Prime Minister Harper's government is facing an open revolt by Canadian consumers over Internet Overcharging.

A full-scale revolt among consumers across Canada has brought the issue of Internet Overcharging to the highest levels of government.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said the government is very concerned about a decision from the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission that has effectively forced the end of unlimited use broadband plans across the country.

Both the Liberal and NDP parties have made a point of protesting the CRTC decision, which happened under the Conservative Party’s watch.  Harper’s Industry Minister Tony Clement stepped up his remarks this morning which hint the government is prepared to quash last week’s decision by the CRTC, which has already forced price increases for broadband service across the country.

“The decision on its face has some pretty severe impacts,” Clement told reporters in Ottawa after NDP and Liberal critics in the House of Commons repeatedly pounded the government on the issue of so-called “usage-based billing.”

“I indicated the impacts on consumers, on small business operators, on creators, on innovators. So that’s why I have to work through a process, cross my T’s, doc my I’s. When you’re dealing with a legal process, that’s what you have to do. But I will be doing that very, very quickly, and getting back to the prime minister and my colleagues very, very quickly,” said Clement.

As of this morning, more than 286,000 Canadians have signed a petition protesting the Internet Overcharging schemes.

The protest movement has now been joined by small and medium-sized business groups who fear the impact new Internet pricing will have on their businesses.

Richard Truscott, with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, normally a group that prefers less government action, said his members are demanding a stop to the pricing schemes before they get started.

“The vast majority of small businesses rely on reasonably-priced Internet service to conduct their operations,” he said. “Generally this is the sort of thing that hits the most innovative sector with higher costs.”

Most cable and phone companies are lobbying Ottawa politicians to keep the new usage-based billing schemes, and several are pretending the protest movement doesn’t exist.

AgenceQMI, a cable-company owned wire service, is also coming under fire for misrepresenting Clement’s positions on the pricing schemes in a news report issued yesterday.  The wire service claimed Clement supported the CRTC’s position, something Clement adamantly denied this morning.

The National Post, a self-described conservative newspaper, this morning published an editorial supporting usage-based pricing, claiming a handful of users were creating a problem that light users should not pay to solve.  But many readers leaving comments on the article strongly disagreed, claiming the newspaper is out of touch.

Although the regime of usage caps, speed throttles, and overlimit fees have been in place with most major providers for at least two years, the culmination of several events in the last six months have brought the issue to the boiling point:

1. The arrival of Netflix video streaming, which provides unlimited access for a flat monthly fee;
2. The ongoing limbo dance among several providers who are reducing usage allowances when competitive threats arrive;
3. The increase in providers now enforcing usage limits by billing consumers overlimit fees that spike broadband bills;
4. Recent examples of bill shock, which have left some consumers with thousands of dollars in Internet charges.

Bill Shock

Kevin Brennan, a graphic designer who works from home and downloads large files from clients, was first hit with extra charges in November, which cost him $34 above his usual Shaw bill.

“I’d never been contacted about going over before,” he told the Calgary Herald, adding he was also over in December. “Thirty-four dollars doesn’t seem like much, but over the course of a year it adds up.

“What concerns me, outside my own business, is the lack of innovation people will be able to do. And it makes Shaw a monopoly. . . . if you watch TV or the Internet, you pay more to them.”

Shaw reduced its usage allowance for customers like Brennan late last year from 75 to 60GB on its most popular broadband plan.  It also now enforces a $2/GB overlimit fee.

John Lawford, counsel for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, told the Herald the concern isn’t just that smaller companies can no longer offer unlimited plans, which reduces competition.

“The phone and Internet and cable companies of the world are playing it both ways. They’re saying, ‘Well, there’s these big data hogs that are using too much, we’ve got to punish them to keep the price down.’ On the other hand they’re buying media companies so they have stuff to shove down the wires, which doesn’t count toward your cap,” Lawford said. “That’s anti-competitive.”

Most Canadian media companies are now tightly integrated with large telecommunications companies.  CTV, Canada’s largest commercial network, is now owned by Bell, the country’s biggest phone company.  Rogers, Shaw, and Videotron — the largest cable companies in Canada own cable and broadcast stations, newspapers, and magazines.  They also control cellphone companies, Wi-Fi networks, and have interests in satellite providers as well.

