No Truth In Advertising When It Comes To ISP Traffic Shaping In Canada

from the that-seems-like-a-problem... dept

Via Rob Hyndman, we learn that in the Canadian gov’t hearings investigating broadband provider traffic shaping, the providers revealed a lot about their traffic shaping practices that seem to contradict what those same providers claim on their websites well selling connectivity. Even if traffic shaping is to be considered legal, shouldn’t broadband providers be required to be honest about what they’re offering customers?

Filed Under: , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “No Truth In Advertising When It Comes To ISP Traffic Shaping In Canada”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Neo-Leper (profile) says:

I am glad I live in the USA where we have all these choices. In my area alone we have three, yes three ISP’s. Cable, phone and Earthlink…. Which Earthlink goes through the cable isp, Time Warner, uses their hardware, TW sends me the bill for Earthlink, Earthlink goes by TW’s rules, etc, TW is the one that fixes things when there are problems…..

Ahhhh…. the lands of choices…

Sad. Corporatism really did kill Capitalism.

B's Opinion Only (profile) says:

Fiber is the solution

What we need is for a smart, nimble and innovative company to set up shop and start running fiber into our homes. The New Brunswick government is giving Aliant telecom $60 million to do it, and they say they can wire every home in 2 cities for $857 per home.

I know that I would happily pay $857 or more to have an unlimited pipe coming into my home, and I would pay for the privilege of using as much real bandwidth as I wanted! Some months I might only use a few gigs, other months I would use hundreds. Just like electricity, water, and gas I would pay for what I use from an unlimited supply.

I’m curious how many others would pay to free their homes from the clutches of Bell and Rogers. Resident-owned fiber to the home is the solution. Imagine real competition for your telephone, Internet and TV service!

On another note, when I cancelled my Rogers Internet service last year, they asked why I was canceling and I told them it was completely because of the throttling. They pretended not to know what I was talking about, and their computers didn’t have a ‘check box’ for that, so I made them put a note on my account explaining in detail how displeased I was. Unfortunately I went to Bell, who started throttling soon after I joined, after promising me that they had no plans to ever do so and would never do such a thing.

cjmpe (profile) says:

Re: Fiber is the solution

Sadly your telecom organisation appears to be in the minority. My parents live on Vancouver Island and their Co-op cable company recently sold itself to one of the biggies (Telus, I believe) – every subscriber got a nice cheque, something like $2K, but now they probalby won’t see the progessive thoughts of the NB government.

Techn1x says:

Re: Fiber is the solution

Reminds me of how lucky we are here in Australia. We should be getting FTTH to 90% of homes in the next 8 years! Of course, it’ll cost $43 billion, but hey I’m not complaining.

The only problem we have is internet caps due to our location, but that should be fixed once more money is put towards larger bandwidth fiber across the pacific to the US.

You guys in the US shouldn’t complain about shaping etc. our government is trying to implement filtering! WTF! 90% of people are against it but somehow it’s going forward…

Anonymous Coward says:

I have serious problems with the article in NowToronto.

They are trying to equate ALL download bandwidth with P2P bandwidth. While Bell might offer 10Mbps downloads, and shape P2P to 512k, they are NOT turning off the rest of your download space – just not allowing P2P to happen beyond a certain limit. So you could still watch a video off of YouTube or whatever and your P2P speed would not change. It isn’t like they throttle EVERYTHING down to 512, which is what they are trying to imply.

The assumption by the NowToronto article is that users do nothing except P2P, which is just bogus. It is entirely a misrepresentation of the truth. Mike, you should be ashamed to link to this sort of misinformation, don’t you read what you link to?

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...