Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This thread is for members who have contacted the CRTC and their MP to complain about Usage Based Billing and Bandwidth Caps ONLY.

Post your email here and who you sent it to. Also let us know if you filled out the complaint form on the CRTC website.

See this article for more details on what you can do if you want to fight UBB.


NOTE:

This thread is strictly for posters who have emailed to post their letters and any response they may have received specifically to their letter.

If you'd like to discuss UBB, what to send etc see this thread
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,300 Posts
Here's mine, copied from the automatic response to posting on the CRTC site:

Industry of interest/concern: Internet
Type of message: Complaint
Your Message: The following complaint has been sent via email to:
Navdeep Singh Bains, MP
Tony Clement, Minister of Industry
James Moore, Minister of Heritage Canada
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister

As one who has worked in the telecommunications industry for many years, I follow the trends in Canada and elsewhere. One thing that has become blatantly obvious is that the CRTC has little concern for the average Canadian. I have read reports that consistently show Canada is falling behind the rest of the world, both in services and prices in the telecommunications sector. At the same time, I keep reading about how the major Canadian telecommunications companies are doing very well financially. Yet, despite this, we are all too often seeing our services costs rise, while provided services are reduced. This is in direct contrast to most of the rest of the world, where the exact opposite is happening. The latest item is user based billing, where the major Internet providers are placing caps on the amount of data used, along with severe penalties when those caps are exceeded. This is on top of already profitable connection rates. While I in general support user based billing, the way that it's being implemented in Canada is nothing but a rape of the consumer. Also, some of the companies involved are in the business of providing television signals, via satellite or cable, to consumers. Since the caps will discourage viewers from obtaining television shows and movies via the Internet, this is obviously being used as a method to restrain competition. As a result, with user based billing as currently implemented, the CRTC is protecting the major carriers, at the expense of the average taxpayer.

Canada was once in the vanguard of telecommunications services and rates. Sadly, that day has long past. Please do what's necessary to restore some sense of balance to the telecommunications industry, particularly with respect to Internet access. To do otherwise, will severely hurt Canadians and their ability to communicate, enjoy entertainment and conduct business.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
Sent earlier this morn to my MP:

Hi Mr. O'Connor,

My name is ********. I live in Kanata. I wanted to contact you today concerning the CRTC's recent decision to green light usage-based billing:

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/10/28/crtc-usage-based-billing-internet.html

As the world marches forward with technology and countries embrace it I feel this is a step backwards for Canada. I work in the tech industry, work from home and rely on the Internet heavily for both my work and entertainment.

While other countries are forging ahead on the access and use of the Internet (see Australia link below) our two main Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Canada (Bell & Rogers) are using bandwidth caps to limit users' use of the Internet. It could be argued they are doing this to protect their entertainment businesses (TV etc) from the likes of Netflix and other internet based entertainment. It is a direct move to stifle competition in the other markets they play in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Broadband_Network_(Australia)

The CRTC decision also allows the large ISPs to force usage-based billing on the smaller ISPs that buy wholesale bandwidth off Rogers and Bell. Competition in the marketplace is good for everyone involved. In our case now in Canada the smaller ISPs are being forced out of the market with decisions such as this one.

My argument isn't that the Internet should be free for all to use as much as they want. What I think we need is to encourage competition in the ISP market and let the market decide what the usage limits should be and what the unit cost of going over is. Having the 2 largest players in the market decide these values for all of us is not healthy for promoting innovation in Canada.

thanks for you time.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
374 Posts
Sent to my MP and CTRC:


Dear M. Galipeau,

I would like to bring to your attention my frustration and disbelief at the recent CRTC decision to support Bell Canada’s request to impose usage based billing (UBB) on third party internet service providers (ISP). Bell has moved to impose caps on internet bandwidth and Rogers seems poised to follow suit with similar limitations. The CRTC has chosen to support these highly profitable companies with decisions which will only reduce the already limited competition and result in even higher internet costs for Canadians with reduced service.

