Canadian ISPs Fight Back, Again 200
jenningsthecat writes "With the recent CRTC decision giving Canadian telcos such as Bell and Telus the legal right to deny third-party ISPs access to their infrastructure, smaller Canadian Internet providers are again fighting for their lives, and are asking their customers for help. The ISPs are seeking public support, asking people to go to competitivebroadband.com to send either a form letter or a personalized message to the Industry Minister, the Prime Minister, the Opposition Leader, and optionally the respondent's local Minister of Parliament. If the CRTC's decision is not overturned, approximately 30 ISPs will likely be forced out of business. Competition in the ADSL market will be totally eliminated, and Canadians will have only two choices for wired Internet access: the local Cableco or the local Telco. Given that Canadian taxpayers have heavily subsidized the telcos in multiple ways for several decades, this decision to hand over exclusive control of the keys to the cookie jar hardly seems fair."
Bigger picture! (Score:4, Informative)
Living in Canada and working in Telecommunications a bit (and my father still does) you begin to learn a few things about these two big companies. Where I live there are 2 basic Internet Service Providers, Shaw (cable) and Telus (Telecommunications).
Telus, being the Telecommunications company - actually OWNS most of the physical infrastructure, or the wiring, that runs across the city. Shaw basically sets up a deal (not sure of the terms) so that they can provide internet access THROUGH telus' wiring. You can try both service providers, but essentially you have two choices: Regular speed with random faults of downtime (telus) or something slightly slower but pretty reliable.
The big wigs of these companies are by no means in competition, with the way they charge rates, make deals to use each others services*, I wouldn't be surprised if they both play Golf together, all the while discussing "How can we make an extra few Million this year. A little for me, a little for you..."
*(for example, 411 directory service from ALOT of providers that aren't Telus is done by Telus Employees)
Re:Bigger picture! (Score:4, Informative)
FYI, while they "own" the infrastructure, they didn't pay for it. Your tax dollars did.
And they use up BILLIONS of dollars per year worth of free right-of-way that only they have access to.
No, it's a monopoly. (Score:3, Informative)
Your logic only works in a competitive marketplace.
The wires to the home/business are owned by a monopoly. It would be a rare case indeed where putting new wires to a customer makes sense. Most of the time (in the US, anyhow) it's not legally possible to do so.
If these ISPs go away, there will never (outside of wireless) be any alternative to the Telco or the Cable company. Ever.
Re:Slashdots slashdots great articles like this (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Then why do Telcos "own" the networks? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Bigger picture! (Score:4, Informative)
Where does the cable start going through the phone?
As soon as it hits a Shaw building and needs to go somewhere else.
Re:Dear Canada, welcome to our world! (Score:4, Informative)
TekSavvy [teksavvy.com] (the best DSL provider I've ever worked with, Google for reviews, you'll understand) is still around, but this decision will probably kill them. It's a real shame.
Re:Letting it die? (Score:5, Informative)
But they do. Check out the reviews of TekSavvy on DSLreports [dslreports.com]. Vastly superior service to Bell that can't exist without government defended peering agreements.
Disclaimer: I am not employed, contracted, or a family member of anyone connected to TekSavvy.
Re:Articles like this make Slashdot great. (Score:3, Informative)
Right now the competition is better. The rate that Bell (Qwest in your example) can charge the competition is regulated by the CRTC to costs + 15% profit margin. This whole article is about the CRTC removing that regulation, creating a situation like you have with Qwest where the independent ISPs will cost significantly more.