When a competitor like Netflix arrives to challenge the companies’ pay television interests, turning down consumers’ broadband usage allowances discourages cord-cutting.

The CRTC’s decision to allow Bell to charge usage-based pricing for wholesale accounts was the final death blow to unlimited Internet according to several independent service providers, because virtually all of them rely on Bell — a company that received taxpayer subsidies to build its broadband network — for access to the Internet.

Canadian Parliament

TekSavvy, a company that used to offer unlimited use plans, can do so no more.  In a statement to customers, TekSavvy laid blame on regulators for being forced to increase prices.

“From March 1 on, users of the up to 5Mbps packages in Ontario can expect a usage cap of 25Gb (60Gb in Quebec), substantially down from the 200Gb or unlimited deals TekSavvy was able to offer before the CRTC’s decision to impose usage based billing,” read a statement sent to customers.

TekSavvy spokeswoman Katie do Forno said the CRTC decision is a disaster for Canadian broadband in the new digital economy.

“This will result in unjustifiably high prices and a reduction in innovation,” said do Forno. “I think it’s going to change behavior about how people use the Internet.”

The company underlines the point by including “before and after” pricing schedules on its website, an unprecedented move.  Shaw, western Canada’s largest cable company, was heavily criticized for trying to hide their reduction in usage allowances.

Ottawa residents are planning direct action to protest the decision this Saturday.  Shawn Pepin is organizing the protest rally.

“What they’re doing right now looks like a cash-grab scheme, and people aren’t going to take it,” he said.

[flv width=”640″ height=”388″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CBC News Pay As You Go Tony Clement 2-1-11.flv[/flv]

Minister of Industry Tony Clement was pressed by CBC Television about the Harper Government’s stand on Internet Overcharging.  The CBC asks why Canadians are paying some of the world’s highest prices for broadband and why Clement is finally getting involved.  Watch as he mysteriously avoids stating the obvious: Canadians are in open revolt and politicians from competing parties are taking their side.  (9 minutes)

Clement

On Monday, the Federal Minister of Industry Tony Clement issued a statement about Internet Overcharging that was so non-committal, media companies are interpreting his comments as “for” and “against” usage-based billing.

Tony Clement’s full statement:

“On Tuesday, January 25, 2011, the CRTC announced its decision to allow wholesale and retail internet service providers to charge customers for exceeding the monthly usage of data transfer permitted with their broadband Internet package. This will mean, for the first time, that many smaller and regional internet service providers will be required to move to a system of usage-based billing for their customers.

I am aware that an appeal has been initiated by a market participant. As Canada’s Industry Minister, it is my job to help encourage an innovative and competitive marketplace, and to ensure Canadian consumers have real choices in the services they purchase. I can assure that, as with any ruling, this decision will be studied carefully to ensure that competition, innovation and consumers were all fairly considered.

The Harper Government is committed to encouraging choice and competition in wireless and internet markets. Increased choice results in more competition, which means lower prices and better quality services for Canadians. We have always been clear on our policies in this regard and will continue on this path.

Our Conservative Government is focused on the economy and creating a positive environment for job creators and business to flourish. Canadians can count on us to do what is in the best interest of consumers.”

AgenceQMI and Videotron are both owned by Quebecor Media

CBC Radio made mention of Clement’s comments and indicated the minister had expressed concerns about the billing scheme, but readers of wire service reports from AgenceQMI are getting an entirely different view — Clement’s approval of the new pricing scheme.

In a French language story headlined, “Minister Clement justifies the end of unlimited Internet packages,” the news agency got just a little creative in interpreting Clement’s statement (roughly translated from the French original):

He also argues that billing based on actual usage would more efficiently manage Internet traffic and bandwidth and provide a better experience for light users, currently impacted by massive data exchanges among the Internet’s heaviest users.

Minister Clement, who supports this decision, said in a statement that it is his duty to encourage a more competitive market.

It’s hardly a coincidence that AgenceQMI‘s creative spin of Clement’s statement just happens to match the position of Videotron, Quebec’s largest cable company.  They are both owned by Quebecor Media.  Videotron engages in Internet Overcharging that left one Montreal student with an $1,800 broadband bill.

NY City Council members are reviewing an application by Time Warner Cable and Cablevision to offer Wi-Fi services in 32 New York-area parks… for a fee that could bring the companies as much as $10 million dollars a year in new revenue.