The rulings are wrong for a number of reasons:

Firstly, third party ISPs such as Tek Savvy and Primus represent the only competition to the predatory pricing and service structures provided by the two dominant players, Rogers and Bell. In many parts of the county there is no other option for internet service. UBB allows Rogers and Bell to push competition out of the profitable urban markets making it impossible for them to enter the under-serviced rural markets.

Secondly, UBB represents a continual erosion of internet service in an age where new technologies demand higher bandwidth. Emerging and innovative services such as video on demand and video conferencing are perceived by Bell and Rogers to be a direct threat to their core services as television and phone service providers. Rather than embracing new technologies, Rogers and Bell are trying to stifle the competition by restricting bandwidth. As an example of how established industries have missed great opportunities by resisting technological advances I am reminded of the way the music recording industry resisted digital recording transfers until their business model was completely obsolete. However, today, successful companies such as iTunes have changed the paradigm for music sales. UBB now threatens to severely hamper the way Canadians can purchase music or video over the internet. Video streaming through video services such as Netflix is a growing market worldwide and for many people, a viable and affordable alternative to traditional broadcasting services. These types of services are being adopted around the world; however, I fear that Canada will be left behind due to the cartel set up in the telecommunications industry.

Thirdly, the most recent decision by the CRTC which provides third party ISPs a 15% reduction in the retail charge Bell charges its customers for bandwidth overages is a token gesture which will be eaten up by the administration of having to bill customers who exceed their cap. Wholesale bandwidth is inexpensive. Bell and Rogers have both built their networks with the assistance of the federal government. Now that the network has been established the cost of running the system is far less expensive than the rates Bell and Rogers are charging.

There are a number of more arguments against UBB and for the sake of brevity I have not gone into great detail. I would encourage you and your fellow MPs to overturn the CRTC decision and stop UBB.

It is my understanding that there is precedent for parliament to overturn decisions by the CRTC which are not in the public interest and I ask that you do just that.

Sincerely,
dogbolter
Wish I had read Hugh's article before sending.
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks for posting your letters. Others may be able to use them in helping them formulate their letters.

As note in the article, please send them to your MP and the CRTC and consider letting them know the following:

  • How important internet service is to you
  • How important affordable internet service is to the future of Canada
  • How important competition is in every industry
  • How much you pay every month for internet service and how much you will pay after UBB is implemented
  • Take information from this article to show that it doesn’t cost more to deal with increasing internet traffic
  • Who you will be voting for in the next election if UBB is not dealt with in a fair and equitable manner
  • That Digital Home sent you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Here's my letter:

Dear Mr. Bruinooge,

I live in Waverly Heights and I am writing you today in regards to Internet Usage Billing and the CRTCs recent decision to allow it.

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/10/28/crtc-usage-based-billing-internet.html

The Internet is one of the most important resources in my life and I believe that an open and accessible internet is a very important topic for our country going forward. I use the internet every day for my job, my entertainment and to communicate with my family abroad.

The latest developments all point to a dramatic increase in the cost of high speed internet for the average Canadian. I have grown up using an affordable and unfiltered internet. This is something I feel is fundamental to the ideology that Canada stands for. More and more we see concentration of media ownership in the US and a trickle down effect to Canadians. One of the great things about the internet is it gives everyone an equal voice. Video now accounts for over one third of all internet traffic and accounts for much of the increase in internet traffic. The revelation of YouTube and similar sites gives your average citizen a channel to voice their opinions. It takes away the filter and influence that major American news companies put most media through. I think this is a great thing for Canada and provides an opportunity for everyone to continue to have a strong voice as technology continues to change the way we consume media. Part of having a country that promotes freedom of speech and individuality is providing affordable internet services.

I watch NHL games online through NHL's gamecentre, I rent movies online from iTunes. I subscribe to people who's viewpoints I value on YouTube. I read all my news online from sources I trust. Right now I pay $40 for unlimited capacity internet from Shaw. With the latest changes the CRTC wants to make, that will become a lot more expensive.

