Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media The Almighty Buck Your Rights Online Technology

Bell Canada Launches Its Own Online Video Store 106

Posted by Soulskill from the pay-no-attention-to-the-isp-behind-the-curtain dept.
rsax writes "Bell Canada recently announced that it is launching a downloadable video store just as it is caught up in a government inquiry into its traffic-shaping practices. Some consider this a conflict of interest since several content providers were in the process of distributing TV shows using P2P technology before the Bell throttling issue started getting media coverage. Bell's FAQ states that it is not available for Mac users right now (and not Linux either of course) because they are using Windows Media DRM. They do, however, invite feedback on their site."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bell Canada Launches Its Own Online Video Store More

Bell Canada Launches Its Own Online Video Store

Comments Filter:

  • can traffic shaping be proved in court? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by crazybit ( 918023 ) on Thursday May 22, 2008 @11:08PM (#23514214)
    How can we prove a provider is shaping our traffic?

    they will probably allege the slow download is because of net traffic, spam, etc.

    transparent bridges for traffic shaping are very hard to detect

  • Conflict of interest... (Score:5, Funny)

    by TRAyres ( 1294206 ) on Thursday May 22, 2008 @11:09PM (#23514218) Homepage
    And they have a form for feedback? Brace for obvious shit storm...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Geak ( 790376 )
      I took no time whatsoever to submit my comments. Be sure to tell Internet Pat what a wanker he is. I can't remember his last name, but he's the VP of marketing for Sympatico there. He's probably also responsible for those annoying cartoon beavers plastered all over the newspaper ads and television. I wish they would get rid of that ad campaign. Beavers are supposed to be symbolic for hard working Canadians. Nowadays most of their workforce lives in India.

      Sorry, I'm just a little jaded. I used to work

    • And they have a form for feedback? Brace for obvious shit storm...

      Don't worry, their packet sniffers will interpret all these small upstream connections as P2P and reply with forged "Thank you for your feedback" pages.

  • Silly DRM trix are for kids (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Why does everyone insist on using DRM when it clearly doesn't work

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by crazybit ( 918023 )
      I don't understand why people pay for a service that helps a company push it's propietary format in the market.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by Divebus ( 860563 )
        These days, installing Microsoft *anything* is irresponsible. If you're going to use a DRM (all the adopted ones are proprietary), at least push one that works on 99% of the platforms instead of 80%. Put it on iTunes or wind up like all the "Plays For Sure" suckers did. Is there a supportable, platform agnostic DRM available for the movie industry? At least meet them half way so we can do this - then take them down later.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by grm_wnr ( 781219 )

          Put it on iTunes or wind up like all the "Plays For Sure" suckers did. Is there a supportable, platform agnostic DRM available for the movie industry?

          No there isn't, because FOSS OS users don't want DRM to begin with - which is a noble cause but, of course, also prohibits them from playing nice with The Man until the revolution finally comes. Which is most likely a very negligible loss, but you really shouldn't whine about not being able to watch DRM'd movies on Linux, because it's a feature, not a bug.

          • Re:Silly DRM trix are for kids (Score:4, Insightful)

            by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @09:15AM (#23516904)
            The problem with DRM on FOSS is that it's too hard to make it work in the slightest. With Linux you could easily write a video driver and a sound driver that just dumps everything to disk, thereby automatically bypassing the DRM. They could probably do some trickery by ensuring that you are only running specific drivers, but that will only go so far. The open source nature of Linux allows you to do whatever you want with the system. Thereby making DRM impossible. An actual open source library that would decrypt the DRM content would be even worse, because you could just recompile it to drop the decrypted info to the disk. No messing with drivers required.

    • drmbg for the win (Score:5, Informative)

      by thermian ( 1267986 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @12:50AM (#23514572)
      Oh no, this is great. You can remove windows drm with ease, just run drmbg then FairUse4Wm, and the drm is history.
      Why they would use it when its so trivial to reverse is a puzzler to be sure.
  • I mean, what does it take to start our own "free" ISP service as slashdotters in the Canadian chapter? As a customer of Bell, I am sick and tired of the CAD$47.95 I pay to Bell monthly for a 5MB/sec connection which averages about 1.8MBits/sec. I find the rate rather high.

    At first they (Bell) said it was because our Canadian dollar then was way below the US dollar. But even at parity or even greater value than the US currency, I still pay that same amount. What's going on here?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      What's going on here?
      Profit.

    • Re:Let's start our own... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by taylortbb ( 759869 ) * <taylor.byrnes@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Thursday May 22, 2008 @11:41PM (#23514340) Homepage
      Just switch to TekSavvy. They're an ISP that believes in network neutrality, they've even organized a rally on parliament hill for next week. Prices beat Bell too.

