Prime Minister Stephen Harper

The Conservative government of Stephen Harper technically fell Friday after a no-confidence motion organized by opposition parties forced Canada’s leader to dissolve Parliament Sunday.  Harper announced new elections will be held May 2nd.

While broadband was certainly not a key issue in the take-down of the government, the forthcoming preoccupation with elections comes at the same time the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is revisiting its earlier decision about usage-based billing, dealing with conflicts over increased competition in the wireless market, and fielding controversy over the agency’s newest commissioner and vice-chair.

The government’s latest pick for the CRTC, the eminently unqualified (but well-connected) former politician/talk show host-turned regulator Tom Pentefountas, is scheduled to take his seat at the Commission this April.  The “Pentefountas Matter” threatens to become a political sideshow here in Ottawa as opposition parties feast on a host of missteps from the former president of Action Démocratique du Québec, a Quebec political party that some have called a Francophone ‘mini-me’ version of the Tories inside Quebec.

“Here is a man who comes to a broadband and telecommunications regulatory body with just one telecom qualification on his resume — he was a radio talk show host,” shares François Dumont, a Stop the Cap! reader in Montreal.  “UBB (usage based billing) to this man could be a brand of suntan lotion.  In America, it would be like naming Rush Limbaugh to the FCC.”

NDP MP Charlie Angus, one of Canada’s most vocal, pro-consumer critics of the Conservative Party’s ‘corporate agenda-meets-federal policies’ dismissed Pentefountas as an unqualified mess who lacks credentials for the post and won it only through his friendship with Conservative Senator Leo Housakos and Dimitri Soudas, Prime Minister Harper’s spokesman.

[flv width=”480″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Charlie Angus Pentefountas Affair.flv[/flv]

Charlie Angus on the attack during Question Time in Parliament over the appointment of Tom Pentefountas.  (4 minutes)

Pentefountas made matters worse for himself this week when he declared he deserved to be vice-chair of the CRTC because he “earned it.”

Charlie Angus (NDP)

That reasoning has not impressed Angus, or some members of Canada’s Liberal party, who accuse the government of cronyism for appointing an unqualified candidate to the CRTC as the agency is mired in controversy and generates headlines in the media with every policy decision.  Angus isn’t even sure if Pentefountas even formally applied for the job.  When asked, Pentefountas would only say he “expressed an interest.”

Now, members of several opposition parties are calling on the Conservatives to fire Pentefountas before he gets the keys to his office.

Meanwhile, the CRTC continues to dig in its heels about the parameters of the review of its earlier decisions about usage-based billing.

With the applause of telecom business interests in Canada, the Commission has already fixed the future review around its own preconception of the “facts” about UBB:

The two guiding principles for the review are that “ordinary consumers served by small Internet service providers should not have to fund the bandwidth used by the heaviest retail Internet service consumers”; and that “it is in the best interest of consumers that Small ISPs, which offer competitive alternatives to the incumbent carriers, should continue to do so.”

The agency plans hearings for July, but few broadband observers expect the Commission will depart much from its original conclusion Canadians need to pay significantly higher broadband bills for the good of the providers delivering the service.  Industry Minister Tony Clement continues his efforts to soothe angry Canadian consumers with a promise to overturn the agency’s decision if it continues to give a thumbs-up to UBB.  But government critics say the mandate given to the CRTC is the real problem — so long as the Conservatives insist the CRTC take a deregulatory approach to telecommunications, the longer the green light on higher prices and less competition will continue to shine.

With most observers predicting the Conservatives are on track to win the spring elections, it is unlikely any major changes in telecom policy are forthcoming.  Technology columnist Michael Geist suggests voters across Canada can upset conventional wisdom by making telecom issues a major focus of the forthcoming campaign, urging candidates to “vote for the Internet,” supporting consumer-friendly positions like a rejection of UBB and embracing forward-looking broadband policies.

Paul-Andre Dechêne is Stop the Cap!’s correspondent based in Ottawa, Ontario.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Charlie Angus on UBB.flv[/flv]

Charlie Angus in another exchange in Parliament with Industry Minister Tony Clement over the issue of usage-based billing.  (2 minutes)

AT&T’s support forums are being censored to stop a free and open discussion about the company’s elimination of an unlimited Internet experience.

We received word this morning from Stop the Cap! reader Roger, who tried to post a message including a link back to one of our stories exposing the myth of AT&T’s “congestion problems” to share with the large community of readers angry with AT&T about its Internet Overcharging scheme on its support forum.

“AT&T will not allow people to post links to your website,” Roger writes.  “Both myself and a friend of mine tried on two separate occasions to write messages that quoted from your facts and figures and linked back to them for readers looking for additional information, and AT&T removed them within minutes.”

Stop the Cap! can confirm AT&T is actively engaged in censorship on its support forum when I tried posting a message myself to test the theory, under my real name, including three links to three individual stories, and signed with a link back to our website’s home page.  Sure enough, within the hour, AT&T stripped out the links and implied we “revealed personal information” (about myself in the form of my name, which still appears as my ‘handle’) and were “spamming” the forum — a stretch when the only links were back to the content referenced in the piece.  A few other linked sites, including Broadband Reports, are not suffering the same fate when users link back to their content, at least for now.

(click to enlarge)

AT&T followed up claiming it does not allow messages that support the work of third-party groups, even if that “support” comes only from links back to content referenced in the forum.

“At least your message remained partially intact,” Roger adds.  “Ours were deleted completely.”

“With AT&T’s heavy handed ‘editors’ at work, no wonder there are concerns about Net Neutrality.  AT&T censors first, asks questions later.”

Q.  What moves faster than North Carolina’s cable and DSL service?

A.  Legislation to make sure the state’s telecom companies can continue to provide slow, expensive, and hit or miss service for years to come.

