: This is complete nonsense. Remember that Google is a US corporation and always carry its national interest. Bell, Telus and Rogers are our few jewels. Certainly Canadians can sacrifice not going to American web sites. Especially those online shopping sites just give CND retailers trouble. Every Canadian ISPs should encourage domestic traffic and throttle the ones go out of border.
  9. Alastair james Berry from Nanaimo BC CANADA, Canada writes:

    I have noticed a VERY COSIDERABLE DETERIORATION of my Chat on YAHOO with my friends in China compared with the almost perfect transmissions I get from them!

    I reckon it's the TERRORISM PARANOIA (amongst other things) that has gripped North America. If I mention bombs targets missiles or anything like that my computer seems to crash or at least my camera to fail. ( I have even had notification that my EMAILS across the Pacific have been delayed 24 hours!) I think that CANADA is ' kow towing' to Washington, and all EMAILS or CHAT is being analysed for possible terrorist activity........... because the USA is the main traget for terrorist's venom!
  10. Zigg Zagg from Mistersauga, Canada writes: 'If they only knew exactly how much traffic Bell sends their way...'

    Bell doesn't it send it their way, their customers make a choice to visit their site because it offers something compelling. Their customers also quite reasonably in my opinion expect that when sold a high-speed connection that it operates that way.

    If Bell is so concerned why not just put a cap on usage of xx gigabytes of bandwidth or whatever amount of usage per month. Then charge for any amount over the limit. If they ran their business properly they would be excited and encourage people to download more because it would mean more revenue.

    This is monopoly behaviour plain and simple. Did any of the media outlets point out that Bell introduced their own video download and music store recently?

    I wonder if that traffic gets shaped? The G&M is partly owned by Bell so this post will likely be censored to protect the shareholders.

    Bottom line is that Canadians are at a disadvantage compared to most countries when it comes to telecommunication. This is just another example of how un-competitive the telecommunication market is in Canada. Send Google some more traffic and search for OECD telecommunication reports.
  11. Gordon Murray from Canada writes: Readers of
    1) '...protecting consumers, competition and innovation.'
    2) heralds of Bell August
    a) 'novel' 15 cent per text incoming charge and
    b) unlimited-data 'answer to 'July 11iPhone' might
    3) find 'Shaping's End!' hope's reincarnation evaporated (Tempers cross subsidizing has ended!)
  12. Jack Sprat from Sheepscrotum AB, Canada writes: One of Bell's execs just left Bell and went to Google. I'd like to hear his thoughts on this now LOL. I think his name was Patrick.

    Speak up Patrick
  13. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: 'Wealthy CEO of a Canada Retailer, We sell everything 50% Higher in Canada from Canada writes: This is complete nonsense. Remember that Google is a US corporation and always carry its national interest. Bell, Telus and Rogers are our few jewels. Certainly Canadians can sacrifice not going to American web sites. Especially those online shopping sites just give CND retailers trouble. Every Canadian ISPs should encourage domestic traffic and throttle the ones go out of border.'

    Since when is Bell, Telus & Rogers Canadian jewels, their all publicly traded companies, they all trade on both the Toronto & New York stock exchanges. If you said Canadian monopolies I might have believed you!

    As for shopping Canadian websites your alias says it all '50 percent higher in Canada eh'! Well you've got that right & I save several thousand a year buying from U.S. sites, you want to fix it so I buy Canadian lower your prices, stop ripping off Canadian's.

    I thought Google's submission was great, with the exception of paragraph or point 13, they really blow it with that one. The copyright holders are going to be all over that statement for months to come!
  14. Posh Spice from Canada writes: Wow finally a big guy is helping a little guy. Most corporations are good at screwing the consumers but I am glad Google has the courage to take ISP's like Bell to court. It's a bunch of nonsense that these companies cry foul that they do not have the money to upgrade their services. They sure as hell have the money to pay Ceo's and other execs millions every year so why can't they upgrade their lines?????? Blaming P2P users for clogging the internet lines is a lame excuse. Isn't the point of these $6.99 system access fees that we pay on our phones or whatever other amount that hides in our bills somewhere supposed to help maintain these lines because i see these useless 'non government fees' as paying for some execs brand spanking new condo and BMW instead of having access to unlimited high speed internet.
  15. Mean Machine from Bugtussle, Canada writes: Far out
  16. Jake Richardson from Kingston, Canada writes: Jerry R from Canada writes: Geez, I wish there was some kind of market competition that would weed out that kind of tomfoolery. If only there were other players...
    Haven't had any problems with Telus highspeed and 'market shaping'.

    I'm sure google is the perfect champion for justice for this cause for net-freedom. Just like a butcher supporting the fight against fur coats, lol.
    --------
    Reread the article. Telus is no angel here - they aren't traffic shaping yet, but they support Bell, and if Bell wins out, Telus will absolutely start shaping traffic.

