Blog Post

Netflix exec: Canada’s broadband caps “almost a human rights violation”

Stay on Top of Enterprise Technology Trends

Get updates impacting your industry from our GigaOm Research Community
Join the Community!

There’s no love lost between Netflix (s NFLX) Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos and Canada’s big Internet providers: “It’s almost a human rights violation what they’re charging for internet access in Canada,” Sarandos said during the Merrill Lynch Media, Communications & Entertainment conference in Los Angeles Wednesday.

Sarandos was referring to the low broadband caps in place at Canadian ISPs like Bell and Shaw, which force their customers to pay more if they exceed monthly caps that can start at just 15 GB. Netflix has sharply criticized broadband pricing in Canada before, with CEO Reed Hastings calling caps and overage fees like these “grossly overpriced.”

However, Hastings had initially said that he didn’t anticipate the caps to be a problem for Netflix’s business in Canada. The company eventually adjusted its streaming rates in the country, making non-HD streams the default option for Canadian users, and now it looks like it’s acknowledging that the caps are having an impact on subscriber growth.

Asked about it on Thursday, Sarandos had to concede that business in Canada could be better if broadband access came without caps and expensive overage fees. Said Sarandos: “The problem in Canada is… they have almost third-world access to the internet.”

To learn more about the future of TV, check out my ebook Cut the Cord: All You Need to Know to Drop Cable.

Image courtesy of Flickr user LWY.

160 Responses to “Netflix exec: Canada’s broadband caps “almost a human rights violation””

  1. Graham Fair

    I just took a look at Shaw’s Internet packages. Their smallest bandwidth cap is 125GB, almost 10x what Netflix is suggesting. So… take what they are saying with a grain of salt, I suppose.

  2. Shaw’s lowest plan is $50 for 125GB. It’s expensive but it’s not third world.

    Other ISPs are similar. The prices are too high, but the level of services aren’t atrocious like the Netflix shills make it out to be.

    It’s not spectacular but it’s nothing like the way Netflix shills are painting the picture.

  3. I don’t have a Netflix account because there is a crappy selection of video content for Canadians.
    Canada does have unlimited usage providers.
    Like any other country in the world we Canadians vote and empower with our wallets.

  4. I’m sure everyone defends their right to run their business. We also have a right to criticize it as being similar to third world in nature.

    They’re setting record profits and not upgrading infrastructure. Prices aren’t coming down. And that’s just fine to you. Sad.

    • Graham Fair

      Record profits in this economy? I don’t think so. And if you think carriers aren’t constantly upgrading their infrastructure you need to actually talk to them instead of slandering them and making comparisons to 3rd world nations.

      Canada and the US share the same telecom landscape, and the prices I see from US ISPs are pretty shocking.

  5. This is all about greed…plain an simple…once the price of data goes down, they gotta find a new way to get money out of it…and here in the US the FCC has no balls to go after them…

  6. I pay here in Finland 15 euros for 10 Mbps down/10 Mbps up. I used to have 2/2 mbps service, but the service provider for our building offered us an upgrade costing only 5 euros more.

  7. Why would I stream when it is simply cheaper to download and watch many times offline?

    To conserve bandwidth and get around the capping, most *SMART* users would just download movies, put it on their HDD or NAS or HTPC and run it off locally. Duh..

    Having a home made DIY Netflix like system is CHEAPER than online streaming.

  8. We use vianet out of Sudbury, exactly like teksavvy – cheap prices, no bandwidth caps. We only watch TV through the internet. No cable or sat. in our house at all. Love it, $39.99 a month.


    I live in Ontario, I am a subscriber to internet services. I dislike third world as a term used to describe internet access as it exaggerates the issue a bit; I wouldn’t say internet is a human right or basic need. That said, what they are charging is COMPLETELY, ABSOLUTELY 100% CRIMINAL. Rob-us….excuse me the RoBellus Triopoly is milking the candy bar effect to its fullest and there’s nothing anyone can do. Prices do go down over time yes, but the quantity of bandwidth decreases at a disproportionately larger rate; the result is the same amount of bandwidth will cost you more. And the only way to avoid it? Sign a 5 year contract that locks your service options into a tightly confined contract that costs thousands to get out of. Dealing with the companies to get the best deal is practically impossible; none of their reps offer the same deals, and they try to rip you off as hard as they can — in fact, rep options are intentionally limited so that if you argue someone else got a better deal, they retort with “Hmm well that doesn’t seem right, I don’t think thats possible because our systems (that you can’t see), don’t show us as having those options; maybe it was a special deal we used to run (because they always run “special deals” as the costs go up forever)”. When I renegotiated my plan with fido-rogers, it took 2 months to get a fair deal out of them. 2 months of calling, every-single-day; I now pay 45$ a month and have unlimited incoming long distance (only because I had this plan from 6 years ago, and nothing new compares to it) and 6gb of data (a special they have only run twice at 30$/m). I used to also get 100 local minutes anytime, 1000 after 7pm. What do I get for being a customer of 6 years? They bumped my anytime minutes by 100 and bumped my 1000 minutes up to 5pm ONLY because I called a thousand times about it and called them out on their shit over and over and over again. ALL of these companies STILL charge to unlock their phones EVEN THOUGH IT IS ILLEGAL TO SELL A LOCKED PHONE IN CANADA WITHOUT AN UNLOCKED COUNTERPART OR TO UNLOCK FOR FREE UPON REQUEST. So yes, rogers, bell and telus are all committing wide scale criminal activity, but no one does a shit about it. They say they base their pricing plans on usage statistics, which is why if you have a data plan USE ALL YOUR DATA EVERY MONTH, OTHERWISE THEY JUST THINK “OH LOOK PEOPLE ARE USING LESS DATA THIS MONTH BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO CONSERVE WHAT LITTLE DATA THEY HAVE, THAT MEANS WE DON’T HAVE TO PROVIDE AS MUCH”. I’d say they are f*cking morons, but its far, far too greesy to be just plain old ignorance.

  10. Clearly, at some point, these service providers would provide their own infrastructure (Google is a good example).

    The pipe operators are not going to say “yes, that is right, we built the pipes, these guys used that and made tonnes of money while we were bleeding”

  11. CalGeorge

    The wholesale costs for bandwidth vary from $1/Mbps to $900/Mbps in the US. The major carriers like AT&A, and Comcast own the infrastructure. They don’t like to participate in rural areas because its not profitable enough for them. Small ISPs fill that void. I run one in rural California. I have to charge more than it costs me to provide the service. I service customers that can’t even get a phone line from the phone company.

  12. NoWhiners

    Meanwhile, Netflix continues to grow really rich off delivering content free of charge over other peoples networks. Carriers have to pay for infrastructure, support, maintenance and be accountable to their investors as well. Netflix gets a free ride. I guess the carriers could start charging Netflix for delivery, just like the post office did when they delivered DVD’s by mail, but then you all would be bitching about the increase cost that Netflix will pass on to you. Why weren’t you complaining that all the mail is not delivered for free under this model? Other than the fact that Netflix paid the freight for that, but now makes you pay it through your internet provider. Who is worse here, the carriers who are trying desperately to keep up with the demand, or Netflix who dramatically decreased their expense by handing it over to you. Now they complian that you aren’t able to watch enough movies for your $8/month without having to pay a little more. I bet they wouldn’t be encouraging all that movie watching when they were paying all the postage. In fact their policy prevented it by only allowing one movie out at a time, or did you forget about that? Why couldn’t you rent 4-5 movies at a time via DVD? You can certainly stream that many providing you have the bandwidth and the devices to do it. Get over it people. Technology and access to it costs money whether you like it or not. Why don’t you complain about the post office charging per letter? You already pay taxes to support them. Shouldn’t you have unlimited access to mail as many lettes as you wish? Sounds rediculous when put into that context, doesn’t it?

    • But the network operators (ISPs) are being paid to run the network, it’s not free to access their network is it? You don’t pay the post office a subscription in addition to stamps to send mail. Bandwidth is INCREDIBLY cheap, and the ISPs are not struggling at all, they’re trying to cling on to their decade old pricing schemes to rip off their customers for as much profit as is possible. Networking technology, like all computers, has dramatically increased in power at the same cost compared to 10 years ago, so it costs a fraction of what it used to for x amount of bandwidth, or x amount of data transfer.

      • >Bandwidth is INCREDIBLY cheap
        But maintenance is not.
        Canada has some of the highest paid workers in the world.
        Even at base hire rates.
        And employees have been working for some time since our companies have been in businesses for a long time. So they get raises of course.

  13. Mike Hammett


    No, wait…



    The not funny part is that people believe this guy. I love how people these days are so detached from the cost of something.

    • Unlimited bandwidth options in Canada are 90 times more expensive than other countries. Even if we’re to look at the costs in other countries and limit it to roughly a 300gb cap, Canadians still pay twice as much. The inability of Canadian carriers to provide competitive levels of service and pricing compared to other countries is a sad testament to the lack of diversity and competition in the Canadian marketplace. Canada is by far the most expensive country to surf the web in.

    • Chris Rodney

      Nailed it. I’m sure that selection vs US Netflix (and word of mouth about the lacking Canadian service) has bigger impact than bandwidth caps in Canada. Better selection = more subscribers.

      I’m not letting the internet companies (who are also the cell phone companies, who are also the cable/satelite/IPTV companies) off the hook though. What a cartel they are!

      • Its absolutely about content. Canada Netflix has a horrible selection compared to US Netflix. I know several people who go out of their way to specifically get US Netflix, even though its costing the more money. Also its super frustrating that only a few titles are available in HD on the PC. I dont feel like running out and spending $100+ for a box just to watch the same stuff on my TV that I can through my already connected PC. Add more HD content to the PC and I’d be more willing to recommend the service to others.

        Shaw backed off of Usage Based Billing last year and actually provides a very good service now. I’m paying about $50/mo for 25mbit down, and 2.5mbit up with a 250gig cap. Plenty for us. For $10 more I could get 50mbit down and 3mbit up, and 400gigs of bandwidth. Also for $110/mo you can get 250mbit down, and 15mbit up with 1terabyte of data (they eve have an unlimited data plan).

        I think the real issue is out in Eastern Canada where Bell and Rogers are screwing their customers. Shaw tried to follow suit, but after a huge pushback from their users they smartened up.

    • Chris Kafka

      The irony is the poor selection is ALSO caused by those selfsame incumbent carriers that are offering the moronic caps, as they are huge, vertically integrated companies that are not only providing the connections, but are huge media distribution owners/producers as well. They buy up the rights to everything under the sun for “Canada”, and then refuse to share those rights with Netflix and other alternate entertainment providers, while at the same time squeezing those providers with the ridiculous and ethically questionable data caps. And the only ones who might be able to step in and so something about it, the regulators, are almost entirely under the sway of said incumbents.

      • This. I know that Netflix Canada has an uphill battle getting the content people expect from them, but I’m happy as a consumer. And even if I wasn’t, I’m happy to support a company that is trying to make it work in such a terrible market for them to be in.

        And Netflix Canada still gets content that the US doesn’t. And not just crappy stuff. People just never talk about the positive aspects. People just like to complain.

    • For sure it’s the selection in Canada. If it has been released after 2005 it won’t be on Netflix in Canada. This is exactly the same issue we have paying MORE here than the same product in the US. And what does NetFlix say? Oh your market is too small to support more content. This would be like me buying a car made in the US but it doesn’t come with Tires and windows because the market doesn’t support it. Yet i’m pay the same or More the same product. Netflix is just as bad as the ISP’s here in Canada they truly don’t care about the customers.

  14. John Christopher Supertramp

    Please help us!!! We have a 4Mbps down and 56Kbps up. Mamimum plans outside big city for New-Brunswick is Rogers Cable with 150Mbps down and 10 Mbps but for 229$/month and no dedicated IP

    For symetrical bandwidth, Bell Aliant charge for a 36 months commitment to service.
    – 550$ (+600$ installation) for 5/5Mbps
    – 750$/month (+600$ installation) for 10/10Mbps.
    – 1100$/month (+600$ installation) for 20/20Mbps


    We can’t run a business which need Internet as it cost more than the price of renting an office per month.

  15. Leif Utne

    Wow. Compare that to Finland, where the courts have ruled that broadband access really IS a human right. Or Sweden, where I just spent several weeks, and saw TV adds for 200 MBPs service with no bandwidth caps for SEK 499 a month (about USD $75). See By comparison, the rates in Canada are criminal. And the US isn’t much better. I’m paying Comcast $70/month for 30 MBPs at home.

    • You think that’s bad? I moved to Canada (where I’m a citizen), and we’re paying $170/month for 6 up/1 down, with a 125 gig cap, standard phone (no long distance, no caller id, nothing), and standard satellite – no DVR or anything.

      • Graham Fair

        Where do you live, John, and which carrier? And what are the names of the packages that you have? Please be specific. That seems rather high unless you are in a remote location. You can get all of that or more for under $100 from every ISP and Telecom company in Canada.

      • I would look for a better package dude, I live in souther ontario- wightman ISP – $59.95 10 calling feature phone with 2cents per minute long distance AND unlimited bandwidth on fibre optic from CO- to home with 20 meg down guaranteed speed- usually average 40 meg down 8 meg up

      • Sounds about right, I pay $170 for my 15d/1u 60gb capped + VIP cable on rogers, and I can’t even hit the 15Mbit. Compared to my $60 15/1 300GB capped only during day time hours Teksavvy DSL. I live in Kitchener,

      • Actually, to be fair, you can find areas in major cities with little to no access available.

        Case in point, an area in NW Edmonton has no Shaw access (estimated 9-12 months) for data or regular cable. Dish only.

        So, you figure you’ll go to DSL service. Well, that’d be Telus… Hmmm…6Mbps down, and 1Mbps up. Period. No eta when 15Mbps will be available.

        And this is in the provincial capital. I was shocked, since Calgary has much better coverage.

    • Ken Schauer

      I live in a very small town in Texas with DSL & get phenominal download speeds (very fue people on my node) & only pay $40 a month. you are getting ripped off @ $70 a month bro.

  16. If the CRTC approves Bell Canada’s acquisition of even more of the market share we will see even higher prices and less choice in Canada. Bell wants to squish Netflix and all other competition like a bug.

    • Graham Fair

      Frankly, if I was Bell I’d want to take out Netflix as well. The very notion of an Internet company going after a high-margin service like video on demand without having the same infrastructure requirements must be infuriating. They have a highly unfair advantage and what do we see? They find a low-cost, low-data cap package on Bell’s website and go whining to their investors that with data caps like that, Canada must be a 3rd world nation. Meanwhile Netflix secretly knows that the majority of Canadians don’t own a base Internet package, they have a package 2 or 3 tiers up where customers have 5x to 20x more data allowance, which is enough for entire months of Netflix. So really, you are just seeing posturing from Netflix, they’re acting like bitches.

      • Lemondish

        With respect, Canada’s internet pricing and infrastructure is still second rate, despite you being correct in most of your assertions. Unlimited bandwidth options in Canada exist, but they’re on average 90 times more expensive than other countries. The inability of Canadian carriers to provide competitive levels of service and pricing compared to other countries is a sad testament to the lack of diversity and competition in the Canadian marketplace.

      • otakucode

        Yeah, every restaurant should run their own water infrastructure and every retail business should run their own electrical grid. The fact they exploit the infrastructure like that is just disgusting! I want a cable for every single Internet-based business running from telephone pole to telephone pole. Just because the phone companies have fought every single step of development of the Internet, and depend COMPLETELY upon government protection from competition to remain in existence, that’s no reason why society should expect them to contribute something. We’re only talking about enabling the largest and most abundant economic opportunity for wider society that has ever been developed. The phone companies should definitely remain the sole ISPs and continue to be able to provide services like telephone and video distribution even though the Internet makes those services millions of times cheaper and easier to provide. When automobiles were developed, the government stepped in and forced automobile companies to require a buggy whip to be inserted into a special slot in the car before it could start because the buggy whip manufacturers wanted to continue making money, so they should step in again here and give the phone companies all of the benefit of connecting to the Internet even though the phone companies fought to stop it from happening!

      • You’re arguing against technological advancement. Netflix can offer a cheaper better service becuase of advances in technology. It’s not their fault Bell was too near sighted to set up the service before they did. Now, instead of competing in a fair market with netflix, they’re going to create unfair disadvantages for netflix to ensure their dominance and artificially high prices.

        It’s about as ethical as buying the world’s entire supply of flour and then quadrupling it because “it’s good business”.

      • My “2 or 3 tier up” Rogers cable package gives me 60GB of bandwidth a month, most definitely not enough to stream netflix like I watch TV. That was part of the reason I canned my netflix subscription, I wasn’t using it because there wasn’t enough content, and I don’t really wanna slam through my bitcap and have to fork more money to rogers.

  17. twospruces

    wow. well netflix should go ahead and liberate me from this tragic circumstance by building their own infrastructure so they don’t need the carriers.

    how silly. on so many levels.

