On Monday, Mark Evans wrote a piece on Net Neutrality Ignorance. I am not sure I agree with his contention that
In Canada, the Net Neutrality issue is sitting in limbo as the regulator and the broadband service providers wait to see how things evolve in the U.S. – a typically cautious Canadian approach to anything contentious.
I think we could argue that our Telecom Act is already clear on points of discrimination and in carriers acting on the content of transmissions. More recently, as we have written before, the Telecom Policy Review panel examined the issues and came out with what we termed ” A Solomonic balance of interests.” The CRTC has examined the question and has said that it will deal with contraventions as they arise. Which they are doing.
It is hardly a ‘cautious Canadian approach’. We have existing legislation that covers much of the concern. We have had a review of the issue, with active public participation and had a report issued already. Are we really in limbo or do some folks just not like the current balance? I think we are ahead of the pack on this one, despite some people not being happy with the outcome – but duhhh… what else is new in Canadian telecom regulation?
Mark’s post refers to Save the ‘Net advocate Dave Weinberger, who writes about the potential loss of Innovation, Open Markets, Free Speech, Creativity and Democracy itself! Let’s look at one of his arguments:
Creativity. Net neutrality is being legislated away in part to make the Internet safe for Hollywood content. Carriers already block users from being full-fledged creators on the Internet by providing paltry upload capacity. Why allow the carriers to give fast-lane preference to Hollywood’s content? And why give them the power to restrict content they think may rile the copyright totalitarians?
Where does he get the idea that carriers “block users from being full-fledged creators”? Did all of the carriers in Dave’s area conspire together to refuse to sell him symmetric access? Or, does Dave really mean to say that he was too cheap unwilling to buy a business grade high speed internet access service with loads of upload and download speed. Apparently, Save the ‘Net folks wants symmetric access for $40 per month – or maybe they want government provided municipal service, so that they get other people to pay for their service.
Let me explore this paragraph a little further. We are supposed to believe that carriers are conspiring with the Hollywood studios to keep little guys from publishing content. This conspiracy presumably extends to the carriers coercing the studios to pay extra fees for their content to be carried, in exchange for the carriers prohibiting little folks from being full-fledged creators.
I guess all of the studios and carriers must be on side with this conspiracy – otherwise, I can’t wait to see Oliver Stone’s movie version.