While CIPPIC is deservedly collecting praise for its successful challenge of Facebook’s privacy practices, it recently lost a challenge related to deep packet inspection (DPI).

CIPPIC had argued that: (1) Bell uses DPI to collect and use personal information without customers’ consent; (2) Bell collects more personal information than is necessary to ensure network integrity and service quality; and, (3) Bell does not adequately inform its customers of its practices.

In a letter to CIPPIC and Bell, the Privacy Commission concluded that only the third complaint was “well-founded”:

Accordingly, the complaint is not well-founded with regard to the two matters of consent and limiting collection, but well-founded with regard to the matters of openness.

In respect of increasing transparency, the changes sought appear relatively minor:

• Agreeing with Bell’s idea to add a FAQ on the Bell Privacy web pages
• Adding a statement to Bell’s existing FAQ on network management to state that the customer’s IP address is collected
• Adding a heading (along the lines of “Customer Service Information”) to Bell’s internet service agreements

The Privacy Commission made some important statements in its 18 page Report of Findings.

For example, the Privacy Commission found:

• Peer-to-Peer (P2P) applications are large users of bandwidth. Applications that are often used for music and movie file sharing between computers can consume a great deal of capacity and “slow down” other internet traffic;
• The investigation confirmed that the use of P2P does increase network traffic and that the widespread phenomenon of congestion is largely caused by user downloads or file sharing using P2P;
• DPI and other traffic management tools are among several means by which ISPs can optimize traffic flow.

To what extent will these findings be consistent with the CRTC’s review of network management practices? Is this a foreshadowing?

Update [August 28, 1:10 pm]
Here is a link to the OPC finding [ pdf, 2.19MB]

The US is moving to ban robocalls, those really annoying pre-recorded calls that most of us have received from credit agencies or cruise lines. But the new rules aren’t coming from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC – the US counterpart to the CRTC). Instead, it will be changes to the Telemarketing Sales Rule from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

According to AP:

Before the ban, consumers had to specifically join a do-not-call list to avoid prerecorded telemarketing calls. But after Sept. 1, consumers shouldn’t get most of these calls anymore.

Will that US hardware be pointed northward to continue to harass Canadians?

An article in Sunday’s Washington Post has some good commentary on why fibre doesn’t necessarily belong in every diet.

I remember a basic systems engineering principle that says most people define their requirements in terms of a familiar solution, rather than looking at the real requirements.

As a result, it is common for governments to say that they need fibre – defining fibre as a requirement, rather than a solution. In doing so, they restrict the degrees of freedom for solutions that could be innovative and more cost effective.

Look at this quote from Mitsuko Herrera, cable and broadband administrator in one of the counties seeking $130M from the US stimulus pork barrel and tell me what is wrong:

We’re looking at rural businesses. We have family farms — only half of them have Web sites. Once you get fiber optics, you can build a Web site . . . to match people who grow locally with people who want to eat local food.

Does this broadband administrator really expect each farm to become its own website host?

Australia – spending more than $40B of taxpayers money on its national broadband program – has recognized that 10% of the population will not be connected with wireline solutions.

In the Post article, a representative of Hughes Network Systems points out that fiber-optic connections are not particularly cost-effective, especially in sparsely populated rural areas.

I have frequently written about the role of fixed wireless and satellite broadband in allowing Canada to already boast 100% availability of broadband. Wireline solutions provide coverage to around 94% of the Canadian population, already ahead of Australia’s ultimate objective.

Broadband availability is only one side of the question.

Broadband adoption is an issue that needs to be a focus. It is a concern for urban and rural Canada. We need to develop a greater understanding of what are the factors that keep people from getting connected.

Rob Sugar, Canada’s premier Weight Loss Coach according to his fax ads, has the distinction of being the first person to be named as a violator of Canada’s Do Not Call List.

According to the CRTC, he did not make representations to defend the marketing.

He has been assessed a penalty of $4000 and has until September 25 to pay it. If payment has not been received by then, the Commission will certify the unpaid amount with the Federal Court in order to collect.

The CRTC also issued two notices against Peerless Mason, one for roofing and one for waterproofing. Peerless Mason had appealed, saying that they are not telemarketers, but a penalty of $10,000 has been assessed in each of the two cases.

At some of our extended family gatherings, some of us have been known to re-tell a old tale more than once. My late uncle used to say that we either need new stories, or new friends.

I was reading about the concern that consumers are having a hard time making sense of the multitude of different plans and options from the carriers, with some of the same voices making the same complaints. The problem is that I don’t think these stories are representative of today’s reality.

Isn’t choice an indicator of a competitive marketplace? Innovation from carriers, trying to help consumers tailor their packages to meet their needs. Sure, it was a lot easier when all phones were black rotary dial models and there were no features to choose from.

But do we all really want vanilla flavoured mobile service?

A recent column speaks of hidden charges and uses system access fees as the example. I’m not crazy about extra fees myself, but the fees are hardly hidden. And, there are choices out there that have no fees: check out Koodo, Fido and Solo, among others.

I have been shopping for wireless services a couple times this summer and shopped by internet, by phone and in person at company owned stores and with agents. This wasn’t hypothetical shopping, but looking to spend my own real money on real services. The complaint I read about not being able to take your old phone with you when you switch between carriers is pretty lame. I suspect my family members are fairly representative of having no interest in being stuck with an old phone.

There were no hidden charges. I was even walked through a check list to make sure I understood my first bill including all the fees, pro-rated charges, etc. Most of the websites let you see a sample first bill.

As to the perspective that only Rogers has all the cool phones, apparently these kvetchers haven’t heard of the Blackberry Tour, the Blackberry Storm or the Palm Pre which are only available on TELUS and Bell. Exclusive contracts aren’t necessarily a bad thing, as I have written before.

As to the tired old claim (I wrote about that one more than 2 years ago) that North Americans suffer from having CDMA and GSM networks, instead of all carriers using one standard, there are others who would see this as offering consumers yet another choice. We didn’t need government to mandate VHS versus Beta; we didn’t need government to regulate GSM over CDMA.

There really are new stories out there, as more than 1.3 million Canadians who activated a phone last quarter experienced. That is, more than 15,000 people each day who are shopping, finding an offer they like, and subscribing to a new mobile phone service.

You need new stories or new friends to stick with the same old stories. Go shopping and you might get both.