While internet traffic is increasing dramatically every year, so is the technology that runs the internet. The cost of delivering data is going down faster than the increase in usage is going up. There's no need for any increases in usage fees. Lets let true competition decide the cost of service, not the two major ISPs.

The stance that our government takes on this topic will be a deciding factor for me come election time. I want leaders that allow me to chose what I watch, listen to and read. In a country like Canada I've always taken that as a given. I want my children to feel the same way and the most important decisions that we face right now are in net neutrality and openness.

I ask that you and your fellow MPs overturn the decision by the CRTC to allow usage based billing.

More information can be found at http://openmedia.ca/ and http://www.digitalhome.ca

Thank You,
quailman
First letter I've ever written to my MP. At lease I can complain about my bill now!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I have sent this email (or variants of) to the CRTC, my MP, Stephen Harper, Tony Clement etc. as suggested by the article. Please, everyone do the same! We must stop this madness.

Dear Mr. XXX

I wish to register my complaint against the recent CRTC decision to implement Internet Usage Based Billing (UBB) in the strongest terms possible.

The Internet is the single most important communications service to me. It is my primary method of communication to remain in contact with my friends and family. In addition to communications, my work schedule means that the Internet is also my primary form of entertainment.

I regularly use my Internet access to make video and voice calls that would otherwise be prohibitively expensive with traditional telephone long distance rates. Being able to see my significant other and have an actual conversation while working for long periods of time out of town is priceless and irreplaceable. Combine that with a streaming video service such as Netflix for shows and movies I would not otherwise be able to watch and I quickly exceed the paltry 25GB cap suggested in the CRTC decision. I do not consider those activities to be excessive use and I should not be unfairly charged for using simply using available technologies for their intended purpose.

I do not begrudge a company making a profit on the service they provide, but UBB will destroy the ability of a smaller Internet Service Provider to compete. Canadians NEED that competition if we are to keep service charges from spirally out of control. I do not believe that driving smaller companies out of business is the intended result of this decision, but that will be the consequence. It will leave me, the consumer, at the mercy of a monopoly that is only concerned with extracting the most possible profit.

For example, my monthly bill will rise considerably if UBB is implemented. I currently pay in the neighbourhood of $50.00 for my high-speed connection. A conservative estimate places my data usage at around 100 Gigabytes per month.

Under the CRTC ruling, exceeding the 25GB cap will add approximately $60.00 to my bill, giving me a total monthly cost of $110.00. That is more than double and completely inexcusable when you consider the following:

“One industry insider told Digital Home that four years ago, the cost for a large Telco to transmitting a GB of data was around twelve cents when all operational and fixed costs were accounted for. Thanks to improved technology and more powerful machines, that number dropped to around six cents two years ago and to about three cents today.
A senior staffer at one web hosting company which serves up terabytes of data a day says the cost of serving up an extra Gigabyte of data in today’s marketplace is negligible. This staffer described the extra charge of $2 to $5 per gigabyte for overages as “obscene.”

From http://www.digitalhome.ca/2011/01/usage-based-internet-billing-what-can-you-do/

The reasons to support UBB are simply not there. The cost to the end user is just not sufficient to justify a doubling of my monthly bill.

Please, do not allow a select few companies to dictate what we can, and can not, do with the Internet.

Candidates that support Usage Based Billing will NOT be supported by me.

Sincerely,

Myself
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
Here is the letter sent to my MP. Use of English was out of the question here!!!



Monsieur Gilles Duceppe
Député de la circonscription de Laurier-Sainte-Marie

Monsieur Duceppe,

Récemment le CRTC a approuvé une résolution, 2010-802, autorisant les principaux fournisseurs Internet du pays à limiter la capacité d’utilisation des abonnés. Les personnes qui, comme moi, utilise les services d’un fournisseur indépendant verront leur service modifié de façon importante. En effet, d’un usage illimité mon service sera dans un futur rapproché limité à 60Gb par mois. Tout surpassement de cette capacité sera facturé à fort coût.

Cette législation vise l’élimination des fournisseurs indépendants au profit des géants de l’industrie qui sont tous des fournisseurs de services de télévision. Cela aura pour effet de créer un monopole des services de télécommunication au détriment des Québecois et Canadiens.