      • onespruce

        Does it matter if he does? Or does it matter if you work for Netflix?

        Who builds a business plan that depends on deliverying product to their customer without having to compensate the deliverer for the delivery?

        The ISP sets a price for their service based on the cost of offering the service. When the cost of deliverying that service exceeds the revenue received the ISP has to do something to recoup the cost. They can either raise their rates or reduce their costs. The caps allow them to do that.

      • @onespruce You are completely misled or intentionally misleading others. Shaw’s lowest Exo package costs the consumer $90 a month. It costs Shaw less than $20 to offer that service to the customer, which includes cable, internet and phone. They are incredibly profitable, right now.

        The bandwidth limits have nothing to do with profitability. They have to do with protecting their cable offering by limiting bandwidth consumers already paid for, from being used for cable alternatives (youtube, netflix, bittorrent, etc…).

      • @Domenic Polsoni
        You guys are forgetting about people.
        There are other cost.
        Paying employees.
        Paying R&D.
        Paying for legal fees for future development.

        Please think outside the box.

      • @Fred, the cost of employing people does not go up the more bandwidth someone use.

        NO cost goes up the more bandwidth you use. Bandwidth is not a finite resource, that can be “used up”. Sure, you can oversaturate it, or you can have excess, but at the end of the day you are not using up a commodity that Bell and Rogers have to go buy to resell to you.

        Even if Bell or Rogers had to pay additional peering costs because you are using more bandwidth, the price they are charging the consumer are about 10,000x what they would pay their peers.

        This is nothing like a business delivering a physical product, like a cart full of turnips. It does not cost more to deliver more, like turnips would. The people who can defend this from anything other than it “Theyre a business, they can charge you whatever they want” standpoint do not understand the technology. Think of the internet like a painting. Do you pay more for a painting the longer you plan to look at it each day? If an art dealer was to say “You will look at this painting an hour a day, so I will charge you 10,000 dollars. If you were only going to look at it, say, once a week, it would be 4 dollars”, would you be able to justify that in any possible way? The amount that the painting can be looked at is not a finite resource. If youre not looking at it, the painting is still there and its possible to go and enjoy it. Why would that cost extra?

        Also, websites do pay. They pay a hosting company for bandwidth so they can deliver their site to you, or they have an ISP that allows them to host their own servers. So the “Dotcoms shouldnt get a free ride” argument also cant really be justified. The money comes out in the wash at the peers, which connect the two ends.

        So tell me again why canadian telco’s should get a bigger cut at the consumer level? They can either take it up with their peering providers (Like Comcast tried to do with L3), or use the money you are paying to upgrade their infrastructure if thats where their problem is.

      • @onespruce: Do you ever make a phone call to a mobile phone? Who pays for that airtime?

        Do you not realize that it’s the *consumer* who pays for access to the Internet, and that they should therefore be getting reasonable access for what they’re paying for?

      • TheREALTruth

        @theTruth – the ISPs have been shown to be price gouging over and over and over again. Their prices are not connected to their costs. Do a little of your own research, and try to go beyond the information given by the ISPs – you might broaden your horizons, and learn the world isn’t as you thought it was.

      • Jeff seems to be the only one who gets it here. Maybe its because I’m an engineer, who knows, but I can’t even comprehend a world without the internet, let alone not understand how it works. The real key point here to take home with you is what has been mentioned above:

        The internet is NOT a finite resource.

      • @onespruce

        Who builds a business plan that depends on delivering product to their customer without actually delivering products to their customers? If it weren’t for great internet products out there like Netflix, ISPs would have far fewer people demanding their product. People would be fine going back to dialup speeds. ISPs are in the business of delivering internet content. Without great internet content, they wouldn’t have anything to deliver and wouldn’t exist. The internet is continually becoming more advanced, and now Canadian ISPs are lagging behind and are unable or unwilling to satisfactorily deliver this content.

    • twospruces

      what would you propose for the online book retailer who wants to set up shop in iqaluit? should bell aliant run a subsea cable into frobisher bay for them?

      canada is a large and thinly populated place; not the lowest cost place to operate a network. I dont work for a carrier but i defend their right to run their business.

      the copper loop was unbundled; competition should happen to flatten things down.

