

Canadians: Please submit a comment to the CRTC on 2011-77 - mrcharles
http://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/instances-proceedings/Default.aspx?Status=Open&PubArea=Tel&PubType=NofConsul&PubSubType=All&Lang=eng

======
mrcharles
Cheat Sheet for writing a letter:

-UBB is anti-competitive

-Bandwidth restrictions harm the adoption of modern technology in Canada

-Bandwidth is not a limited resource, therefore charging by total use is incorrect

-Bell doesn't charge for bandwidth use on its own IPTV solution.

-Most ISPs aren't "resellers" but simply using the last mile connections to consumers.

-The growing rate of internet use means that 25gb in a month will not be considered "a heavy user" for long.

And feel free to embellish as you see fit. But please avoid hyperbolic
arguments like "This is a matter of free speech" or "Internet is a human
right." We need serious well reasoned arguments, not knee jerk marching
slogans.

~~~
ataggart
>\- UBB is anti-competitive

So far as I am aware, for something to be "anti-competitive" it must restrict
the (otherwise non-criminal) actions of extant or would-be competitors in a
market. From what I've been able to glean about the UBB brouhaha, the change
is a removal of such a restriction, thus would be quite the opposite of "anti-
competitive."

Perhaps the deeper issue is that relaxation of this anti-competitive
restriction would reveal the negative effects of _actual_ anti-competitive
CRTC regulations. To paraphrase Henry David Thoreau, instead of hacking at the
branches of "anti-competition," perhaps you should strike at the root.

~~~
forensic
It's anti-competitive because they're using a monopoly in one area to gain a
competitive advantage in another area.

Bell's IPTV service would not be subject to the UBB pricing while Netflix
would be.

~~~
ataggart
>they're using a monopoly in one area

Then it would be the regulations granting monopoly that are anti-competitive.
Again, removing restrictions on extant and would-be competitors cannot be
anti-competitive; words mean things.

------
joetek
Link doesn't work.. use this one instead:

[https://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/Intervention/Submission-
Soum...](https://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/Intervention/Submission-
Soumission.aspx?lang=e&EventNo=2011-77&EventType=Notice#Step1)

~~~
mrcharles
The link does work... usually. The CRTC's site is pretty slow. Thanks for
providing an alternate.

~~~
OmarIsmail
I want to be absolutely clear that I'm "voting" properly. If I'm AGAINST UBB
being applied to indie ISPs, should I choose "support" or "opposition"?

I've tried to read through the specific notice
(<http://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-77.htm>) but when it comes to
legalese subtle wordings can make all the difference. If I say "oppose" I want
to make sure I oppose UBB and not oppose repealing/investigating UBB. And vice
versa with "support"

~~~
mrcharles
This is actually specifically about comments, so there's nothing to oppose or
support for the moment. You should just choose the option "comment".

------
mrcharles
This is regarding Usage Based Billing, and is a comment round soliciting
feedback from Canadians.

------
JonLim
Made my comment, and mentioned all the groups who were affected by UBB in
general.

I made sure to place an emphasis on how anti-competitive this was for everyone
outside of the big ISPs.

------
unreal37
The Service Canada web site has timed out. Awesome web infrastructure, guys!

~~~
jbrennan
They probably used up all their bandwidth for the month.

------
djorgensen
One may also send a comment through openmedia.ca: <http://openmedia.ca/crtc>

