http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20247550-Jason-Laszlo-Bell-spokesmans-real-thoughts-on-this-issue

.”Should ISPs Be Able to Slow Down Heavy ‘Net Users?” Recently, it has been brought to the media’s attention that several ISPs have been using back-end techniques in an effort to slow down heavy-bandwidth activities that people might perform on the Internet. This includes, most importantly, downloading and transmitting large files, like movies. Is it right of the ISPs to do this

Next most of the related online Comments for a start rightfully do not Support BELL in this AT ALL…

Anonymous said…
What bothers me is the secrecy involved. Imagine this occurring in any other industry. Perhaps you buy a dozen donuts, but find only 6 in the box. When you complain, the vendor states that they had to reduce “a dozen” to 6 in order to keep the price the same, and that it’s perfectly legal for them to adjust terms of sale without your notice.

When I’ve paid for something, I expect to receive it. If terms of sale change, I expect to be informed. Specifically, if ISPs sell me bandwidth, they should not be able to control what I do with it without my knowledge. And where is the line drawn? Would the situation really be any different if they were “shaping” HTTP traffic? I’m sure everyone’s speed would improve if people weren’t looking at so many damn web pages, so perhaps they should slow that down too.

I can understand the major ISPs perspective, but if you can no longer sell what you are promising, secretly adjusting terms of sale is unacceptable. If this were an older, more established industry, the ISPs would already be in court over this. I am not normally one to suggest regulation, but as Internet access becomes an essential service, some regulation does appear to be required.

Anonymous said…
Totally illegal, Bell (or any other ISP) have no legal right of any kind of doing the RIAA/MPAA bidding. (how much ISP are paid to illegally censoring the net?)

Randy said…
This sounds like something bell might do and since rogers has been getting away with it since 2005 who is to stop them ? since most ISPS lease from bell or rogers

Anonymous said…
Bells traffic shaping is hardly to protect the 90 out of 100 who use their service for basic surfing.

If users are eating up too much bandwidth, they’d most likely be affecting other heavy bandwidth users, before low bandwidth users even notice.

There’s currently plenty of bandwidth to go around.

This is more out of bandwidth greed, bell needs the bandwidth for something (IPTV?) and are throttling and throttling their third party distributors.

It was no conincidence that Rogers traffic shaping started around the same time they launched their VOIP service, bell is playing their cards in turn.

I don’t mind if they throttle their own customers, but it is completely illegal for them to throttle their third party distributors, with little notice, to forward their own business plan.

Anonymous said…
It isn’t what Bell is doing…
it’s how they do it.

They are well known for making up the rules as they go, completely disregarding the impact to others.

I have had the unpleasant experience of being a Sympatico DSL client and will begin supporting TechSavvy by becoming their customer. If Bell punishes all users, I may as well pay the company who supports me in principle.

Anonymous said…
I would like to throttle my payment for the Bell services accordingly.

Anonymous said…
Bell’s false smokescreen justification for these immoral acts is a false camouflage for their own original misleading, false advertising of unlimited downloads, and is merely a cover-up for the fact their system cannot meet their originally promised capacities and they Bell should be seen now only as liars, Bell needs to be taken to Queen’s court for this too.

Anonymous said… ISP’s like TekSavvy have their oven internet connections and peering arrangements for internet access, Bell is just providing the connectivity from the users phone line to in this example Teksavvy’s network. This is what Bell is choking down on them. Teksavvy and many other independents have their own internet access and provide better services than those available through Bell Sympatico or Rogers with their throttling and port blocking. This is not really about Bell’s internet bandwidth, but is in fact an anti-competitive act. Since Bell have been throttling their own customers they have been leaving in droves to the independent competition, well beyond the normal customer “churn”. This move by Bell effectively kills the competitor’s edge.

“Bell is a a dual faced hypocrite itself, it does not want to be regulated and yet it regulates other.. so regulate Bell by it’s own acts, standards..

“In Europe the present existing capacity and speed of the internet is significantly a lot higher over that now being supplied by Bell. It’s own past is catching up with Bell. They are also reaping the lies they have sowed. As it has been already detailed in many places on the net, just do a Google search of Bell Sympatico, and you can see that in reality Bell falsely has deceived, mislead it’s customers Canada wide on it’s existing capacity to deliver the promised unlimited internet download speeds, on top of that the very poor presidential manager of Bell had also failed to use it’s profits to adequately upgrade it’s capability next to do so. It now was also already known in the communication, technical industry. amongst IBM engineers too, that the Scrooge Bell is a Dinosaur, and that it is, was not only poorly managed but has been composed of very incompetent, unqualified, and underpaid personnel “..

and that is just a few of the negative comments.

“Customers in Canada are leaving Bell en drove for cable. as a result too.

Bell’s false gambling with the disatissfied customers has become a great loss for Bell too..”