Home » Ontario » Recent Articles:

Another Ridiculous Online Surveillance Bill; ‘If You’re Against It, You’re Pro-Child Porn’

Openmedia.ca's campaign against increased government surveillance

Two weeks ago, Ontario Provincial Police arrested at least 60 people in connection with one of the largest child pornography rings ever seen in the country.

Under current Canadian law, authorities obtained warrants to identify names associated with the IP addresses police say were engaged in the trade of lurid sexual imagery of minors, as well as recruiting potential new victims in online chat rooms and social networks.

Provincial police were able to identify at least five dozen suspects within the province and successfully staged a coordinated raid in Windsor, London, Toronto, Barrie, Niagara, Sudbury and Ottawa, charging them with more than 200 criminal offenses.

But some lawmakers believe existing privacy laws are inadequate and hamper police investigations, and plan to allow authorities new latitude in chasing down online crime.

An “Act to enact the Investigating and Preventing Criminal Electronic Communications Act and to amend the Criminal Code and other acts” is scheduled to be introduced in Parliament later today, and some of its supporters are attacking online privacy advocates of being “pro-child porn” if they oppose the measure.

“He can either stand with us or with the child pornographers,” Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said to one government critic of the new privacy bill.

The proposed legislation is nothing new — similar bills have come and gone through Ottawa for a few years now. Most seek to demolish the pesky and inconvenient process of obtaining a warrant to compel service providers to hand over personal information about those police are investigating. If the new legislation passes, providers will be able to track every call you make and every website you visit:

  • Require ISPs to provide, on request, your name, IP address(es), device identification numbers that allow authorities to track your cell phone and/or modem, and all contact information including unlisted phone numbers;
  • Require manufacturers and Internet providers to install “back door” access, allowing on-demand surveillance without a warrant;
  • Allow authorities limitless access to archived data including e-mail and other communications logs providers store;
  • Compel other parties to preserve and produce electronic evidence, such as received e-mail, online order histories and other financial transactions.

Together, these new police powers would allow the government to engage in real-time surveillance of your phone calls and online activity without any court supervision or oversight. If it turns out you were unlucky enough to secure an IP address that was formerly used by a subject of an investigation, authorities could begin digging into your background and potentially charge you with an unrelated crime if they happen to find something not part of their original investigation.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CBC Online surveillance critics accused of supporting child porn 2-13-12.flv[/flv]

CBC News outlines Canada’s latest effort to broaden online surveillance powers and the ensuing controversy. (2 minutes)

Online privacy advocates call the new legislation chilling, and are unpersuaded by supporters who think the process of obtaining a court-issued warrant is too burdensome and time consuming.

When pressed by the media, law enforcement officials have yet to identify a single criminal investigation hampered or delayed by current privacy laws, which require police to obtain sufficient evidence to convince a judge an invasion of privacy is warranted to pursue a criminal investigation. With this new legislation, authorities could launch endless “fishing expeditions” of those they suspect might be involved in a crime, but lack evidence to pursue. Even more concerning is that national security agencies could monitor political opponents, protest organizations, and other groups deemed threatening by the current government.

Proponents say such abuses are unthinkable and the bill is no more threatening than issuing an IP “phone book” for authorities, showing who is using what IP address. But Michael Geist details the legislation is much more than its backers would have you believe.

Without any proof current law is insufficient to handle criminal cases like the one noted above, it is prudent to reject this bill and avoid handing the government unchecked new powers of surveillance. That some in government are willing to play the ‘you are with us or with the child predator’-card as part of reasoned debate is as reprehensible as those in Washington who accused opponents of broad new surveillance powers after 9/11 as being “with the terrorists.”

For more information and to sign a petition opposing the measure, visit Openmedia.ca’s Stop Online Spying website.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Stop Online Spying.flv[/flv]

Openmedia.ca’s campaign against online spying includes three professionally-produced ads that put the bill in terms even technically-unaware Canadians will understand. (2 minutes)

Usage-Based Billing Nightmare: $689 In Overlimit Fees Shocks Ontario Cogeco Customer

Phillip Dampier January 31, 2012 Canada, Cogeco, Consumer News, Data Caps, Editorial & Site News, Public Policy & Gov't Comments Off on Usage-Based Billing Nightmare: $689 In Overlimit Fees Shocks Ontario Cogeco Customer

A Burlington, Ontario customer of Cogeco Cable, convinced by the company to upgrade his broadband service to a usage plan with a higher allowance, has been billed nearly $700 in broadband usage overlimit fees in a single month after the company quietly removed the cap on overlimit fees associated with the plan.

The customer first learned about the change in Cogeco’s usage-based billing policies when the company’s “auto pay” billing service deducted nearly $900 from his checking account to pay his cable bill, he told Broadband Reports.

Further charges and late fees have now racked up to almost $1,200 and so far Cogeco has only been willing to provide its customer with a $50 “courtesy credit.”

Cogeco claims it notified customers last fall it was removing the maximum overlimit penalty cap from two of its broadband plans, including the one the Burlington customer was persuaded to choose by a company representative.  Prior to October, The Ultimate 30 plan, designed for so-called “heavy users,” included a 125GB usage allowance with an overlimit fee of $1/GB, capped at a maximum of $50.

Canadian broadband users likely to exceed a broadband usage allowance typically upgrade to a service plan with a higher allowance or factor the capped, fixed overlimit fee into their assumed monthly cost for service.  But when providers like Cogeco quietly increase the maximum overlimit fee, or remove it altogether, usage-based billing shock often follows.

The customer claims he never received any change of terms notification until the first bill with unlimited overcharges arrived, and Cogeco admits it cannot assert every customer received the notification much less absorbed its meaning.  According to the Burlington man, Cogeco told him customers often don’t read the letters or throw them out, unopened, assuming it is advertising.

Even if Cogeco did send a letter, the man believes the company has gone out of its way to avoid prominently alerting customers about the possibility of explosive increases in broadband usage expenses.  Instead, they have framed the changes as an “enhancement” that will “help you get more from the Internet.”

When bill shock becomes an enhancement -- An informational message included on a recent Cogeco billing statement.

Cogeco customers upset about the change say it is easy for people to miss the implications buried in a rate chart that the maximum overlimit penalty has been removed.

“A Cogeco salesperson called me to change my service based on my usage,” said the Burlington man. “[The Ultimate 30 Plan] would cost me less money and in return I would receive faster internet and an increased data transfer capacity.”

Now the customer also gets hundreds of dollars in overlimit fees, too.  Even worse, the man complains, he was never given an opportunity to adjust his usage or service plan to avoid the enormous bills he has since received.

“I would have stepped down to the Turbo 20 package that has a maximum of $50 for usage or the Business Ultimate 50 package which [has] unlimited data transfer,” the man complains. “Either option would have saved me hundreds of dollars.”

The cable bill in your future?

Cogeco’s unwillingness to forgive overlimit usage charges seems strange to the Burlington man because several other Cogeco plans retain a fixed limit on overlimit fees.  Other Cogeco customers have begun to question the company’s logic in usage billing more generally, because hundreds of gigabytes consumed on a slightly slower usage plan would result in a bill a fraction of the cost the Burlington man now faces.

“Why does Cogeco’s bandwidth cost a ridiculous $1 per gigabyte on one plan, and considerably less on others with capped overlimit fees,” asks Stop the Cap! reader Jeff, another Cogeco customer who shared the story. “It’s a usage shell game and it’s all about the money because they won’t give a decade-long customer a break on fees they would never have charged many of their other customers.  The bandwidth costs to Cogeco are the same no matter what plan you are on.”

Jeff wonders whether customer goodwill matters anymore at telecommunications companies.

“They’d rather harass this man for hundreds in phantom ‘costs’ and destroy their reputation in the process.”

The customer says he can’t even be sure the bill is correct.

“Internet usage based billing is flawed,” he says.

He points out the methodology and devices that determine the bandwidth are not certified or regulated by Measurement Canada. There is no recourse for customers to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the bandwidth measurements. Cogeco customers must rely on an ‘Internet Usage’ meter Cogeco has on the website. The meter is not always up to date and has frequent outages, customers report.

Against this backdrop, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunication Commission new rules governing the practice of usage-based billing are set to take effect tomorrow, Feb. 1st.

“We are moving ahead with the implementation as planned to ensure that independent ISPs will continue to offer competitive and innovative services to Canadians,” said Leonard Katz, the CRTC’s acting chairman and vice-chairman of Telecommunications. “Some temporary adjustments have been made to ensure a smooth transition to the new billing regime and to ensure consumers are not inconvenienced.”

As an interim measure, independent ISPs who are customers of the Bell companies will have the flexibility to either merge their business and residential Internet traffic, or keep them separate.

In November 2011, the CRTC established how large telephone and cable companies should charge independent ISPs for the use of their networks.

