Home » Uncategorized » Currently Reading:

The Beavers Are Lying: Bell Admits It Throttles Customer Speeds Up to 98.5% for Nearly 10 Hours Daily

Phillip Dampier July 15, 2009 Bell (Canada), Canada, Internet Overcharging, Public Policy & Gov't 2 Comments
YouTube Preview Image

The Bell Beavers have been lying to Canadians for at least a year about the speed of their broadband connections through Bell.  Despite assertions in advertising that Bell Internet does not experience “slowdowns,” the company admitted Tuesday it intentionally does slow down certain broadband applications by up to 98.5% for 9.5  hours a day.

Appearing before commissioners of the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission hearing on bandwidth management, Jonathan Daniels, Bell’s vice-president of regulatory law, told commissioners peer-to-peer file transfers are “throttled,” or reduced in speed, for up to 10 hours daily.

In Ontario and Quebec, speeds are reduced to 256kbps (kilobits per second) between 6pm-1am, representing a 98.5% reduction in the maximum speed of 16Mbps offered as part of Bell’s Internet Max 16 service.  During dinner time, starting at 4:30pm-6pm, speeds are reduced to 512kbps.  Even those up late to avoid the throttle will still encounter it between 1am-2am, when speeds are also reduced to 512kbps.

Although Bell has never denied throttling users’ speeds, the company clarified the extent of the throttling and its specifics for the CRTC yesterday.  Daniels promised the company would post this information on its website soon, so customers are fully informed about the practice before signing up for service.

Bell defended the practice, extending not only to its own customers but also to customers of independent Canadian ISPs who obtain their broadband access from Bell’s wholesale bandwidth division.  Bell claims it was not satisfied with simply raising prices or placing usage limits on its service — the company also felt it necessary to start reducing the speeds of “problem applications” on its network.  Bell lobbied the CRTC to endorse Bell’s bandwidth management plan and also called on the commission to apply any regulatory changes not only to its own DSL service, but also for competing technologies like cable, fiber, and even wireless broadband.  Inclusion of the latter technology would establish a “lowest common denominator” broadband standard for Canada, where all players would be permitted to limit and throttle usage based on the least capable competing technology.

Independent Internet providers across Canada complain their wholesale access from Bell not only faces speed throttles, but also usage based pricing, which effectively could render most uncompetitive.  They have asked the commission to force Bell to stop throttling their wholesale accounts and permit them to establish whatever bandwidth management technologies are appropriate.  Bell dismissed that notion, claiming that unless independent providers use the same policies Bell does, demand on its network from its wholesale accounts would create congestion problems for Bell’s own retail customers.

CRTC Chair Konrad von Finckenstein asked why Bell is the only ISP in Canada that throttles peer-to-peer downloads, while most other ISPs only throttle uploads.  Daniels claimed that downloads are a bigger problem for the Bell network, and that most cable ISPs engaged in throttling are dealing with a network much more sensitive to upload activity.

The issue is hotly debated across Canada because much of the network that Bell and other providers utilize for Internet connectivity was built with Canadian taxpayer dollars.  Because the network was built with public funds, Bell cannot refuse requests from competitors to purchase access to their network at wholesale prices, which are set by Canadian regulators.

The wholesale price for Canadian residential customers with a 5Mbps connection starts at $19.50 per month.  An additional charge for connecting an independent network to Bell’s network is levied, along with a specified amount of bandwidth consumption.  A wholesale account on Bell’s “High Speed Access” network, which doesn’t engage in traffic throttling, is not regulated and is currently priced at $40 a month for a 6Mbps connection.  ISPs are required to install more of their own network management equipment, making access to this higher level of service an expensive proposition for both the ISP and the residential customer.  Few ISPs choose the “High Speed Access” network because of the cost.

The CRTC became involved after getting complaints from Bell’s wholesale customers who suddenly discovered their own customers were being speed throttled.  Last November, the commission found such throttling by Bell was permitted, primarily because they throttled every customer’s speeds — retail and wholesale.  But a decision to hold hearings into bandwidth management was deemed necessary, and the result was a week of hearings that wrapped up Tuesday.

Currently there are 2 comments on this Article:

  1. Tim says:

    Sounds like to me they are trying to fit as many people on one pipe as possible and blame P2P file shares for wanting to throttle traffic because they have too many on one line. If the line could handle the bandwidth, they wouldn’t have to throttle in the first place. If I were a Canadian customer of theirs, I would demand they take that idiotic commercial off the air. And also, why do they even throttle P2P? There are legit torrents out there.Most people using like Utorrent can bypass this throttling anyways by enabling encryption in the settings.

    • Smith6612 says:

      Encryption + UDP Transfers, and if they use TekSavvy, they can use MLPPP to get around Bell’s Throttling.







Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

  • Ian L: Not sure what's particularly interesting about this analyst. Says TWC is overvalued, and one analyst saying that broadband drives TWC's price doesn't ...
  • Phillip Dampier: Thanks for the information -- I'll take a look. I'm hardly surprised Texas is giving free passes to big providers, whether it was AT&T or its predece...
  • Phillip Dampier: I don't praise any broadband company with Internet Overcharging schemes. Videotron has been kicking Bell's butt much the same way cable operators eff...
  • PreventCAPS: I don't think that's going to happen. It would mean less $$$ for cable companies. Yes, they would gain new consumers, but not enough to offset the man...
  • infojunkie: Your posting illustrates the need for a la carte cable subscriptions. Why pay for what you don't want? Surely the technology is here to handle it....
  • screw TWC: stop the cr*p! Imagine this: I paid for an hour I would like to use an hour. 5 minutes now (noon), 10 minutes later (2pm)... [^ this applies t...
  • StopYerWhinin: I've had entire platoons of privates burning latrine refuse, that didn't whine as much as you people. Seriously, either my service works way better t...
  • Mike: It makes me sad to see so many of our elected officials parroting the selling points of this merger as if Comcast and NBC wrote their statements for t...
  • Ian L: Note that Novus's caps are independent for upload and download; you can push 360GB AND pull 360GB down and still not get an overage charge. Also, t...
  • Ian L: Wait, you're pairisng Videotron now? That 50 Mbps service is all too similar to Sunflower Broadband's tier: 50 Mbps down, 1 Mbps up, 100GB cap. That s...
  • TelLAWCom Labs: Great article. AT&T conduct par for the course we're afraid. It's even worse in Texas. Take a look here where an ex-Texas Commission employee ...
  • Jeremy: What a surprise?! The elected representatives of Kansas and their hand picked members do little to nothing for their constituents. Yet they make buc...

Your Account: