Bell appeals Klass decision, or why net neutrality is a dead letter in Canada (1)

bell-denied-boom

February 20: Bell Mobility asks the Federal Court to toss out the CRTC’s Mobile TV decision, the one described by Chairman Blais as favoring “innovation and choice.” In what might be seen as an attempt at intimidation, Bell also asks for costs to be awarded against Ben Klass and several other intervenors.*

~~~

Update 2, Feb 23. The Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) has now listed the Bell appeal on its site. The start page to query the FCA database is here. In “Party name” field, insert “Bell” and submit. That brings up a long table, with the first record being Court Number 15-A-3, now identified as “BELL MOBILITY INC. v. BENJAMIN KLASS ET AL.” Clicking the “Re” link brings up this window (as of 2:20 pm Monday):

fca-bell-15a3-feb23

Update, Feb 23. Our friends at OpenMedia are on this case in a big way. The press release is here. My favorite part is the message summed up in this piece of signage:

bell-mobileTV-appeal

That’s an effective way to capture the worst aspects of the incumbents’ goal: turning an open platform into a completely closed, one-way system that’s like nothing so much as cable TV.

Some US and Canadian net neutrality highlights…

  • Nov 10 – Barack Obama stuns Washington advocating “the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.”
  • Jan 29 – Ben Klass wins CRTC decision against Bell for the “unlawful practice” associated with the pricing of its Mobile TV service.
  • Feb 4 – FCC Chairman Wheeler provides a glimpse of his unprecedented and highly controversial net neutrality rules.
  • Feb 16 – Openmedia.ca joins a huge campaign to feed pro-Internet messages to the FCC from a Jumbotron placed right outside the agency’s DC offices.
  • Feb 20 – Bell Mobility asks the Federal Court for leave to appeal the CRTC’s Klass decision, asking in its filing that several intervenors be obliged to pay legal costs.
  • Feb 26 – FCC to vote on Wheeler’s proposed rules to regulate Internet access providers like common carriers.

(*Disclaimer: As an intervenor of record, I’m named as a Respondent in the action.)

openmedia-jumbotron

Vancouver’s Openmedia gang reach out to DC: join here

~~~

 Important lessons from Ben’s win and Bell’s appeal

The open Internet community was thrilled by the CRTC’s decision to find in favor of Ben ben-nowak-feb8Klass in the matter of his complaint against Bell Mobility TV. In its decision, announced January 29, the CRTC ordered Bell to stop playing favorites with the way it prices its own mobile TV content, at the expense of competing content (the decision, CRTC 2015-26, is in pdf here).

I was one of the witnesses to Ben’s devotion and unpaid hard work on behalf of the public interest. His victory was a long time coming. He made the original complaint on November 20, 2013, and the research needed to support the complaint began weeks before that. (I wrote a number of posts on the matter, starting in November 2013: Ben Klass asks CRTC to stop Bell’s deliquency on Mobile TV.) Continue reading

Cancon redux: Canada’s TV “system” battles the Internet

netflix-browser-jan2015

~~~

“Somebody called me a protectionist this week. I’ve been called far worse, but the term rankled because I had not argued that Canadian television should be protected from foreign competition.”

Kate Taylor, Jan 18: A contemporary argument for Canadian content

~~~

The ball’s in somebody’s court and needs to be lobbed back.

Let’s start with who or what is protectionist. The only such reference I made was to  the policy regime we’ve had in Canada since the 1970s:

“Bell and Rogers (plus Shaw and QMI) have made fabulous amounts of money thanks to the vast protectionist apparatus they’ve enjoyed for decades.”

While life may be tougher now, it would be hard to argue that our broadcasters aren’t still benefitting from protectionism: foreign ownership restrictions, simultaneous substitution and restriction of US satellite signals to the approved list are three current examples. Simsub is also a good example of a policy designed to help our TV business rather than TV viewers, who hate it – as in, where are the Super Bowl ads? Continue reading

It’s 2015: Cancon is the aberration, not VPNs or the Internet

witopia-promo-page

WiTopia is a provider of personal VPN services

~~~

In a Globe and Mail piece last Friday, Kate Taylor starts off by asking the wrong question: Digital content may be cheap, but who will pay to create it? Things go downhill from there.

Ms Taylor’s old-fashioned apology for Cancon, with its predictable sideswipes at “freeriding” Netflix and marauding pirates, is based on ideology rather than evidence. It completely misconstrues the role of security tools like VPNs, at a time when Canadians should be far more concerned about their privacy and security online than about shelf space on the network for domestic TV shows. Most of all, it treats the Internet like a cultural and economic aberration that’s ruining our TV system, when the aberration is Canada’s bizarre and unworkable framework for broadcasting.

Virtual private networks and why you need one

What the article says about VPNs:

“The latest scheme is to use a virtual private network, or VPN, to trick Netflix into believing you are located in the United States and can thus subscribe to the video-streaming service’s American catalogue….

Internet advocates love to preach choice, diversity and freedom – after all, a VPN can also be used by citizens in China to access content censored by their government.”

A VPN is specialized client software that encrypts online messages, and is said metaphorically to “tunnel” through the public Internet. It’s a “virtual” network because there’s no real tunnel or separate physical network. Your data packets are still co-mingling with other people’s packets, but only you and folks with the authentication tools – like a password – can read those packets. The VPN is said to be private for exactly that reason, like an office behind a locked door. Continue reading

Updating the Sony hack: FBI story not selling to crypto experts

sony-hacked-again

***

Here in a nutshell is how things stand a week after my original comments on the hack and Sony’s culpability:

  • Sony Pictures chair Michael Lynton has even more pointedly dodged any responsibility for the damage caused on November 24.
  • FBI director James Comey insists more than ever that North Korea engineered the hack.
  • A high-profile crypto expert, Marc Rogers, has just published a detailed critique of the claims made by the FBI and Sony.

Lynton’s lapses. In an interview last week for ABC News, Chairman Lynton said the following:

“We are the canary in the coal mine, that’s for sure. There’s no playbook for this, so you are in essence trying to look at the situation as it unfolds and make decisions without being able to refer to a lot of you’ve had in the past or other peoples’ experiences. You’re on completely new ground.”

Talk about revisionist history. In case you haven’t read my previous post, I lay out the michael-lynton-sony-2sordid 10-year history of Sony’s experiences in the so-called “coal mine.” Needless to say, Lynton has a vested interest in getting the audience to believe the November 24 attack came out of the blue. That makes him look less like a failed leader, and probably prevents him sinking even further into legal liability. Here are three highlights of the backstory he conveniently overlooks:

  • Sony Pictures itself (not the parent company) was hacked – with many of the same awful results – in the summer of 2011. No, November 24 didn’t happen without any “playbook.”
  • IT consultants hired by Sony Pictures in the summer of 2014 warned of numerous security vulnerabilities in their netwok, which management apparenty ignored.
  • Sony Corp’s fight with the hacker community began all the way back in 2005, with the Sony rootkit scandal, which produced years of conflict and plenty of guideposts to refer to, if the Lynton squad had been paying attention.

Continue reading

The GOP hack: making Kim answer for Sony’s 10-year online war

theinterview-rogen-franco

***

Sony Pictures, the White House and the FBI should get a medal for the greatest political marketing triumph of 2014.

kimjungununiformAfter the horror show following the November 24 hack of Sony Pictures by the Guardians of Peace (GOP), America rallied behind Washington’s theory that Sony was the hapless victim of a Cold War cyberattack. Kim is certainly an easy guy to dislike and no friend of the Americans – no friend of anybody but Kim for that matter. (He comes by it legitimately. His dad and predecessor once had an actor hired to play grandpa Kim Il-sung in a movie role, for which the actor underwent plastic surgery to more closely resemble a Kim; once the shoot was over, the actor was shipped off to a concentration camp.)

The triumph of Cold War marketing over any hint of Sony’s bad behavior is all the more remarkable given the nasty quarrels that have embroiled US stakeholders, press and critics of all stripes. Not to mention the fact that as recently as New Year’s Eve, cryptographer Bruce Schneier and others were still casting doubt on the official claim that the hack was carried out by the Kim regime.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Lining up for The Interview as an exercise in patriotism

“The fact that they’re showing this movie shows that America still has a backbone regardless of the critics,” said Jay Killion, a golf pro who caught a screening at Tower City Cinemas in Cleveland.

Continue reading

Now playing at the CRTC: your precarious future on the Internet (2)

toronto-skyline