Big Telecom money has greased the process as H.129, the Telecom Monopoly Preservation and Protection Act is rushed to the House floor before North Carolina consumers know what is happening.

Residents have until Monday evening at 7pm to make their feelings known on this anti-consumer nightmare for cities and small towns:

• H.129 will shut down the digital economies of small cities like Wilson and Salisbury just as they are primed to sell themselves as a great home for high-tech, high-paying jobs.
• H.129 guarantees rural North Carolina will resemble the 21st century equivalent of Oliver Twist — begging for whatever limited broadband the state’s phone companies refuse to deliver.

The appalling truth is that the companies pushing for this bill only want broadband service on their watch, under their control, with their high prices and virtually no competition or choice.  And now AT&T is prepared to limit your broadband usage as well, establishing usage caps and overcharging customers who exceed them.

Do you want your broadband choices limited to these phone and cable companies?  Considering North Carolina broadband is ranked 41st out of the 50 states, it’s clear they don’t consider the state a priority.

But it does not have to be this way.  Where providers drop the ball, communities should have the choice to pick it up and run with it.  That is what Wilson and Salisbury did, and the result is the best broadband service in the state.  That’s a threat Time Warner Cable and CenturyLink can’t afford to ignore, which is why they want these networks stopped at all costs.

Defeating H.129 is critical to the state’s broadband future.  As written, it delivers no new broadband connections, does not promote or provide any competition, or help any individual or community.  It was written by the state’s telecom companies to benefit them, and them alone.  It guarantees you will be stuck paying ever-increasing bills for limited service indefinitely.

Tell House members they must do what is right for the voters, not what is right for the cable and phone companies.  Tell them to VOTE NO ON H.129.  The broadband saved may be your own.

You can find your individual representative and their contact information below the jump.  Please get writing and calling today!

… Continue Reading

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Kelsey Sees Higher Wireless Rates After T-Mobile Deal 3-24-11.flv[/flv]

Getting the mainstream media to cover issues in the telecommunications sphere usually means wading into the “business news” sections of newspapers or watching business cable news channels.  Unfortunately, too often these outlets cater to the whims and preconceived notions of the audience — big business.  In the case of the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, Wall Street loves the idea, but consumers do not.  Watch as Free Press’ Joel Kelsey handily deals with the gang at Bloomberg News, who are convinced mergers and acquisitions never result in price increases for consumers.  Has your cell phone bill gone up or down in the last three years?  (4 minutes)

BitTorrent, the company behind the popular file sharing protocol routinely blamed by providers for overburdening broadband networks and by Hollywood for distributing pirated content, took a tentative step today to oppose Internet Overcharging schemes.

Eric Klinker, CEO wrote a guest piece for GigaOM calling out AT&T for its announced 150-250GB usage caps:

While the trend toward metered bandwidth is not inherently pro-consumer, ISPs have staked out a singular public rationale: data caps are necessary to limit the consumption of “bandwidth hogs” in order to protect the network experience for everyone else. Such concepts are simplistic and easy to imagine. They are also completely wrong.

And with that, Klinker stumbled into a public relations and marketing effort defending the company’s culpability for increasing broadband traffic, and proposing a resolution for their ‘part of the problem’:

Since any data traffic that doesn’t induce congestion on a fixed cost network is essentially free; applications can voluntarily play a role in traffic prioritization. And since BitTorrent is a high percentage of global Internet traffic, we have a responsibility to be a part of the solution.

This was the primary motivator around our release of a new protocol a year ago, called µTP. The protocol essentially senses congestion and self-regulates to avoid contributing to Internet traffic jams.

Because µTP can never induce network congestion, it doesn’t contribute to an ISP’s cost. An ISP still has regular network maintenance expenses, but remember, with a fixed-cost network, traffic only becomes an economic burden if it contributes to congestion and forces the need for expansion.

As a result, µTP is exceedingly friendly to ISPs and their business model. µTP is open-source, and we invite application and cloud services providers to work with us directly or in the IETF’s LEDBAT working group in the ongoing innovation and usage.

Klinker

Some providers and their allied interest groups have disputed the diminished impact Klinker cites as a benefit of µTP, but in provider-world, the BitTorrent “problem” is rapidly becoming yesterday’s news anyway — online video is the new boogeyman.  NPD Research just released numbers showing peer-to-peer use has dropped from 16 percent of all U.S. Internet users to 9 percent over the last three years.

After making a spirited sales pitch for what he hopes will represent peer-to-peer 2.0, Klinker surrenders on behalf of everyone else, arguing the solution to America’s ‘broadband crisis’ is speed throttles during peak usage periods, and time of day pricing.  Klinker suggests broadband users might need to plan their “on-demand” viewing well ahead, or face the kind of “congestion pricing” Londoners face if they attempt a journey by car into the city center at high noon.  Klinker suggests Netflix customers should pre-schedule downloads of their movies the night before watching them, or else pay a fee for instant gratification.

That assumes, of course, you know what you want to watch the day before you do, that you can download Netflix content (you cannot), and that you didn’t remember you could accomplish the same thing if Netflix shipped the DVD out to you by U.S. Mail.

Are broadband rationing coupons far behind?

Klinker’s willingness to submit his own company’s peer to peer technology to provider speed throttles is likely to earn him a dressing down by investors wondering what the future holds for a protocol that can be dosed with Xanax at provider will.  Handing over the power to make your file sharing technology painfully slow and frustrating is likely not going to win new converts, either.

Before willing to subject everyone to solutions for broadband providers’ scary predictions of a broadband exaflood, would it not be better to actually obtain verifiable evidence there is a congestion issue in the first place?