    If only Canada was open to true competition. This rogers-telus-bell cartel is really starting to be infuriating.
  17. Rural Reader from Canada writes: It's a further hang-over from Bell's years as a monopoly here in Canada (see the text messaging fee articles for more of the same). As a consumer you're under the false impression that you have a choice of ISPs, when in fact you're with Bell whether you like it or not.

    As to "Google is generating amazing revenue using operator's network for free." - this is a basic problem in Canada with a business model of using the internet as a primary means of delivery. On the one hand Bell is trying to sell you movies and other bandwidth intensive media every chance it gets, on the other it wants to charge you for the bandwidth required to download that 4 gigabyte file...

    The CRTC is at great risk of seeming irrelevant...
  18. Peter Zahoruk from Canada writes: Your majesty,

    I humbly suggest that with all respect to what is being argued, the provision of medical services with respect to Google Medical Records needs to be delayed until post-death analysis of accounting records and investment is complete.

    USMC
    Law Society of Upper Michigan
  19. J M from Canada writes: I understand that Google clearly has much to lose from the disintegration of Net Neutraility as internet users use a lot of bandwith from Google alone. However, I am glad to see that they are taking some action against Bell Canada and other ISPs with the ideal result being fair access for big players and small players alike.
  20. Timothy Nessus from Somewhere, Canada writes: Bell has "right of way" anywhere in Ontario and Quebec barring certain exceptions. This means, they can pretty much lay cable/wire anywhere they darn please and NOT pay a CENT to anybody. This is NOT the case for ANY other Telco/ISP. They HAVE to pay. Furthermore, worst, worst, Bell has been receiving hand-outs err... "subsidies" from the Government since at LEAST 50 years to do just that! This is, to connect, coper-wise, Canada, primarily in Ontario and Quebec.
    Therefore, taking into consideration that Canadian taxes paid for a great deal of Bell's infrastructure, and that Bell is NOT paying any "access fees" to ANYONE in Ontario and Quebec, why would not we, the Canadian people, make use of this infrastructure???

    Furthermore, taking into consideration that most of Bell infrastructure was paid for Canadian taxes and CONTINUE to be paid for by ISPs AND USERS, WHERE did Bell the right to CENSOR anything it wants???

    In addition, how can Bell censor (i.e throttle or decrease the speed to ludicrous levels) and AT THE SAME TIME open a Bell MOVIE store that is a BANDWIDTH HOG!!!

    Sure, downgrade competitor's speed, use the saved bandwidth to push its own product, accept hand-outs, pay minimum tax or no tax and do NOT invest in infrastructure. It's called the BELL way.

    Mark my words, IF the Bell sale goes ahead, this is just the tip of the iceberg. They will dollar, nickel and dime EVERYTHING and ANYTHING to pay the buyout debt!
  21. Stan West from Kitchener, Canada writes: Isn't time to put Bell off to bed? They've done a disastrous job keeping their infrastructure updated. Playing games with people's service quality behind their backs is corporately unethical and only goes to demonstrate Bell's desperate position. Either update to the requirements of the marketplace or get out of the game.

    Way to go Google - it's about time the monopolizing dinosaur got called up.
  22. Ambassador x from Fredericton, Canada writes: I think its easy. Net neutrality and usage fees based on volume. Or, traffic shaping, and all you can eat. Take your pick - I vote for the first one! Like my dad always said, you don't get something for nothing. My provider is Aliant in NB and my internet connection ROCKS!
  23. Enoch Root from Canada writes: Lets be clear here, Google is NOT doing this out of some altruistic sense of moral justification for net-neutrality. Their business is to put PAID ADVERTIZING in front of you (a well analized consumer) - thier shtick is to give you a seach engine to get you captured in thier web based advertizing. They are in this for the money only! In fact if the logic they propose is true, then they are guilty of restricting data and information flow also to suit their needs; by presenting you paid advertizers first and not the most relevant retruns on a search. Google plainly knows that DPI (deep packet inspection) for throttling certain traffic types, is implemented in almost all ISPs globally on the pretext of combating peer-to-peer piracy to provide better internet experience to all their customers. They know that all the ISPs/Carriers will next be implementing prefered traffic performance to the likes of Google, YouTube, etc for a fee - who are ofcourse making BIG money on the back fo the Carriers by advertizing to you, THEIR customer. And lets not also foget that Google is about to launch a IP-Phone service (like skype), wich will be 150% painfully suseptable to any latency or loss of their packets due to Carrier throttling. More of Google and their like making money on the backs of everyone else (including you). In fact it would probably be pudent of companies like Googe and YT to give a little of the pie to the carriers so that they can keep the publicly shared resources we call the internet able to support the bandwidth demands their money making ventures will be driving. Google deserves no support or sympathy in this case, where were they in the early fight for net-neutrality. IMHO

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top