La position des principaux fournisseurs Internet (Videotron, Bell, Rogers, etc) appuyée par le CRTC vise à empêcher le développement des services de fourniture de contenu visuel sur Internet tel tou.tv et Netflix, ainsi que tout développement futur.


Je vous demande, humblement, de mobiliser le gouvernement contre cette législation du CRTC. Monsieur Charlie Angus, membre de la chambre, a déjà pris position ouvertement contre cette mesure du CRTC.


Salutations distinguées
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
My letter, which I sent to my MP Lois Brown, and to the CCTS, isn't as eloquent as the others but it felt better just to 'vent' ..thanks for the directions hugh (my google news page lead me to your page)

Sirs,
My anger at your passing of Bell Canada's demands, i.e. UBB, in the recent rulings has left me speechless. I cannot put into words how disgusted I am in the CRTC . Up until this recent ruling I thought you were seeing to my best interests as a consumer, taxpayer and Canadian citizen. Now I realize I was mistaken. Shame on you for so thoroughly abandoning the ideal that you were to uphold.

When looking for somewhere to vent - I came upon the site that outlines a few of your guidelines. I bring your attention to one that perhaps you have forgotten, I quote, "The CRTC does not regulate rates, quality of service issues or business practices of Internet service providers as they relate to retail customers. This is because there is enough competition in the market that retail customers can shop around for service packages."

I cannot read that without shaking my head in dismay. What on earth is going on? You have stifled competition, and the few independent ISP's that can weather this, you've turned into collection agents for Bell. Competition CAN NOT thrive in the environment you have now created.

I can only hope the government will recind this abomination you have let loose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
I am so incensed by this whole fiasco that I sent my first ever letter to an MP (and registered here in order to thank hugh for the work he's done and consequently share my letter with this community)

As a constituent residing in [xxxxxxxxx] I am writing this as my first ever letter to a member of parliament. And the occasion to that hasn't been a issue of impending doom and gloom. Rather, it is the sad whimper of extinquished true competition and choice that the CRTC recently handed down allowing Bell to charge forthwith Usage Based Billing(UBB) and forcing competitors to charge %85 percent of what Bell charges. It could be argued that the cable companies could offer alternatives -- but they haven't and won't. Already the lower tier package that I currently receive from Rogers has its bandwidth cap lowered from 25 gigabytes to 15 gigabytes per month for new subscribers. This being a blatant attempt to steer potential customers into highter tiers at the outset. This forces lower income people to make hard choices when it comes to making a purchasing decision.

There is no technological reason for these increases in price other than an attempt to wall off the world that has recently become accessable and circumvents the entertainment options that these companies also provide. It is, in the end, an attempt to prop up vulnerable divisions within these companies that are threatened by unfettered access to the internet. That the very companies also provide television programing also provide internet access should send a note of caution to us. That at the very time that Canadians are making entertainment choices that aren't derived from Bell and Rogers (to name the major players in our local market): They feel that there suddenly are 'bandwidth hogs' abusing the service subscribed for. If that is the case then why are they lowering the caps across the board? They've done that in a calculated maneuver to ensure that more people will go over their caps and thus be subject to their grossly inflated cost per gigabyte schemes. As I have learned from various sources available on the internet, including Hugh Thompson's Digital Home(http://www.digitalhome.ca/) and as reported there:

"One industry insider told Digital Home that four years ago, the cost for a large Telco to transmitting a GB of data was around twelve cents when all operational and fixed costs were accounted for. Thanks to improved technology and more powerful machines, that number dropped to around six cents two years ago and to about three cents today.

A senior staffer at one web hosting company which serves up terabytes of data a day says the cost of serving up an extra Gigabyte of data in today’s marketplace is negligible. This staffer described the extra charge of $2 to $5 per gigabyte for overages as “obscene.”"

MP [xxxxxxxxx], I urge you to look into this matter. The world is on the cusp of an information revolution that must be encouraged and fostered in our country like the last match left to light the fire while we keep our backs to the winds of ignorance and disinformation.