      If you want to attend the rally, see http://www.netneutralityrally.ca/ [netneutralityrally.ca] .

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by aleph42 ( 1082389 ) *
        Yes, that's what I think each time I hear about ISP's misconduct.

        But if I remember correctly, Comcast or some other big ISP was enforcing their throttling on smaller ISP's traffic because they were the ones ultimately carrying it; the smaller ISPs were just detailers for the big one.

        Do we have the problem here? Also, is there an equivalent of TekSavvy in the US?
        • TekSavvy does use Bell's last-mile network and as a result has been throttled recently, the CRTC (government is regulator) is investigating and may rule the practice illegal. That's also what has lead TekSavvy to organize the rally for network neutrality.

          As for their US equivalent, you may want to see my above post: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=561862&cid=23514422 [slashdot.org] . Basically they're considering expanding to the US, let them know you want it.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by Phics ( 934282 )
            On top of this, it is possible if you've made Bell-Sympatico's blacklist and have had your service cut off, (bandwidth abusers), you may currently be denied the ability to sign up with a third party provider such as TekSavvy.

            That takes care of the competition.

            See Ottawa Gal's article on the present situation as she has researched it at Bell in this article [p2pnet.net]. It covers portions of the Acceptible Use Policy employed by Bell-Sympatico, including a letter of abuse, and some other outrageous information.
            • If you live in Ottawa, you can go with Rogers. Their rates are comparable to Bell, and I haven't heard any new of them throttling yet.
              • Read the article [p2pnet.net] linked by the parent. It states pretty clearly that Bell is following Rogers in throttling.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Mashiki ( 184564 )
                Rogers throttles aggressively and has caps, I can say this being a rogers customer it stinks, but in many places there is no other game in town. This has also been covered repeatedly on DSLR http://dslreports.com/forum/rogers [dslreports.com] as well, other things they like to do is throttle encrypted traffic, which is really good if you're actually doing legitimate things.
                • I'm a Rogers customer also, and I haven't noticed any throttling. I'm constantly maxing out my connection on torrents.

      • One real recourse against Bell. (Score:5, Informative)

        by guidryp ( 702488 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @06:32AM (#23515672)
        I am with a small DSL player like Teksavvy. These smaller players are great. They offer lower rates and MUCH BETTER customer service. I have no idea why anyone stays with Bell for DSL.

        Teksavvy is in the lead for customer service and standing up to Bell, but it does little good, unless they win, because all DSL sucks now that Bell is throttling the last mile for everyone. (BT runs at about 20kB/s during waking hours, but full bandwidth is there for web and presumably Bells competing services).

        I seriously doubt this throttling on the last mile of the competition is necessary, but once Bell throttled it's own customers (more likely to contain back end internet bandwidth than last mile bandwidth) it was losing them to the competition, so they throttled the competition.

        The particularly heinous parts of this, is that the small DSL player pay $20/month to Bell for the last mile connnection, a last mile monopoly of twisted pair that was largely granted by Canadian citizens.

        Bell is largely attempting to eliminate the competition.Users seemingly have little recourse, but we have one.

        Bell is pervasive, you might not even be able to complain about DSL if they aren't your provider, but Bells pervasiveness is their weakness as well as strength.

        Cancel your DSL and move to Cable. Tell your provider why. This will deny bell revenues and may give small players ammunition in their legal action against Bell. True the Cable side of the duopoly are no angels either but the throttling is no near as restrictive, and it cuts off any revenue to Bell.

        Cancel any Bell long distance plans.

        Cancel you landline and switch to Voip.

        Cancel your Bell ExpressVu Satellite TV.

        Cancel you Bell cell phone (or any provider reseslling the service).

        Basically become Bell free, on every cancellation tell them why.

        I have started the transition. In a month I will be entirely Bell free! I will no longer feel dirty know my money is funding these monopolistic pigs with hideous service.

        • Cable? Are you nuts?!? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by camperdave ( 969942 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @07:44AM (#23515990) Journal
          Cancel your DSL and move to Cable.

