Days after New Zealand dropped its support for the "three strikes and you're out" approach (also known as "graduated response") that would see ISPs terminate subscribers on the basis of three unproven allegations of copyright infringement, the European Parliament has similarly rejected the proposed approach. Le Quadrature du Net reports […]
Post Tagged with: "internet service providers"
NDP MP Charlie Angus introduced his private member's net neutrality bill in the House of Commons this afternoon. The short bill seeks to add transparency, neutral network management, and open devices to the Canadian telecom law framework: Network operators shall not engage in network management practices that favour, degrade or […]
Last month I wrote about the pressure to adopt "graduated response," a policy that is better described as "three strikes and you're out" for ISP subscribers. While Canada has yet to take a public position on the issue, a new French document cites Canada as an example of a country […]
CAIP has submitted its response [update – now online] to the Bell throttling submission and it does not pull any punches:
It is also clear from Bell's Answer that it fundamentally misunderstands (or has consciously misrepresented) several key facts and issues that are of direct relevance to the issues under consideration in this proceeding, including, most significantly, the nature of the local access and transport service that Bell provides to its wholesale customers, the extent to which its DPI "traffic shaping" technology interferes with both the content and privacy of end-user communications, and the tremendous impact that its traffic shaping practices have had – and are continuing to have – on competitors, their end-users customers and providers of new media content that make use of P2P applications to deliver content to their on-line users, listeners and viewers.
CAIP continues to focus on the competitive implications (and rationale behind) Bell's throttling, arguing that:
There is also uncontradicted evidence . . . that strongly suggests that the reasons behind Bell's decision to throttle its competitors' GAS traffic have little to do with Bell's unsubstantiated claims of "network congestion" and more to do with a desire to lessen competition in retail telecommunications markets. There are far too many "coincidences" between the timing of the initiation of Bell's throttling practices and the timing of a number of other events in order to conclude otherwise.
The CAIP submission also includes some interesting new allegations.
The new baseball season is in full swing, yet in recent months the phrase "three strikes and you’re out" has taken on an entirely different meaning on the Internet. My new technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) reports on how, prodded by content lobby groups, a handful of governments have moved toward requiring Internet service providers to terminate subscribers if they engage in file sharing activities on three occasions. The policy – occasionally referred to as "graduated response" – received support last fall from French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who pressured the private sector to negotiate an agreement to implement the three strikes system. The policy soon attracted global attention as the United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia all announced that they were contemplating a similar approach.
In recent weeks, however, it would appear that governments are beginning to have sober second thoughts. After a Swedish judge recommended adopting the three strikes policy, that country's Ministers of Justice and Culture wrote a public opinion piece setting out their forthcoming policy that explicitly excluded the three strikes model.
Earlier this month, the European Parliament delivered an even stronger rejection.