The future of our competitiveness upon the world stage depends on access free from incumbant companies drunk on the profits that their wireless networks provide and determined to alter the landscape of general broadband to mirror that which they enjoy from handset users.
I stripped the salutations and whatnot for the above quote of my letter.
ps I've been a lurker here for, um, more than a few years.

Cheers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,780 Posts
Here is mine:

Dear Mr. Chong, I reside in your riding and run a small business. I have been an ardent supporter of you and your party in previous elections. I rely heavily on internet access to run my business.

I am writing to you today to express my extreme displeasure with the recent CRTC ruling that allows for excessive extra charges for internet bandwidth usage. These extra charges of $2 to $5 per gigabyte are obscene. Moreover, the ruling that resellers such as Teksavvy must charge within 15% of these grossly inflated rates effectively eliminates competition.

Bell, Rogers and Shaw also happen to own the major television distribution systems in this country. This blatant attempt to stifle video content options for Canadians only serves one purpose. Internet access for Canadians is extremely important and will continue to gain importance in the coming years. I believe one of the core values of the Conservative Party is to encourage growth through free enterprise. Taxation, stifling competition and protecting monopolies goes against what I understand to be important to your party.

I respectfully ask in the most vehement terms that you and your party reject this ruling by the CRTC. I also ask that your Government immediately begin a revue of the CRTC focusing on their mandate and the scope of their authority. Their recent rulings do not represent the interests of Canadians in any way, shape or form and in fact appear to heavily favour the broadcasters and internet providers.

How Bell, Rogers and Shaw have been allowed to buy CTV, CityTV, Global, their local stations and most newspapers is beyond me. This has happened during the tenure of your government. We now have a situation where the editorial content and slant of news coverage being fed to Canadians is controlled by media outlets with ulterior motives.

Reject this latest CRTC ruling and start the process for reform of this Commission. Sincerely, Me
I've always been meaning to write my MP about the CRTC and this pushed me over the edge. I will file a complaint with the CRTC also but that will be like peeing in the wind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I snail mailed my MP (Calandra), MP, Stephen Harper, Tony Clement, James Moore, Jack Layton, Charlie Angus, Michael Ignatieff back on Dec 19th. A couple updates, since sending the letter, I've learned that cap will most likely now be 25 GB, with overuse fees over $2/GB to a maximum of $60.

Dear Mr. Calandra,

I'm writing to you today because I am concerned about the trend of poor decisions made by the CRTC which threaten to deteriorate the quality and increase the cost of Internet access in Canada. In the latest in a string of bad judgements, the CRTC has ruled in favour of Bell Canada's proposal to impose Usage Based Billing (UBB) on wholesale Internet Service Providers (ISPs) who use the last mile of Bell's infrastructure. UBB is an unfair and unjustified price hike that wholesale ISPs will be forced to pass on to their customers. UBB will prevent these smaller ISPs from differentiating themselves from Bell's offerings and will ultimately destroy competition in Canada. The CRTC is not acting to protect Canadian consumers.

Without competition, Canada's Internet ranking will worsen. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Canada’s ranking has already slipped from second place to ninth place amongst 30 developed nations in the last decade. Internet access in Canada is already some of the most expensive in the world. When price and speed are combined, Canada sinks toward the very bottom of the OECD rankings. As measured by price per megabyte - effectively the price for speed - Canada ranks 28th out of 30 countries, ahead of only Mexico and Poland.

Due to historical reasons, in exchange for building a telecommunication infrastructure (phone network) across Canada, Bell has inherited a privileged position and has benefited from government subsidies and resources. In the Internet age, as a counter to their monopoly, Bell was forced to open the last mile of their network infrastructure to wholesalers, such as my ISP: Teksavvy. Now, Bell Canada is using their dominance and monopoly position to influence the CRTC to dictate how their competitors (wholesaler ISPs) conduct their business and charge their customers.