The controversial proposal would frustrate efforts by the nonprofit group NYCWireless to find free Wi-Fi providers to deliver service in New York’s public parks.

In September, the city of New York renewed franchises for both Cablevision and Time Warner Cable that included a commitment to spend $10 million to install Wi-Fi service in area parks.  But nobody said the companies had to provide the service for free.

Instead, users will only get free samples — up to three ten-minute sessions per month.  Additional time on the network will cost 99 cents per day.  Cable customers will get unlimited access for free.

Dana Spiegel, executive director of the nonprofit NYCWireless, says handing over the wireless space in public parks to private fee-based providers is “absolutely unconscionable.”

City council members don’t have a final say over the deal — a state commission does — but intends to investigate the deal and its fairness to New York residents.

Verizon FiOS has a growing presence in New York City, and those customers would be locked out of free Wi-Fi access on the proposed park network.

NYCWireless offered the council several reasons why relying on cable companies to deliver public park Wi-Fi was not a great deal:

First, the plan does not establish any form of “Free Public Wi-Fi”, an amenity of New York City parks since NYCwireless began our work, and one replicated by the Parks Department and many other organizations around the City. Free Public Wi-Fi Hotspots were a very significant recommendation of the Diamond Consulting “Broadband Needs Assessment Study,” and the “Free” part of these public hotspots are exactly the part of these amenities that make them so valuable and essential for local residents.

Make no mistake: DoITT’s plan establishes a $1 per day fee for internet service in parks. There may be a few free 10-minute blocks per month, and there may be ways to hide the $1 per day charge in a resident’s cable service internet bill, but with DoITT’s plan, NYC won’t have Free Wi-Fi. We’ll have $1 per day Wi-Fi, delivered to public spaces that are maintained by our tax dollars, paid to a couple of huge private corporations.

In fact, Cablevision and Time Warner Cable stand to make tens of millions of dollars per year providing this service. Central Park gets about 25m visitors per year, and if we ignore all other parks, and figure that fewer than half of those visitors buy one day of internet service per year, Time Warner Cable and Cablevision get paid $0.99 x 10 million visitors = $10,000,000.

Second, the industry standard for gaining access to such types of subscription service as are contemplated by DoITT and the cable companies requires that a prospective user of a fee-based Parks Hotspot will need to create an account and enter their billing information. This requires the submission of identity, address, and credit card information into a web form prior to gaining access to the hotspot. Essentially, by promoting this solution, DoITT is pushing NYC citizens and visitors to hand over deeply personal and secure information to a private organization over which neither the user nor DoITT has any control.

Contrast this to the way that NYCwireless offers free Wi-Fi to citizens: we do require registration of a user account so that we can track agreement to our Acceptable Usage Policy. However we require only a valid email address. No billing address, no credit card, no other identity information.

Personally, I am fearful of handing over such information to such private organizations, though I have in the past. But I am more fearful for the harm that will be done to those that depend more significantly upon Park Hotspots. How many city residents don’t have a credit card? How many children in playgrounds who couldn’t get a credit card even if they wanted to? Adults? How many city residents live in neighborhoods that are otherwise safe, but in which they would prefer not pulling out their wallet and a credit card just to get what should be Free Internet Access? How many city residents depend upon Free Wi-Fi because they live below the poverty line, and because they can’t afford or don’t want cable internet, cannot afford the $5 it would cost them to get internet access in a city park during the week?

Lastly, because of DoITT’s “whole package solution”, most NYC residents and visitors won’t see any Wi-Fi, for free or for fee, for years, since local organizations that would otherwise have sponsored the creation of a Free Public Wi-Fi Hotspot say “oh, well, the city is going to do this someday, so we won’t bother doing this now for our community.” If past experience is any predictor of future performance, it will be years before the first Paid Wi-Fi Hotspot is opened, and many more before many others are opened, if at all. Meanwhile, DoITT’s actions will have stopped in its tracks any plans for more hotspots that local organizations may be contemplating.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/NY 1 Time Warner Cable Offers Free WiFi Hotspots For City Customers 3-26-10.flv[/flv]

NY1 reported on Time Warner Cable’s expanded Wi-Fi hotspots in New York in this story from last March.  (1 minute)

More than 160,000 ordinary Canadians have signed a petition telling telecom companies to back off their Internet Overcharging schemes.  The NDP has adopted an anti-Overcharging position, and now Openmedia.ca, an ally of ours, is spearheading an effort to get the larger Liberal Party involved in the fight against Internet ripoffs.