          Teksavvy doesn't provide internet over cable. Rogers and Shaw have a tighter grip on their network than Bell has on the phone lines.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by BlueBlade ( 123303 )
          If you're with Teksavvy, here's a little trick to get around the Bell traffic shaping boxes. If you use multilink PPP packets, they will leave your traffic alone, even if you only have one DSL line. In Windows, you can enable MLPPP by simply going into your connection properties, in the Networking tab. Click the Settings button for PPPoE, then check the "Enable multi-link for single link connections". Reconnect and voilà, no more traffic shaping! To do it in linux, simply modify your ppp config file to

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by aclarke ( 307017 )
        This seems like a good space to interject a rant I wrote on the SageTV [sagetv.com] forums a couple weeks ago. This was in response to someone suggesting I use Bell Expressvu satellite since in their opinion Sympatico was a good choice. I hope anybody who's reading this thread and is using Bell Sympatico will seriously consider switching to someone else.

        Oh man, where do I start? Let me start with their latest jewel, of shipping 2wire routers to their customers with a HUGE KNOWN SECURITY VULNERABILITY. And yes, that

    • Re:Let's start our own... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Nuitari The Wiz ( 1123889 ) on Thursday May 22, 2008 @11:48PM (#23514356)
      A good connection to the Internet and a way to connect to your subscribers.

      The reason why so many smaller ISPs are in trouble is that they could not invest in their own DSLAMS as Bell has been quick build new cabinets, which are not required to be unbundled.

      The exchange connects to cabinets which connects to people's houses. However the law only forces the exchanges to be unbundled (what a nice loophole). Also cabinets will reach much fewer people then exchanges.

      On the other hand, a link between a cabinet and an exchange can be fiber, while between the cabinet and the customers can still be copper, reducing the reliance on copper.

      Unfortunately, fiber can't carry a DSL signal.

      Also here in Montreal, the only viable broadband alternative is Videotron (owned by Quebecor) which is the only major Canadian ISP not to fight requests for subscriber's information.

      Videotron even stated publicly that they would comply with any request for subscriber info.

      You could also ditch Bell and go with a different ISP, at least with that Bell would get less money from you.

      I've already canceled 1 phone line and 1 adsl service with a different ISP. Once my Bell ExpressVu contract runs out, that too will go.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Sentry21 ( 8183 )
        You should check out Colba-Net [colba.net]. They're a small, private ISP, and they've been moving their customers slowly from Bell's infrastructure over to their own. This means if you're in the area they've upgraded, you not only get ADSL2+ speeds, but also avoid Bell's P2P capping as well.

        Check them out. A friend used to work for them and did all their installations, so I know a little about their upgrade, but as with anything, it really depends on where on the island you are.

        Couldn't hurt to call.
        • I called them, unfortunately ADSL2+ is only available in certain regions between highways 40 and 20.

          The rest of the ADSL is dependant on Bell, and they "Cannot guarantee any download speed anymore"

          As I'm actually in Laval...

  • FAIL (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Great, another DRM service doomed to fail.
    One thing that Bell doesnt understand is that nearly all of its subscribers know how to get non drmed content for free... and those are the ones that havnt left bell due to the bandwidth cap for a 3rd party reseller with an unlimited cap still.

  • According to their FAQ Apple doesn't support the right kind of DRM, so they have no option re platform. They ask for "ideas on how we can get MAC and PC to play nice together."

    Here's one, Bell - strip the DRM and present the video using an open standard. Content provider doesn't like it? Well, as a big distribution channel, you might just have a bit of leverage with them to, you know, SERVE YOUR CUSTOMERS BETTER.

    • Re:Bell "Support" for Mac (Score:4, Insightful)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Thursday May 22, 2008 @11:59PM (#23514410)

      Here's one, Bell - strip the DRM and present the video using an open standard. Content provider doesn't like it? Well, as a big distribution channel, you might just have a bit of leverage with them to, you know, SERVE YOUR CUSTOMERS BETTER.

      The content providers ARE their customers where this service is concerned, we the consuming audience are the product BEll Canada they are selling to the provider. ;)
  • Dear Bell People:

    It seems that you are not so competent at providing the one service you have been given a virtual monopoly to provide so how do you think you ould be able to compete with other firms offering the same downloadable content like I dont know iTunes, Netflix (maybe not in canada as yet), CBC etc.

    Regards,
    Someone who would never use Bell

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by wildem ( 1267822 )
      Same here. I would never use Bell and would advise everyone I know against it as well. Their traffic shaping and throttling practices skew theplaying field in their favour and punish consumers of other ISPs who use Bell's lines for the ' last mile ' .

      Teksavvy all the way.

  • Group hug? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by nightglider28 ( 1243916 )
    "We're hoping that one day Microsoft, Apple, the content owners and video sites like ours will have a big group hug and we can all share content. Until that day comes, all video content is delivered to you wrapped with Digital Rights Management (DRM). ... Bell Video Store is required by the content owners to put DRM on every video."

