Canadians React With Anger to New Internet Usage Caps

RollForInitiative

New member
Mar 10, 2009
1,015
0
0
Hey, we get mad too. It actually happens sometimes. It just takes a lot longer to make us drop the polite veneer and break your nose with a hockey stick.
 

number2301

New member
Apr 27, 2008
836
0
0
I struggle to sympathise with this. In the UK some plans have a 1 or 2 Gb monthly limit. 20Gb is condidered unlimited by some companies. I've found that heavy browsing uses about 2Gb a month, so that still leaves 18Gb from a UK limit. I don't really see the problem!?
 

YouEatLard

New member
Jun 20, 2010
96
0
0
I'm not sure what is worse, that people actually live in Canada or that they think they should be allowed unlimited to access the internet.

I'm joking of course.

So how would Canadians go about fighting this? They don't have a military to speak of to fight it. You really can't boycott your ISP as then they don't have Escapist access. I don't know that Canadians are capable of rioting.

Again... I'm joking.

I'm damn happy I don't live in our 51st state. This internet cap thing would really get under my skin.

I'm probably atleast partially joking there. I haven't decided.
 

karashata

New member
Oct 25, 2010
4
0
0
yesjam said:
I'm a Canadian customer of Bell Canada...and seriously people, it's been this way for a long time - I'm not sure when usage caps were first implemented but about 7 months ago, I was charged extra for internet usage and was told it was because I went over my monthly limit. Since then I've paid an extra few bucks a month to get an extra 60 GB of usage.

If you haven't come across this before, it's probably because you haven't had to worry about it.
There are a lot of smaller ISPs that offer unlimited bandwidth for fairly cheap, though the speeds are typically lower than capped service from the bigger ISPs. What this decision essentially does is tell the smaller ISPs they can't do that anymore and have to offer capped service with overage charges once a rather low bandwidth cap is exceeded. This kinda ruins the competitive market because it means there's less incentive to go with a smaller ISP since they're now stuck offering essentially the same service as the larger ISPs. I could probably go on, but a lot has already been said elsewhere and I'd encourage you to look for it yourself if you're so inclined.

squid5580 said:
I dunno for me it has always been a choice. Either I go with the companies that have caps (Rogers and Bell) that yeah I have to pay like 15 bucks more to have my cap doubled. Or I go with the company that has unlimited but the internet is so fucking slow I couldn't use much more than the basic limit.

I personally enjoy not having to wait an hour to download a freakin small arcade game on my 360. Or being able to play online with the proper framerate.
It's a matter of preference, honestly. I would rather have unlimited bandwidth and be able to download as much data as I could possibly want, and maybe have to wait a little while longer to get it because of lower download speeds. With the amount of data I've downloaded in a month on numerous occasions, I'd have paid through my nose with low bandwidth caps and excessive overage charges.
 

Danpascooch

Zombie Specialist
Apr 16, 2009
5,231
0
0
mad825 said:
If there would ever be one thing preventing me from wanting to live in Canada, It would be this.
I know right? Canada was my backup plan.

But in all seriousness, as someone getting a degree in game design, there is a very good chance I may have to move to Canada for work given their low taxes on the industry.

NOT GOOD.
 

Lost In The Void

When in doubt, curl up and cry
Aug 27, 2008
10,128
0
0
Vivace-Vivian said:
Instead of bitching about it on here people in Canada should be going to their MPs about it. Getting angry on forums won't solve a thing... A quick email will help flood their inboxes. At least, that's what I did.
Good I echo this man's statement; the more people that e-mail their MPs, the more they will realize that this is an issue. Don't just ***** on this site, e-mail your MPs.
 

Waif

MM - It tastes like Candy Corn.
Mar 20, 2010
519
0
0
squid5580 said:
Waif said:
There is a lot of talk in my area of Canada about how this will affect our billing rates. I am concerned that my own ISP will mandate these cap changes, which will most certainly disappoint me. I, however, dislike usage based billing in general, and it can lead to a great deal many abuses to the customer.