~~~

In this post, I follow up on my comments about the first day of the CRTC’s hearing to review its framework for wholesale services in the telecom industry. Since the most significant sector to be affected is Canada’s residential broadband service, I’m summarizing evidence here that was compiled recently by the Open Technology Institute (OTI) that compares broadband in 24 cities in Europe, East Asia and the US, along with Toronto. This evidence is consistent with findings from other international studies. It shows Toronto lags far behind the broadband leaders in available speeds; in the penetration of fiberoptic platforms; in symmetric connectivity (uplink bandwidth matches downlink bandwidth); and, most seriously from a social policy perspective, in the high prices Torontonians are forced to pay. I take this evidence as a strong argument in favor of maintaining and extending the regulatory regime that ensures open access to networks for smaller, competitive ISPs – including not just legacy platforms like DSL, but also emerging fiber platforms. Unless the CRTC includes these next-generation platforms, Canada will fall even further behind in its long slide into slow and expensive broadband connectivity.

~~~

“We are now ready to take our place as the most technologically advanced nation on the planet.” –Stephen Harper, Digital Canada 150, April 2014

Last month the Open Technology Institute released the third in a series of annual studies of broadband speeds and prices in 24 cities in the US, East Asia and Europe, plus Toronto (originally 22 cities). I wrote about OTI’s first report back in November 2012 (CRTC’s 2nd pro-consumer decree: 4 reasons not to celebrate); and I had comments a year later about the second report (Broadband data for Toronto: more bad news and getting worse). Continue reading

Now playing at the CRTC: your precarious future on the Internet

oti-toronto-data-3

If the Competition Bureau is too short of “facts” on Canadian broadband to advise regulation, as it told the CRTC, here’s a start (source: Open Technology Institute).

~~~

THIS week’s CRTC hearing, launched in October 2013, will cover the changing market in Canada for wholesale wireline telecommunications services, including Internet access. The Commission is hearing arguments as to whether any of its existing policies on wireline services should be eliminated or updated. The biggest bone of contention will involve the treatment of fiberoptic delivery platforms. New entrant ISPs want the Commission to guarantee wholesale access to these next-generation platforms. Deciding in their favor would be an important barometer of the health of Canadian broadband, but that goal is far from a sure thing. Meanwhile, recent data on broadband in 24 cities around the globe, compiled by the Open Technology Institute (OTI), shows once again how terrible the prices and speeds are here in Toronto.

~~~

In my previous post on Barack Obama’s stunning pronouncement on open Internet policy, I misrepresented what the CRTC is up to these days. I claimed the CRTC is fiddling over the fate of broadcast television with few signs it’s prepared to address the much more important problems of broadband availability, high prices, slow speeds and unaccountable service.”

Not exactly. First, the CRTC recently finished a proceeding on the wholesale market for mobile wireless services. Second, this week features the hearings phase of a proceeding launched in the fall of 2013 that tackles many of the same policy problems on the wireline side. While the scope is all wholesale telecomm services, what really counts here is the Internet access market.

Thanks to the usual tumultuous changes in technology, markets and business models, the Commission has set itself an obscure but potentially far-reaching task (Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2013-551, pdf uploaded here):

“The Commission initiates a proceeding to review the regulatory status of wholesale services and their associated policies, including the wholesale services framework, wholesale service pricing, and the appropriateness of mandating new wholesale services, including fibre-to-the-premises facilities. The purpose of wholesale services is to facilitate competition in retail markets to provide Canadians with increased choice.”

Why the CRTC regulates wholesale Internet access

It may not be clear as to why wholesale services should exist to make retail markets competitive. (Ironically, one of the least convincing arguments made by the incumbents during the wholesale wireless proceeding was that the wholesale arrangements they make with the smaller carriers like Wind have no effect on the health of the retail market for wireless.) Continue reading

Barack Obama for Prime Minister

obama-nn-plan-nov10

As net neutrality boils over, Obama calls for much tighter regulation of Internet access

~~~

If you care about the Internet and don’t care to see it co-opted and controlled by gatekeepers like Bell and Rogers, President Obama is your man. Yesterday he made a speech from the White House that has electrified the nation (theirs, not ours). He has called not merely for proactive regulation from the FCC to protect the open Internet. He has explicitly called on the agency to invoke Title II, that part of the Communications Act of 1934 intended to regulate common carriers like phone companies. Obama wants the regulator to treat the Internet like what it has become: a utility-like lifeline, not just an add-on to cable-TV service. Continue reading