    Wouldn't it make more sense for all *content delivery services* to have a group hug refusing to deliver content with DRM?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Rockoon ( 1252108 )

      Wouldn't it make more sense for all *content delivery services* to have a group hug refusing to deliver content with DRM?

      ..and then file for bankruptcy?

      The point of their business is to deliver content. The video streaming industry isnt anywhere big enough for them to have any leverage at all on the content owners. If there were big profits for the content owners here, they would simply set up their own services (and still use DRM.)

      Only ITunes has gotten away with using leverage on the content owners, but only because of their massive existing user base willing to throw money at them.

  • It's clear why they shape P2P traffic: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Fluffeh ( 1273756 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @12:32AM (#23514504)
    To make more bandwidth for their customers to download movies off their site.

    *collective duuuuuuuhhhhh*
  • Bell's FAQ states that it is not available for Mac users right now (and not Linux either of course) because they are using Windows Media DRM. They do, however, invite feedback on their site."

    The thousand nerds of the Slashdot Empire will descend on you! Their flames will blot out the internet!

  • Two issues with Bell Canada (Score:3, Interesting)

    by suck_burners_rice ( 1258684 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @12:40AM (#23514530)
    I see a two issues with Bell Canada. First, this so-called Traffic Shaping is really a way to artificially screw up what would otherwise be a nicely working system. Who are they to dictate what traffic gets priority? Secondly, on the issue of using DRM, I think Steve Jobs put it nicely in his open paper about DRM-less music being sold on iTunes. Turns out that all this hoopla about piracy that caused the invention of DRM is over-exaggerated and some big businesses are agreeing with him. After all, if piracy were as large a problem as many would like us to believe, then how come iTunes is making Apple boatloads of money? I think Bell Canada would be wise to stop the traffic shaping and do something to support Linux and Mac. Otherwise they are really limiting themselves to that portion of the market that doesn't care about P2P and doesn't use Macs or Linux. Just my two cents on the whole matter.
  • I'm taking bets on how long it'll take them before they consider p2p distribution after they use a million gigabytes of bandwidth and it costs them a lot of whatever money they use in Canada...dollars still I think. So yeah, large file download services are kinda expensive which is why MMO patches and Linux images are p2p. *gasp* they use p2p legitamately? Witches! Burn them!
    • Oookay, you sure that's your definitive answer? Just asking, 'cause it's a pretty dumb one.
      Their service will obviously running on their servers which will obviously be located in their network. They won't send themselves a bandwidth bill for that since, well, suing themselves for not paying would be pretty dumb and you don't send invoices if you're not going to collect, eh?
      Now there may be some costs for the actual servers, but we're talking the easiest kind of data to distribute here -- predictable, lin

      • at the expense of massively worse service quality
        how do you figure that?
        • How often has a BitTorrent download that did not mostly originate from dedicated seeds on server-grade connections max out most of your bandwidth for 95% of the time it took to be downloaded?
          Linear protocols like http or ftp are perfectly suited for streaming because they obtain the content the way you want to consume it: Starting at point x, progressing towards the end.
          P2P protocols are, by their very nature, based in small blocks so lots of slow peers can replicate sets of files quickly amongst each ot
          • a neat idea would be a streaming hybrid model for this. vaguely like the blizzard torrent system, but prioritized by the time in the stream.

            basically, start streaming from server, then download other pieces from peers, with nearer pieces having higher priority. if an adequately fast peer with a needed-right-now piece cannot be found, it would be downloaded from the server.

            obviously, BT is not the appropriate protocol for this, but creating such a system would be an interesting idea.
      • hey troll, do you think the network comes from the magic network pixie? They rent out their lines to ISPs and they sure as hell don't upgrade the infrastructure much for more capacity when it gets busy. So they're always right on the edge of network meltdown because it's not cost effective to upgrade your entire network to handle 2x what it really needs to. So add in a video service and they have no choice but to upgrade it and that's gonna cost them more in burying lines and replacing network equipment
        • Okay, trying again. Three possibilities and their effect on the telco central and more remote (i.e. from core to last mile and client) networks and (the expensive part) transit bandwidth:
          A: Streaming servers near the central network, exclusively server-to-client traffic. Some network strain at the edge of the centre, little processing power required in both servers and routing equipment due to single, predictable streams. Little last-mile strain, single, easy-to-shape stream. Little to no upstream usage fr
        • Also, responding to both of your initial examples (Linux ISOs, MMO (I'm guessing WoW, right?) patches): Both publishers you speak of are just that, publishers. They pay a lot for any kind of useful transit bandwidth to their clients and want/need to minimize that. Every byte of data handled in P2P fashion is a byte that doesn't use up their expensive bandwidth.
          ISPs have to support the whole network from the server on which the content lies down to the customers. Spreading downloads to a P2P model doesn't l
        • You must live in the USA. Canada has a much more robust backbone-bandwidth-per-user ratio. For areas who have broadband, the limiting factor is usually software controlled more than infrastructure restricted. The lines are already all buried (thanks to government subsidies) and network equipment went through a major overhaul for most of the carriers a few years back. We aren't talking private US company competition here: Bell was a crown telco in Ontario for decades. Now that they have the infrastructu