I can only hope that my fellow Canadians will think in similar ways.
When I first heard about it I was pissed but misinformed. I was under the impression they were going to charge you for the GB. But if they are just capping us and charging us for overages I don't see the problem (especially since I have been capped like that for quite a while now). It shouldn't be that hard for anyone to check their usage. I do it daily and it takes me a few seconds. I also am notified when I reach a certain % of my limit so I shouldn't get a surprise with my bill.
I am already on a system like that. I am with Accesscomm and they have a cap on their plans. Thing is they don't charge overages, they just "raid-shape" your connection until you get back below the cap. The problem I have is that they might very well charge me overages because of their point system. With Accesscomm, if you download or upload anything between 3 pm and 12:59 pm you get dinged 2x rates. Because it is Primetime. What this means is that when I watch an HD video on Netflix (which is very new to me). I am getting dinged 2 GB for a 1 GB download. That's not including any data that might have been uploaded. That and with all the digital content I have through steam, the chances of reaching the overage is to great. I've went over it a few times already in fact, and that was with observations.

I'm over my limit right now anyway, thanks to Netflix, lol! Still, I disagree with UBB in general.
 

frago roc

New member
Aug 13, 2009
205
0
0
YouEatLard said:
I'm not sure what is worse, that people actually live in Canada or that they think they should be allowed unlimited to access the internet.

I'm joking of course.

So how would Canadians go about fighting this? They don't have a military to speak of to fight it. You really can't boycott your ISP as then they don't have Escapist access. I don't know that Canadians are capable of rioting.

Again... I'm joking.

I'm damn happy I don't live in our 51st state. This internet cap thing would really get under my skin.

I'm probably atleast partially joking there. I haven't decided.
I wonder what's more annoying, these caps or moron americans who still think "canada is cold" jokes are still funny.
 

Vrach

New member
Jun 17, 2010
3,223
0
0
Am I reading this right? Are you guys not able to get "flat rate" internet (ie. unlimited bandwidth at a certain speed)? If so, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard and yeah, they're just rushing to cash in because non-flat rate internet is always a scam. You either don't use up the bandwidth that you're paying for or you go over the limit and pay a higher price. Either way, they fuck you over. Kinda the same thing with postpaid phone service, which is why I still happily stick with my prepaid.

If I'm understanding this right, I really, really hope they kill this bill with fire. I have an intention of moving to Canada in a few years and this would be a MAJOR downside for me considering even my dear ol' crappy Serbia is willing to provide flat rate internet that I have enjoyed ever since I got broadband.
 

HellsingerAngel

New member
Jul 6, 2008
602
0
0
I worked for Bell Canada through a third-party contract for about a year and a half. I have a lot of symapthy for them. They've done a lot. They've laid the entire DSL network for Canada and have been striving towards fibre-optics in major cities across Canada. They've been forced to sell out their lines to smaller companies because, apparently, Cable internet doesn't count as true competition to DSL and they're considered a monopoly. They've had to maintain not only their own company, but those like Teksavvy, Primus, Acanac and all those other small companies that take advantage of having, essentially, free server throughput for their customers at the expense of a flat fee and getting the lower grade equipment that Bell Canada has to offer. They've put a lot of money into infrastructure because nobody else wants to put the money forward! It's that simple.

HOWEVER...

Does Bell Canada deserve the money they get for their service? Absolutely not. With this new initiative, Canada has become the worst country in the world for internet in comparison to any other country who has a country wide network (or close to). We were already about 36th out of 60 or so, so we weren't even that high up. Why? Low bandwidth caps for extremely rediculous prices. ISPs in Canada need to be forced to change their pricing structures to fit with a reasonable amount of usage in this day and age! We pay around $60 (that's 60 USD, 37.5 GBP, 43.8 EURO, 59.7 AUD!!!) for 60 GBs a month on a 10 meg download, 1 meg upload plan. Simply put, that's insane! And to think that people complain about customers getting $15 off their first year because nobody gives a better deal! What's the alternative? Go to a third-party company, where you're sitll paying about $40 ($40 USD, 25 GBP, 29.2 EURO, 39.8 AUD) who get shafted every which way in technology, services and repair because they have to rent lines from Bell, who's already pissed about it.

The CRTC is our only chance to straighten things out by putting tighter, but more reasonable, regulations. They need to force telecommunications companies to smarten up or the average canadian is going to have to choose between phone, internet or television, because they'll only be able to afford one! Canadians, write, e-mail, or schedual meetings with your MPs to get the word out there. This has to end!
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
Can we have one country left?

