CTRC Orders Big ISPs To Provide Matching Speeds For Resellers

Meshach writes "In Canada there has been a regulatory decision rendered by the CRTC ordering ISPs to provide the same speed to resellers as they do for their own customers. 'Smaller internet providers such as Teksavvy and Execulink had argued that without requirements to offer matching speeds, the big companies would put them out of business. Bell and Telus are selling internet connections of up to 25 and 15 megabits per second respectively over newer fibre-based networks, but smaller providers can typically offer speeds of no more than five megabits per second over older copper-based infrastructure. After holding a public hearing earlier this year, the CRTC now says it will allow phone companies to charge smaller providers an extra 10-per-cent mark-up to use their newer infrastructure in order to recoup the costs of their investments. The regulator also said it would require cable companies to modify their existing internet access services to make it easier for smaller, "alternative" providers to connect to them.'"

Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

The CRTC did something reasonable for a change! Woo!

That's a step in the right direction, however the lines are still owned by the monopolies, and they still set the base prices.

About Canada

[EmperorOfCanada]

For those foreign readers one must realize that in Canada we have very little competition in that the competitors don't really try and compete. I doubt they conspire but they just like things as they are. With each other cut throat is just not in their nature. But for newcomers cut throat does not even begin to describe the environment. The cards have been traditionally stacked against anyone new. If a newcomer does somehow make it then they are usually bought out by one of the monsters.
But there has been a sea change. The CRTC(our FCC) that seems to have supported this anti consumer situation is no longer friends with the government and thus the big players have lost their biggest weapon to stop annoying things like pro-consumer companies. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Interestingly enough this is not part of an anti-big-business campaign like the Democrats in the US but a pro level playing fields campaign.
If the government continues on this path we might have a chance to have one of the greatest internet systems at low cost that is found on earth. As a heavy user of this sort of technology I can't wait.

Still limited, just quicker

[Anonymous Coward]

This is separate from the 60GB UBB cap. So now you can run into a wall faster.

Re:About Canada

[skids]

We've seen this movie already down here in the U.S. The government steps in to break the stranglehold on the market, forcing the private owners of the infrastructure (ILEC), after much biting and screaming to sell to competitors. Then the small competitors (CLECs) come in. The ones that try to play fair get kneecapped by the ILECs mercilessly. The other ones are ravenous bastards who do things like telling customers to order service from the ILEC (so that they, under common carriage, have to build out any equipment needed to provide the service) and then cancel it. That way the ILEC pays for the equipment, doesn't make their money back on it before it is cancelled, and the CLEC comes in there undercutting the ILEC and the ILEC is forced to let the CLEC use the equipment below cost.

Every party ends up hating each other's guts, and the customers lose in the end.

Sometimes I amuse myself by imagining what it would be like if we ran our highway system like that.

It would make much more sense for the government to buy the infrastructure, maintain it as a break-even venture using private contractors, and provide a fair deal to providers who can distinguish themselves in ways other than "Don't like my prices, I'll just take my ball and go home!" Of course, then the legislative charter would have to be carefully set up to prevent it's use as a giant patronage job bank for do-nothing political allies.

Re:WTF copper lines?

[Dynedain]

The problem isn't copper vs. fiber. The problem is that the large telcos who own the backbones and built the networks with government funding/subsidies were forced to open up the copper networks to other smaller players on a reseller basis. Now that fiber to the home is being rolled out, they are not obligated (until now) to grant access to the fiber networks.

The small companies don't own the physical wires and so by not letting them access the next generation infrastructure rollout, the monopolistic big companies can effectively force them out of the market.

Re:WTF copper lines?

[Psaakyrn]

Yes, but that's a separate problem which "matching speeds" or "network neutrality" doesn't solve. That's a problem with "monopoly", plain and simple.