In turn, cable and telephone company Internet Service Providers can continue to use usage-based billing practices similar to what Cogeco uses, or switch to a combination of flat-rate and usage-based billing.  But with the revenue potential Cogeco has illustrated it can earn from UBB, few large providers are anticipated to sell residential customers flat use plans.

“Caveat emptor,” says our reader Jeff.

New BlackBerry Chief Promises “No Drastic Changes” — Exactly What Investors Don’t Want to Hear

Phillip Dampier January 23, 2012 Competition, Consumer News, Video, Wireless Broadband 1 Comment

Research in Motion headquarters in Ontario

The two co-executives of Waterloo, Ont.-based Research in Motion, maker of the formerly-popular BlackBerry, quietly resigned this weekend, turning over leadership of the faltering company to a new chief executive who suggested little needed to change at what used to be Canada’s most valuable company.

Thorsten Heins will replace co-CEOs Jim Balsillie and Mike Lazaridis effective immediately in what analysts are calling a last-ditch effort to rescue a company that has lost at least 88 percent of its peak value and has a share in the cell phone market now below 10 percent.

Heins’ initial comments, intended to calm investors about the company’s precarious position, have instead caused share prices to tumble further out of fear the new CEO remains in denial about the serious state of RIM’s future.

Heins told reporters that no “drastic change” was needed at the company, even though consumers are increasingly abandoning BlackBerry products in favor of Android or Apple iPhone smartphones.  RIM’s tablet, the PlayBook, never got far off the ground and is now regularly being cleared off store shelves at deeply discounted prices.

“If Thorsten really believes that there are no changes to be made, he will be gone within 15 to 18 months. He will be a transitional CEO and this will be a transitional board,” Jaguar CEO Vic Alboini, who leads an informal group of 16 RIM shareholders calling for a radical restructuring told Reuters.

Heins

Corporate users who formerly appreciated the BlackBerry’s secure platform and business-oriented apps are increasingly allowing employees to adopt competing phones because of recent BlackBerry service outages, fewer BlackBerry-compatible apps, and what some have called “endless” software upgrade delays.

Some analysts have dismissed RIM’s former leadership structure for months as “rudderless,” existing in an environment where cut-throat competition between Google’s Android operating system and Apple’s wildly popular iPhone and iPad are reducing BlackBerry’s place in the North American market to an afterthought.

“RIM had its era, but now it seems very hard to gain back market share in the smartphone market even if the top managers are changed,” Mitsushige Akino of Tokyo-based Ichiyoshi Investment Management told Bloomberg News. “The iPhone and Android are well established in the market.”

RIM acknowledged its market share in North America, particularly among younger consumers, has faltered in recent years, but noted BlackBerry products remain popular in certain European, African, and Middle Eastern countries, with growth also seen in Latin America and parts of Asia.

But perceptions of a company past its prime continued last year with the introduction of RIM’s PlayBook tablet, which was criticized for bringing nothing innovative or new to the tablet marketplace.  Even worse, RIM took a drubbing for releasing the tablet without any e-mail application, an ironic lapse for a company that touted it was “the first to reliably deliver e-mail over airwaves” in the 1990s with its BlackBerry devices.

The BlackBerry Playbook

Several serious service outages, some lasting for days, also had a major impact.  RIM’s next major software overhaul, dubbed BB10, has been long-delayed and will not be released until the latter half of 2012 — perhaps too late for the company to regain its footing.

Still, Heins suggests he is prepared to rejuvenate the company’s products with updates to the PlayBook and a new generation of BlackBerry devices.  The company’s better market share overseas may buy some additional time, but analysts warn RIM will fail to attract much attention in the U.S. or Canada if its products do not deliver something better than current generation Android and Apple phones and tablets.

As consumers invest in a growing number of platform-specific apps, a switch to a competing device becomes correspondingly more difficult.  Corporate users also will not tolerate many more major service outages, especially those that extend for days, not minutes or hours.

“There is yet another ace up RIM’s sleeve — the rate plans of North American wireless companies,” said one optimistic RIM shareholder. “BlackBerry devices are not known for consuming a lot of data, so RIM could market their devices to budget-minded consumers that might not be able afford the latest iPhone or Android phone and a high volume data plan to accompany it.”

