Preparing for the inevitable, Netflix has announced a set-top box that allows its customers to download movies for viewing on their TV.

The box is said to be similar to one from Apple and the news story also talks about a streaming capability to be embedded in some DVD players to be released later this year by LG.

I’m not sure that the age of physical video rentals is coming to an end (sometimes, I like browsing through the aisles), but we can view these services as providing an alternative to video-on-demand from your TV provider.

Of course, high-definition on-demand downloading will have an impact on internet service usage allowances. So, will we see demand for these services limited by consumers concerned about having to pay excess download fees?

Alternatively, perhaps the rental services like Netflix and iTunes will look at commercial arrangements to ‘reverse the charges’ for downloading movies. The idea would be for them to enter into arrangements with major ISPs to exempt their traffic from subscriber usage caps – think of it as an internet 800 service where the usage charges are reversed.

What would the characteristics need to be for such a service in order to avoid concerns about violations of net neutrality?

---

Update [May 21, 10:20 am]
Bell Canada has announced its own video store with 1500 titles for rent or purchase.

Technorati Tags:
netflix, net neutrality

On Friday afternoon, Heritage Minister Josee Verner announced that Tim Denton will become a Commissioner at the CRTC.

His appointment represents an important counter to those who have suggested that the CRTC is populated with too many traditional telco minds.

In 1999, he wrote a paper Netheads versus Bellheads. His website shows that he is more closely associated with the nethead camp.

Mr. Denton is a specialist in legal and policy issues related to the Internet and communications, including telecommunications and broadcasting. He has been involved with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers and the governance of the domain name industry and has also helped introduce long-distance voice competition in Canada as counsel to the Canadian Consumers’ Association.

Tim’s client base has also included: Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA); British Columbia Internet Association; Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP); and, Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB).

Coming into the upcoming new media proceedings, the Commission will gain a different set of perspectives – perhaps with greater interest and familiarity with technical details than is generally seen at Commissioner level.

Last year, he wrote a paper that considered telco investment in next-generation networks “as an opportunity to saddle the Internet with many of the characteristics of the current telephone system.” The paper seemed to challenge the CRTC’s policy of promoting facilities-based competition:

In my opinion, the telcos have succeeded partially in reducing competition by getting rid of the obligation to lease wholesale facilities.

It will be interesting to watch for his influence sitting on the other side of the hearing room.

Technorati Tags:
CRTC, Tim Denton

Perhaps it was only in the interest of journalistic simplicity, but The New York Times seems to have confused the web with the internet. In the NYTimes editorial, entitled Democracy and the Web, the Times seems to think that net neutrality is all about making sure that all websites load just as fast in your browser – in the interests of democratic access.

There is no mention of different applications being treated with different priority (such as voice or tele-medicine competing with file downloading). All bits are the same in the eyes of the Times, because in its simplified view of the world, the internet apparently equals web-browsing. And we can’t allow those greedy ISPs to put their selfish financial interests ahead of democratic access to MLB.com, apple pie recipes, and the American Way.

Mark Evans has a provocatively titled post, “The Web As We Know It is Dying.” The article questions the CRTC examining new media content in an upcoming proceeding:

I can’t wait to see government regulation of the Internet if, in fact, it is possible to regulate it.

On the other hand, his article seems to endorse CAIP’s request that the regulator does intervene and impose some regulations on internet access. Which is it?

He also suggests that those evil ISPs will distort the former free-wheeling internet because of their selfish money grabbing ways.

You notice that broadband carriers and cablecos don’t break out the profitability of their high-speed units? Probably because they’re very, very profitable.

Is the business really so embarrassingly profitable?

Net Neutrality will be the subject of a special panel on Wednesday morning, June 18 at The 2008 Canadian Telecom Summit. Register soon. Prices go up June 1.

Technorati Tags:
net neutrality, Mark Evans, NY Times

Has anyone else noticed that phone calls just don’t seem to be as good as they were 10-15 years ago?

I had a number of radio interviews in the wake of the recent tragic breakdown in communications that may have contributed to the death of a Calgary toddler. Many of the discussions surrounded the potential for compromise in 9-1-1 location information associated with nomadic VoIP.

With over-the-top VoIP, the phone line just cannot be as reliable as a traditional circuit switched phone service. It needs power and it needs the residential broadband service to be working and relatively clear of heavy congestion. For an emergency call to be routed properly, the user needs to actively keep their user profile up-to-date. Still, these compromises are made in exchange for a lower price tag and a number of valuable call management features.

We put up with dropped calls in exchange for mobility; we’re willing to redial in exchange for overseas calling rates that look like domestic pricing. In general, I sense that we seem to tolerate a number of quality compromises these days on voice service in exchange for lower prices and other features.

It is unusual to see quality diminishing with the application of new technologies. Those pin-drop crystal clear advertisements seem to be a distant memory.

Axia SuperNet filed an application on April 21 for the CRTC to review its Deferral Account Decision (2008-1) on the basis that TELUS will be using some of the money in communities that already have broadband internet. Contrast this with an application by TELUS on April 23 asking the CRTC to review the same Decision, but on the basis that more of the Deferral Account funds should go to more communities.

Why do I raise these 3 week old applications now?

Axia has filed some supplemental materials from smaller ISPs operating in Alberta that had not participated in the original proceeding. There is a precedent associated with Mitchell Seaforth Cable and the community of Dublin, Ontario.

There are a few issues at play here. First off, who are the Alternate Broadband Service Providers (ABSPs) and is there a complete inventory of them and their service areas?

There isn’t a requirement for ISPs to register with the CRTC in order to provide internet access service. The CRTC knows about many types of service providers through various registration lists.

For example, carriers show up as:

• ILECs;
• small ILECs;
• CLECs;
• wireless carriers;
• other carriers; or,
• non-dominant carriers.

Some other companies operating as ISPs may show up as:

• Resellers;
• DSL providers; or
• resellers of High Speed Retail Internet Service.

But what about pure fixed wireless ISPs? They aren’t reselling anything. There is no need for them to register as telecom service providers for the contribution regime, if the only telecom service they provide is internet access (eg. no VoIP, no private line, etc.). Who speaks for them in Ottawa?

It may be a real challenge in getting regulatory awareness of precisely those companies that may be most likely to be providing remote and rural broadband – those companies that are likely to be most affected by Decision 2008-1.

Decision 2008-1 may demonstrate why companies like ABSPs need to be aware of regulatory proceedings, despite believing that there own operations are unregulated. Perhaps this is a key selling point for industry associations in their drive for members. Can the CRTC rely on CAIP or other organizations to be the representative voice of ABSPs and other independent ISPs? At the end of the day, is it the CRTC’s job to reach out to all potential interested parties or the ISPs who are responsible for watching out for themselves?

Looking beyond the disruptive impact on ABSP business plans and the potential for market distortion caused by Decision 2008-1, how does the CRTC solicit more ABSP participation in such activities as the annual industry monitoring report?

Technorati Tags:
Bell, CRTC, CAIP, Canadian Telecom Summit