Deep pocketed cable and phone companies have invaded Ottawa with their lobbyists and friends to try and keep your broadband bill as high as possible. We can trump their hand, but only if you get involved.

With Canadian government pressure, the CRTC will fold like a wet newspaper.  Openmedia is trying to collect a historic 200,000 signatures, and starting today every signature will send e-mail to the inbox of Michael Ignatieff and Liberal Party Digital Critic Pablo Rodriguez, encouraging them to join the fight.

If you don’t want to pay through the roof for your broadband, hurry and add your name to the petition.  Ottawa has been surprised by the backlash from everyday consumers from BC to PEI.  Now let’s deliver the death blow to Internet Overcharging and tell Bell, Rogers, and Shaw to enjoy the fat profits they already earn, and stop the gouging.

Tell your friends:

• Email the petition link: https://openmedia.org/en/ca/look-back-our-stop-meter-campaign
• Share it on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fopenmedia.ca%2Fmeter&t=Stop%20The%20Meter%20On%20Your%20Internet%20Use%20%7C%20OpenMedia.ca&src=sp
• Tweet it: https://mobile.twitter.com/session/new

Rogers, one of Canada’s largest telecom companies, will do anything to sell you their 3G wireless broadband Rocket Stick, even if it means scaring you away from using their own Wi-Fi hotspots.

Michael Geist, a popular columnist in Toronto, called Rogers about another matter, but the customer service agent soon began asking if Geist’s family used a laptop to access public Wi-Fi networks.

When I said that I did, he asked if I knew the dangers of using public Wi-Fi, which I was told included the possibility of hackers accessing my data or inserting viruses onto my computer.  Given the risks, the agent continued, might I be interested in the Rogers’ Rocket Stick?

Geist was completely unimpressed with Rogers’ attempts at upselling through scare tactics.

“Mobile internet services are good products that can and should be sold on the basis of the convenience they provide, not by scaring consumers into thinking that alternative access services are unsafe,” Geist wrote.

More importantly, the irony of Rogers’ statements can’t be missed, as Geist notes:

• Rogers operates hundreds of public wifi hotspots across the country. When promoting its hotspots, it describes them as providing “high-speed, secure access to the Internet.”
• Rogers permits Internet tethering from many smartphones. Many users may find that tethering provides a more cost effective solution than purchasing yet another mobile Internet device.  The agent did not mention this alternative.
• There are risks with public wifi, but those can be mitigated through a variety of steps on users’ computers. Advice on what do include Microsoft’s advice on public wifi networks, Lifehacker on how to stay safe on public wifi networks, and Ars Technica on staying safe at public hotspots.

Stories about the risks of Wi-Fi are not limited to Rogers.  Several media outlets have been running stories ranging from the plausible:
[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CTV British Columbia – How to secure your Wi-Fi surfing 10-7-10.flv[/flv]

CTV in Southwest Ontario reports some area residents believe Wi-Fi causes diabetes and other ailments and wants Wi-Fi pulled from schools.  (7 minutes)

Also not to be missed are Rogers’ impenetrable “Flex Rate Plans.”  Would it not be easier to just say customers will be charged the amount of the rate plan that corresponds with their actual usage?

Flex Rate Plans
Rogers unique Flex Rate service automatically adjusts the monthly fee based on your actual monthly usage. As you use more or less data, Rogers Flex Rate Data Plan will automatically roll up or down to the next best rate available. This guarantees you the best rate based on actual usage.
Tier	Monthly Fee	Data Included**	How Rogers Flex Rate Works
1	$35	500MB	You will start each month at Tier 1. If your monthly usage exceeds 500MB, then you move up automatically to Tier 2 and will be charged $40.
2	$40	1GB	If your monthly usage exceeds 1GB, then you move up automatically to Tier 3 and will be charged $55.
3	$55	2GB	If your monthly usage exceeds 2GB, then you move up automatically to Tier 4 and will be charged $70.
4	$70	5GB	If your monthly usage exceeds 5GB, $0.05 per additional MB will be charged.

Monthly prices above do not include the Government Regulatory Recovery Fee*