Australia has the Firewall, Canada has the Watchdogs, UK has the CyberWar, US has the Game bannings...where else do we have?
 

squid5580

Elite Member
Feb 20, 2008
5,106
0
41
karashata said:
yesjam said:
I'm a Canadian customer of Bell Canada...and seriously people, it's been this way for a long time - I'm not sure when usage caps were first implemented but about 7 months ago, I was charged extra for internet usage and was told it was because I went over my monthly limit. Since then I've paid an extra few bucks a month to get an extra 60 GB of usage.

If you haven't come across this before, it's probably because you haven't had to worry about it.
There are a lot of smaller ISPs that offer unlimited bandwidth for fairly cheap, though the speeds are typically lower than capped service from the bigger ISPs. What this decision essentially does is tell the smaller ISPs they can't do that anymore and have to offer capped service with overage charges once a rather low bandwidth cap is exceeded. This kinda ruins the competitive market because it means there's less incentive to go with a smaller ISP since they're now stuck offering essentially the same service as the larger ISPs. I could probably go on, but a lot has already been said elsewhere and I'd encourage you to look for it yourself if you're so inclined.

squid5580 said:
I dunno for me it has always been a choice. Either I go with the companies that have caps (Rogers and Bell) that yeah I have to pay like 15 bucks more to have my cap doubled. Or I go with the company that has unlimited but the internet is so fucking slow I couldn't use much more than the basic limit.

I personally enjoy not having to wait an hour to download a freakin small arcade game on my 360. Or being able to play online with the proper framerate.
It's a matter of preference, honestly. I would rather have unlimited bandwidth and be able to download as much data as I could possibly want, and maybe have to wait a little while longer to get it because of lower download speeds. With the amount of data I've downloaded in a month on numerous occasions, I'd have paid through my nose with low bandwidth caps and excessive overage charges.
I dunno I think that if you use alot that you should be expected to pay a bit more. Sure $2.50 a gb for overages up to 60 bucks is extreme without a doubt (that is my Bell plan). But a simple phone call and I had my bandwidth doubled for $15 bucks. To me it seems like Hydro. I mean you use it you pay for it. You don't use it and you don't. To me it seems like they are just saying use it a bit more responsibly. Make sure you want that movie or music before you download it. Don't leave JTV up when you go for a coffee.

And believe me with the company I had with the unlimited there was no way I could download everything I wanted within a month. It was about as fast as old school dial up. When I complained about the speed and the technician came by he told me my download speed was about 1.5-2mb. I was waiting minutes for an average patch on a 360 game. Not the few seconds it takes it normally.

Out of curiosity how does it work in the States? Do all of your companies have unlimited?
 

Seneschal

Blessed are the righteous
Jun 27, 2009
561
0
0
Citizen Snips said:
Is that similar to cell phone usage limits in the US? I know when AT&T capped all new users it looked like world war 3 was going to begin around my campus. I don't believe I have internet caps on my plan, but they did cut my service down to 300 mbs after a 2TB downloading spree I had at Christmas. I don't think their is an actual limit on what I can download though. It just limited the speed at which it downloaded. On a side not... Damn you Steam Christmas Sale!
2 TB?! I fear phone calls from my ISP when I get to 50 GB (they never did object, though). How did you even manage that just from Steam?

Also, just to put in perspective how ridiculous and backwards this idea is - I live in Eastern Europe and still we have unlimited traffic (though the speed is kinda meh). Canadian ISPs will therefore be somewhere on the level of Somalia.
 

Ultima Shadow

New member
Apr 8, 2009
57
0
0
I cried a little when I read "only 25 GB per month in Ontario". Damn Australian internet means that this is the best I can hope for atm.

But wow, I thought Canada had more sense than this. Major suckage.
 

z3rostr1fe

New member
Aug 14, 2009
590
0
0
The_root_of_all_evil said:
Can we have one country left?

Australia has the Firewall, Canada has the Watchdogs, UK has the CyberWar, US has the Game bannings...where else do we have?
Well, we still have Sealand...
 

Anarchemitis

New member
Dec 23, 2007
9,102
0
0
I brought this up on the Politics forum days ago.
Not quite the quickest gun in the west, Andy.
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
z3rostr1fe said:
The_root_of_all_evil said:
Can we have one country left?

Australia has the Firewall, Canada has the Watchdogs, UK has the CyberWar, US has the Game bannings...where else do we have?
Well, we still have Sealand...
Not unless we can move GAMETRADERS ROBINA across...
 

jpoon

New member
Mar 26, 2009
1,995
0
0
My god anyone who supports this is a moron. Feel sorry for you canucks, I'll download a huge worthless file just for you all.