The UBB as ruled by the CRTC will kick in after a user consumes (sum of downloads and uploads) 60 Gigabytes (GB). This bandwidth cap of 60GB is extremely low and prevents Canadians from engaging in many activities on the Internet without paying huge overuse fees. Every day, products and services are moving into the online world. Movies are now easily rented and downloaded over the Internet directly to a family's TV. Video games, once lining store shelves, are moving into download and on-demand services. Even radio now is primarily obtained through online services rather than an actual radio receiver.

Bell Canada claims the reason for UBB is network congestion; however these claims appear to be highly dubious. In 2008, Bell Canada began throttling the traffic of wholesale competitors before delivering it to them, without telling them. While Bell claimed the move was to handle congestion, follow up inquiries showed little to no congestion -- leading to the assumption that Bell simply didn't want any competitors offering DSL service that was superior to their own, throttled Sympatico service.
Bell Canada has also begun to roll out it's own Internet TV offering (IPTV), which will create a substantial amount of Internet traffic, calling the networking congesting claim into doubt. UBB is not really about network congestion. The true purpose of UBB is to eliminate the competition to their high speed Internet service, Internet TV and companies such as Netflix who dare to challenge Bell's Video On Demand TV services.

As well, the UBB rates proposed by Bell and ratified by the CRTC rates are a good example of how Canadians continue to overpay for Internet access. In comparison:
• As a web developer, I pay a web hosting company to host the web sites I maintain. For $7/month, they provide the infrastructure required for hosting and allow unlimited traffic to my web sites.
• As a customer of Teksavvy, I currently pay $32 for DSL and a 200 GB cap. If I was only paying for usage, it would amount to $0.16 per GB. If I go over that 200 GB cap, I can pay for additional cap space at $10 per 100 GB ($0.10 per GB).
The UBB rates that the CRTC has allowed Bell Canada to charge will be $1/GB for the first 30 Gigabytes - 10 times more than what I currently pay. The UBB rates are completely unjustified. Encouraged by the CRTC ruling on UBB, Bell Canada has already planned to increase the UBB charges on their own customers from $30 to $60. How long until they force this on the other wholesale ISPs?

Finally, if UBB is allowed, what sort of standards will be used to judge my Internet traffic? Will Bell have to prove that any throughput meter they use complies with Measurement Canada's standards for fairness and accuracy, just like when you pump gas at the gas station? The CRTC has not specified that this is a requirement for UBB and that Canadian consumers will have to trust Bell Canada’s measurements.

As a hard working Canadian with a family who uses the Internet for both business and pleasure, I do not want to see my Internet access deteriorate. Internet Issues such as UBB and Net Neutrality will be a deciding issue for me in any upcoming elections.

I trust you will stand up for Canadian consumers and stop usage-based billing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
Here is what I sent to my MP today. It's not as eloquant as others but I think it makes the point we are all trying to send.

Mr. O'Connor,

My name is XXXX and I live in your Constituency. This is the first time I've felt it necessary to contact my Member of Parliment directly to voice my concerns about a topic I feel is very important not just to myself, but to every Canadian. The reason I write to you today is because of the CTRC's decision to allow the implementation of usage based billing.

I thought I would always have the ability to choose from many different service providers because the CRTC and the government would never allow one or two companies to control pricing and usuage of internet access. If this ruling is allowed to stand then I will be forced to go with one of these Major ISP's, both of which offer restrictive and grossly over priced services. In an increasingly technological world this is a step backwards.

Don't get me wrong. I don't believe in a free ride or begrudge companies in making a profit but when that profit comes at the expense of a competitive market and price manipulation then a line has to be drawn. It appears that usuage based billing is a way for Bell and Rogers to protect their other interests, namely their television subscriptions.

I understand that internet bandwidth has increased dramatically and will continue to grow in the future but the technology that runs the internet is improving at an even greater amount. The cost of transmitting bandwidth is going down as the amount that is being transmitted is rising. Having the two largest telcom companies dictating prices and usage allowances will only hinder healthy competition in the marketplace and put everyday Canadians at a disadvantage.

