Not to me. The content is available free from OTA transmitters in large urban areas. Bell has shut down or failed to convert existing transmitters to digital in a number of less populated areas. This is simply a ploy to force people to subscribe to BDU operations. I'm sure they would like to enforce a policy that Bell TV be a requirement but that would raise a stink from competing BDUs. This policy can be seen as discriminatory to many Canadians and marginalizes many who do not live near large urban areas. It could also be seen as anti-competitive since it forces Canadians to spend their money on incumbent Canadian BDUs instead of competing services. (In the US, most network programming can be seen on cheaper, OTT services such as Hulu. In many other countries, it's available free on unencrypted satellite.)Sounds like a reasonable policy to me...
Historically, broadcast TV is advertiser supported. Bell is simply trying to force Canadians to pay twice for broadcast TV. This would never be allowed in the US, where the FCC enforces consumer friendly policies by BDUs and also protects independent broadcasters from anti-competitive practices by networks. Canadian regulators failed to protect small broadcasters and is now allowing them to assault consumers with restrictive policies such the one described here.