The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation recently made a bold decision to release an episode of the show Canada’s Next Great Prime Minister through BitTorrent. The move was remarkable not only because the national broadcaster decided to go completely ad- and DRM-free, but because it openly embraced platforms […]

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation recently made a bold decision to release an episode of the show Canada’s Next Great Prime Minister through BitTorrent. The move was remarkable not only because the national broadcaster decided to go completely ad- and DRM-free, but because it openly embraced platforms that are usually known for pirated content, the Pirate Bay and Mininova.org.

But the experience has taught CBC a valuable lesson: Play with the outlaws, and you’re going to be treated like one. Numerous users have reported being unable to access the show downloads due to ISP-based BitTorrent throttling. To make matters worse, telecom company Bell Canada has just begun to throttle P2P traffic for all of its wholesale customers, potentially affecting a huge number of customers of other ISPs that resell Bell’s DSL service.

Many Canada’s Next Prime Minister fans have shared their stories of ISP interference on the show’s blog. One user reported that the download was going to take him 12 hours, while others complained about download speeds capped at 40 kilobits per second and uploads with 5-10 kilobits per second.

Canadian ISPs like Rogers and Shaw have been interfering with P2P traffic for years without provoking a public uproar comparable to that of Comcast’s BitTorrent fiasco. Bell Canada started to implement similar “network management” technologies late last week, and it has now openly announced that it will throttle BitTorrent and other P2P transmissions on its entire network by April 7th, which will also affect any DSL ISP that has a line-sharing agreement with the former Telco monopolist.

Viewers, while applauding the broadcaster’s willingness to experiment with BitTorrent distribution, were clearly frustrated by the experience. Some even believe that the timing of the throttling just when a major broadcaster is starting to embrace P2P is no coincidence. One user wrote:

“Look at all the first time torrent users here. Many of them will be left thinking P2P is overhyped and underpowered. If they have to remove the choke in a couple of months, the harm is already done.”

Others seem to agree, noting that Bell and Rogers also maintain their own video services:

“And, gee, just at the time when P2P is emerging as a legitimate alternative to those two companies’ television distribution duopoly.”

It looks like Canada is having its very own Comcast moment. Net neutrality advocates would certainly have a strong ally in CBC if the broadcaster decided to pick up the issue and bring it to the attention of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission — a move that is getting support amongst fans of Canada’s Next Prime Minister.

Ottawa University Professor Michael Geist already sees the writing for Canada’s very own net neutrality regulations on the wall. As he notes: “It will become increasingly apparent that the regulators and politicians can no longer remain silent.”

You’re subscribed! If you like, you can update your settings

  1. CBC has had the foresight to see the future of television services today.. too bad Bell and Rogers clearly wrongfully too do

    .”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..”

  2. Bell Spokesman Jason Laszlo is too fucking stupid to realize that posting a status update on his public facebook account stating that reporters are lemmings wont get caught…Laszlo is a corporate shill and scum and the media should call him out on this now….


  3. Comcast Cable CTO: Bandwidth Hogs Will Experience Slowdowns – GigaOM Monday, March 31, 2008

    [...] have more snafus like the ones experienced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Although the CBC released a torrent legitimately, downloaders had a hard time grabbing the video shows. Werner’s comments and recent [...]

  4. Cable has already started choking P2P when I started to format one P2P got a message saying that they don’t support it

  5. 5 начина да проверим качеството на връзката за Р2Р « Здравей, свят! Thursday, April 3, 2008

    [...] задушават трафика без да го обявяват. Например Bell Canada, или германската Kabel Deutschland. За щастие има лесни начини [...]

  6. News Feed :: Digging Deeper::Your Guide to Net Neutrality Wednesday, April 16, 2008

    [...] but the access for people using other ISPs that use Bell Canada’s lines. The practice happened right as the CBC started using BitTorrent to stream its new series, “Canada’s Next Great Prime [...]

  7. Panic {RE}_Programming » Blog Archive » Digging Deeper::Your Guide to Net Neutrality Wednesday, April 16, 2008

    [...] the access for people using other ISPs that use Bell Canada’s lines. The practice happened right as the CBC started using BitTorrent to stream its new series, “Canada’s Next Great Prime [...]

  8. CBC Torrent Caught Up in ISPs’ BitTorrent Throttling | Fresh Web 2.0 News Wednesday, April 16, 2008

    [...] moving a Brobdingnagian sort of customers of another ISPs that resell Bell’s line service. Continue datum at Newteevee.com. Tags: canada, cbc, bell, bellcanada, bittorrent, [...]

  9. For Now, No Net Neutrality for Canadians « NewTeeVee Wednesday, May 14, 2008

    [...] BitTorrent traffic. Canadian providers requested such a step from the commission after Bell Canada started to use Comcast-type network management practices on its wholesale accounts, meaning it blocked BitTorrent uploads from users that weren’t even [...]

  10. Four (or Five!) Reasons Why » Blog Archive » …The Internet Can’t Kill Cable TV (Yet) Wednesday, May 28, 2008

    [...] as means of distribution, like CBC has done, get applauded for technological foresight, but penalized nonetheless. Will we get to a point where you have to buffer an entire show to ensure that you can watch [...]

Comments have been disabled for this post