  • A Future Dismal Failure... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by His Shadow ( 689816 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @12:41AM (#23514536) Homepage Journal
    75% percent of the portable media player market is Apple's iPod. 75%. Any online store that prevents their target demographic from transferring their videos and music to the overwhelming media player of choice is choosing failure as a business plan. Bell has chosen failure. Microsoft's business plans are not in the best interest's of consumers or even business partners. Surely the latest MSN license server fiasco and the Play For Sure Zune betrayal are painfully evident lessons in who not to partner with when setting up a media distribution shop.
    • You're also ignoring mobile phones. The latest generation has a decent sized screen and enough CPU power to play back videos. Since mobile phones are outselling PCs around 3:1 at the moment (worldwide, may vary in Canada) and Microsoft only owns around 5% of this market. If you use MS DRM then you are basically not counting any mobile devices in your business plan.

  • They only carry 2 movies though, (Score:5, Funny)

    by hyperz69 ( 1226464 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @01:07AM (#23514612)
    Strange Brew and Canadian Bacon.
  • When I attempt to go to their FAQ to verify the article, all I get is a series of "Unknown Browser Type" popups.

    I find myself unsurprised.

  • this can't be legal? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by v1 ( 525388 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @06:29AM (#23515658) Homepage Journal
    Let me see if I understand this right... they're getting ready to open up their own video store, at the same time they are starting to deliberately degrade the performance of other content providers their customers are using which are using P2P to distribute?

    That's gotta be covered under some anticompetitive law somewhere? "We're going to start selling you a product, while at the same time sabotaging our competition's product, to make sure you buy ours instead."

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by howman ( 170527 )
      This surprises you? Try thinking a couple years into the future by looking back a bit. 5 yrs ago, how large was the average image size (kb) you sent by e-mail to a friend? Now look at the same image size (mb) today...

      So, multiply that by x number of frames for a movie (not accounting for compression) and think what happens in 5 yrs when you want to watch TV over the internet because that is the only way to get the selection/services/features you want or are accustomed to...

      Right... I ask again, what p

  • And the puzzle is solved... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 23, 2008 @06:32AM (#23515680)
    It all makes sense now. Bell Canada is the Company that orchestrated Salem-style witch hunts against mom & pop brick & mortar satellite TV shops prior to launching their ExpressVu service. Even before they managed to lobby a dictatorship-style law forbidding foreign satellite service, they were orchestrating raids against their future competitors. The bandwidth throttling is just a modern day version of their Monopoly status abuse.

  • Two different definitions of net neutrality (Score:3, Insightful)

    by billtom ( 126004 ) on Friday May 23, 2008 @09:13AM (#23516880)
    This raises something that I've been thinking about for a while. There are two different kinds of network manipulation that ISPs can do and I think that it is important to make a distinction between them. They are:

    1) Filtering/modifying/shaping traffic based on type (protocol), but not looking at source or destination. For example, giving streaming video priority over email.

    2) Filtering/etc traffic based on source and/or destination. For example, giving streaming video from BellVideoLand priority over video from Youtube.

    I think that ISPs can possibly make a case justifying the first type, based on protocol, on the basis of network management.

    But the second, based on source, is just evil.

    I think that we need to be careful to not lump both of these types under the single crusade of "net neutrality". I think that the term net neutrality should be reserved for source based filtering.

  • No feed back limit? (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The feedback page is sending two emails each time you send a feedback. The feedback system doesnt have any limit (like cookie or anything else). Anyone got some time to write a bot to crash an ISP? :D
  • This has far more implications than just Bell Canada. ISPs used to be a dime a dozen. There were always the big ones but there was always other smaller ones around and were at least profitable. Now the biggest ISPs are (trying) to crush everyting in thier path. Why? Many offer satellite TV, cable TV, own video stores (aka Rogers), hold a miscellany of TV shows/assets, and moreso in the States own or are deeply connected through parent companies to Movie Studios and Record Labels.

    Of course they want to shape

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close