I implore you and your fellow MP's to overturn this decesion so the market can set the prices not these companies and to allow all Canadians the freedom to choose who they get their internet service from.

Any candidate that supports Usage Based Billing will NOT be supported by me.

Sincerely,

Me
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Here's my letter to my MP.

Dear Mr. Bruinooge,

I live in Winnipeg, South and I am writing you today in regards to Internet Usage Billing and the CRTC's decision to allow it.

As an entrepreneur in the inital stages of setting up a small business, the internet is a vital tool in communicating with and sending and receiving information from clients. With the recent CRTC ruling and Shaw's implementation of Usage Based Billing, my costs for internet service would triple for the same service I am currently receiving without any improvements to service.

Not only will my business be impacted by these rising costs, but innovation throughout Canada will be stifled as customers will have to significantly curtail their online activities. As a consumer, my family and I will no longer be able to use online video, music and gaming services such as Netflix, NBA League Pass or iTunes, because of the increased costs.

From everything I have read online, the costs for an ISP to transmit a GB of data were no more than a couple of cents. Not only has Shaw recently reduced my monthly data allowance, without a reduction in price, they plan to charge overage fees of $2 per GB; a 10,000% markup. More information on this can be found at http://www.digitalhome.ca/2011/01/usage-based-internet-billing-what-can-you-do/.

I urge you to do what you can to see that this ruling by the CRTC is reversed. This will be an issue I will be watching for closely for in the next election. The party and candidates who stand up against this issue will be getting my vote.



Sincerely,


Yes I borrowed from some of the other letters posted here, I apologize to anyone that takes offense, but I thought getting the letter out sooner was more important that being completely original.


Also, for anyone emailing Bruinooge, I found two email address for him, [email protected] and [email protected]. Got an immediate canned response about how they take all concerns from constituents seriously from the first one. So for others, see if you can find an alternative email from the standard @parl.gc.ca one, might get to them more directly.


I don't know if threatening my vote was appropriate, but that's what politicians care about right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
Here is my simple email to my local Liberal MP.

Hi Mark,

Recent ruling by CRTC gave Bell Canada approval to implement usage-based billing to wholesale customers like smaller internet service providers that rent portions of Bell network infrastructure.

This means my current internet service provider will now subject to Bell Canada's rule where internet usage will be capped to around 25 GB per month in the future compare to current unlimited usage plan.

Personally, I find that usage-based billing approach is questionable without fair scientific data to prove Bell Canada's claim. Please help to oppose the approval of usage-based billing by CRTC for Bell Canada.
By the way, my local MP's reply is to first file a complain to CRTC. The Liberal caucus is keeping a close watch of the entire situation...

"Fair competition and consumer interests must not be sacrificed for big corporate profits. " quote from my local MP.

My local MP will get 4 votes from my family! Please write to your MP and complain to CRTC about the ruling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
I received a written response from my MP for Ottawa-Orleans.

"As you may know, the CRTC is an independent arms-length commission that reports to Parliament through the Minister of Canadian Heritage. I agree with much of your assessment and given the increasing importance of the internet in all facets of life, I see little benefit in this decision. I look forward to sharing your concerns with the Minister of Canadian Heritage and am confident his office will contact you directly should they require any further information"

Keep those letters flowing! With an election looming, everyone wants your vote!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Here's Mine (to the CRTC)

Here's mine... I'm not so sure about the 30GB - 80GB consumption range I discussed in my note- I read somewhere that the fee for "more than 30GB use" (or was it 25GB?) would be charged, but then the "customer" wouldn't be charged any more fees unless they exceeded the 80GB mark; if they went over that then they'd be charged another "fee". Please consider that & update for yours if that's no longer the case & you want to use the text below.

Anyway, here it is:



I am outraged that the CRTC is allowing Bell Canada to arbitrarily set exorbitant Internet usage-based billing rates for Canadians. The CRTC is supposed to regulate and supervise telecommunications systems in service to all Canadians, but its support of this scheme in its present form very clearly demonstrates to me where the CRTC's loyalties truly stand.