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CTV Execs Out at RIM 1-22-12.flv[/flv]

Canada’s news networks treat coverage of Research in Motion on about the same level American news media treats Apple, Google or Microsoft.  RIM remains an important contributor to Canada’s economy, so this weekend’s developments got considerable attention from the media.  CTV National News led with the ouster of the two founding co-CEOs of Research in Motion. Here is how CTV viewers saw the news unfold.  (3 minutes)

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CBC RIM Resets 1-23-12.flv[/flv]

RIM Resets: CBC introduces its coverage with a round-up of this weekend’s developments, noting a management shakeup could have profound implications on the Ontario company.  (4 minutes)

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CBC News Now Interview with Heins 1-23-12.flv[/flv]

 CBC’s News Now talks with Research in Motion’s new CEO Thorsten Heins about his plans for a revamped BlackBerry and the long-term future for the company.  (8 minutes)

Rogers Hiking Prices on Broadband by $2/Month; Blames Service “Enhancements”

Phillip Dampier January 16, 2012 Canada, Competition, Data Caps, Rogers 1 Comment

Citing “the many enhancements they have launched” in the past year, Rogers Cable has announced an across-the-board broadband rate increase that will cost subscribers an additional $2 a month for Internet service effective March 1, 2012.

Rogers claims the rate increases come as a result of investments in their broadband network and the introduction of SpeedBoost, which delivers a temporary speed increase during the first few seconds of file transfers.

Rogers also claims they have increased monthly usage allowances and download speeds on many of the company’s broadband packages.

The rate increase is not going over well with subscribers, however.

Stop the Cap! reader Nick in Markham, Ontario is one of them.

"No additional charge," except for the $2 rate increase Rogers suggests comes after the addition of "service enhancements" like SpeedBoost.

“Rogers introduced ‘SpeedBoost’ as a ‘free’ feature which we are now apparently/effectively going to pay more for,” Nick writes. “I am really unimpressed with Rogers’ ‘generosity,’ especially respecting bitcaps, considering they are totally arbitrary.”

Nick notes customers in Quebec and western Canada have more generous usage allowances, and often lower bills.

“Shaw customers are getting a much better deal than Rogers’ customers these days,” Nick says. “If Rogers increased prices by $2 and took the caps completely off, I’d gladly pay a little more just to end years of headaches over watching my Internet usage.”

“I am so tired of feeling like my Internet connection is being rationed, and considering my choices have been Bell or Rogers, I think I’ll sacrifice some of the higher speeds and just consider switching to TekSavvy DSL, because it costs less and doesn’t come with Rogers’ stingy caps.”

A Montreal Gazette piece on the Canadian telecommunications industry says stockholders and company executives are doing much better, enjoying major boosts in telecom industry dividends.  The industry enjoyed a 25% boost in stock price + dividend yield over other Canadian stocks over the past 12 months.  The industry also enjoys the benefits a barely-competitive marketplace that offers opportunities for unfettered rate increases:

Canada remains a heavily protected market in telecommunications, which is one reason why consumers don’t get the kind of deals available in other countries.

But in the absence of such [competitive] changes, there’s a strong case to be made that telecom and cable companies will post solid profit growth this year and next.

Bell’s Limbo Dance — Company Lowers Usage Caps, Raises Max Overlimit Fee to $80

Phillip Dampier January 3, 2012 Bell (Canada), Canada, Data Caps, Editorial & Site News 9 Comments

Usage caps low enough to set your hair on fire.

Bell customers across Ontario and Quebec are noticing the limbo dance is back in vogue as Bell Canada lowers the bar on usage caps for its Fibe fiber to the neighborhood service and boosts the maximum overlimit fee to $80.

Late last week, Bell’s website published the new, lower usage caps for broadband customers:

  • Fibe 10 — 75GB 60GB (per month) (Quebec)
  • Fibe 12 — 50GB 40GB
  • Fibe 16 — 75GB 65GB (Ontario) 90GB 80GB (Quebec)
  • Fibe 25 — 125GB 100GB (Ontario) 100GB 90GB (Quebec)

Users who exceed the new usage allowances face an overlimit fee of $1/GB — maximum $80 a month (up $20 effective Jan. 1, 2012).

New customers enjoy aggressively discounted introductory offers, but with usage allowances in decline, customers are being conditioned to use less or pay more.  It is the classic one-two punch of Internet Overcharging:

  1. Gradually reduce usage allowances exposing customers to overlimit fees;
  2. Increase the maximum penalty rate for exceeding the limit.

“I am watching my bill to see if they attempt to impose the new limits on existing customers,” shares Stop the Cap! reader François who lives in Toronto. “You pay Bell more for less and even as a new customer you might first pay less and also get less.  The ‘pay more’ comes after the first year.”

Want to use more?  You will have to buy Bell’s Usage Insurance in advance:

  • $5/month for an extra 40GB
  • $10/month for an extra 80GB
  • $15/month for an extra 120GB

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!