Internet-based programming is both legal and (presently) affordable in Canada, giving Canadians a chance to save money by choosing it over the unaffordable offerings of the cable companies. Might I remind you that these companies have no competition and continue to operate on their own terms without any regard for Canadians demanding more affordable programming choices? Bell Canada's new "fee structure" is a blatant cash grab; as a wholesaler it has no business charging extra for retail consumers' consumption between 30GB and 80GB, especially when Bell's estimated cost per Gigabyte is $0.03/GB. I'm sure you already know all this, but you allowed it to happen anyway.

If this scam is allowed to continue then I, along with many other Canadians, will very vocally call for your removal as an irrelevant, corporate-
infiltrated organization.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Done

Mr Malhi,

"I am writing you, my representative, today to add my voice to the public outcry over the CRTC's recent decision to force internet resellers to implement UBB.

Under the new ruling I will be paying the same money for just 1/8'th of the bandwidth. At a time when internet technology is continuing to explode and grow, we Canadians are having our access severely restricted. With just 1 months notice my ISP is reducing my service by 87%. Not because it wants to but because it is mandated to by the CRTC.

Is this what the CRTC is in business for? To mandate 87% reductions in services to the Canadian public??

I urge you to take whatever steps are necessary to make it clear to Minister Clement, to Minister Moore, to the CRTC and to Prime Minister Harper, that Canadians will no longer accept the abusive practices of the major Telecommunication Corporations in this country or the regulating committee that enables it."



Also sent a similar one to Clement and a harsher one to the CRTC

The more the merrier....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Here's mine, sent to the CRTC as well as all MPs in my city, leaders of all major parties, all digital and heritage critics, and a few media types.

-----------------------

I am writing to formally oppose the implementation of Usage-Based Billing (UBB) by Canadian Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in the year 2011. I work in the Information Technology (IT) industry and fully understand how this will adversely affect Canadians who use the internet.

Many studies, such as one conducted by the University of Minnesota and Cisco Systems, have found that computer processing power, hard disk storage densities and data transmission rates have grown by almost 60% per year in the last decade. That is in comparison to a 40-50% increase in actual internet traffic. This means that internet traffic has indeed grown, but the technology which carries that traffic has evolved to be much faster and more efficient. I believe that the argument made by companies such as Bell and Rogers that data is becoming more expensive to deliver to be false, and UBB is an obvious cash-grab by these companies which stifles competition and innovation in our great country.

Canada has already fallen behind a majority of countries in the world when it comes to internet innovation, speed, and price versus performance. Numerous studies and technology professionals can attest to the fact that delivering a gigabyte (GB) of data using today's networking equipment costs a company, at most, five cents (many studies have shown the actual cost to be closer to three cents). So how can it be justified that with the price Canadians are paying for measly bandwidth caps (25-60 GB a month for lower-tiered plans), companies such as Rogers and Bell are charging anywhere from two to five dollars per gigabyte for overage?

It is my belief that the large internet companies in Canada are in a serious conflict of interest, where the same companies own large media and entertainment conglomerates and are stifling technological competition with their archaic pricing structures. This serves not to help Canadians as a whole, but only shareholders and those who stand to gain from large profits made by these companies. For example, Rogers and Bell also have divisions within their companies which deliver television service to Canadians (via satellite or cable). With the emergence of legal internet streaming available on legitimate network websites or services such as NetFlix, Rogers and Bell are undoubtedly seeing a loss of television service customers. I believe they are illegally using their vast country-wide network infrastructure monopolies to offset those losses.

To put it simply, small bandwidth caps coupled with obscenely large overage charges force Canadian internet media users to make a choice between paying extra for either large amounts of internet data use, or a television cable or satellite package. Either way, it is profit for the companies and leads to higher costs for Canadians and their families (while, at the same time, not making services any better).

I ask that you please stand up for the Canadian people on this issue and not the massive corporations which have raided the pockets of Canadians and dropped this country to pathetic levels of internet innovation in comparison to the rest of the world. My vote in the next election may very well hinge on this issue.
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top