      • twospruce it seems you know very little about the big Canadian telecom companies and not much about economics either. Even in Ontario the most densely populated province our rates and caps are unbelievable. 3 massive corporations hold almost all of our infrastructure and they know it. They push out new competitive firms and are able to charge waaaay above reasonable prices because people will pay them. Its more of an oligopoly than a competitive market where their prices would be around their average total cost to provide the service.

      • twospruces


        So, what would you propose…? Last i checked it is referred to as free enterprise.

        Complaints bin by the door.

        I will repeat. The copper loop has been unbundled. Competition is possible. I use an alternative ip service provider, because i happen to live where that is possible.

      • Graham Fair

        Funion – Canada and the US tried competition, tried deregulation. In the US alone, dozens of CLECs started up trying to compete. With rare exception, they are all gone today. Now it is true that Canadian companies do play hardball, but the fact of the matter is that building new infrastructure is ridiculously expensive, so expensive that new competition can’t enter the market. Who is to blame? It’s not just the incumbents, it’s the suppliers of the equipment, and the overall state of affairs. This isn’t just in Canada, in virtually every 1st world nation the competitive landscape is an oligopolistic situation. What could regulation do? Zilch. The market controls the competition, not the government.

      • Give me a break, Rogers, Bell and Shaw have been gauging their customers from the onset. Our country is so big. What a load of crap. I am from Southern Ontario, one of the most populated areas in North America. And our internet speeds and rates suck! Why do they do this? No competition. That’s why. Tax payer money subsidizes the infrastructure these guys built. I am still waiting to see the benefit of these subsidies!

      • Stefan Alhmqquist

        Wow, you are really clueless about network infrastructure and basic business models aren’t you? Copper is the last thing an ISP in that situation should be looking at.

      • twospruces : God, are you being intentionally thick? You clearly don’t know shit about the whole issue, as others have subtly pointed out. So I suggest you STFU and get properly informed. Also, lay down Atlas Shrugged, it’s a load of crap. Free market/free enterprise does not foster healthy competition. It fosters monopoly unless the government steps in and cockblocks them to allow startups to be competitive. Wake up from your fantasies and again, get informed.

      • Actually @twospruces Rogers (the largest cable provider in Canada) offered an unlimited internet plan for $80 CA per month (I was a subscriber). The week that Netflix announced that they were coming to Canada, Rogers scrapped the unlimited plan and gave me an awesome 80Gb cap, citing that they were protecting us poor consumers from bandwidth throttling (which they do anyways). It has absolutely nothing to do with how “thinly” populated Canada is, and has everything to do with the fact that our Government has allowed Rogers, Bell and Telus to carve out a monopoly in our country, and this includes Cable, Internet and mobile service. Google the total cost to the consumer for an iphone 4, in Canada a three year plan costs the consumer $3,300, compared to $1,000 in the US.

      • Rogers_sucks_hard

        “bell aliant run a subsea cable into frobisher bay for them?”

        Did bell actually do this? Lat time I checked the big two are reinvesting zero of their profits into infrastructure (aside from maintenance and newer cellular networks) – and the lines that all ready exist were installed by HYDRO CANADA and funded by the PUBLIC through taxes.

      • Wade Friesen

        Canada is big, but southern Ontario is not. Even with enough people in rural areas we are still lucky to get anything better than basic wireless broadband. Bell keeps slowing down smaller ISPs development.

    • Domenic Polsoni

      Sure thing. Only Netflix will require several tens of millions of government subsidies in order to do so. I mean, it’s only fair when you consider that just about every other provider did. Ok? Thaaaaanks.

      • Google is already proving telecoms lie and inflate the true cost of installing a new updated fibre network by at least a factor of 50 . Competition will come and believe me when I say the telecoms giants all over the world will be looking for new business models just to stay relevant. WI-FI networks are the future but not in the way most people expect.

    • The infastructure is there, all that has to happen is consumers need to be educated. Not sure why people still buy capped connections.

      I use Distributel which resells me Rogers Cable internet (28mbit down/1mbit up) with no download or upload bandwidth cap. All for $60 per month.

      Teksavvy is another large reseller of Rogers Cable and Bell Fibe as their own without silly caps. I guess Netflix could also resell the internet service as ‘netflix internet’ without caps :) win – win!

    • otakucode

      That would be illegal. Pretty much all places have laws forbidding anyone from setting up new networks because some people don’t want tons of cables hanging from every telephone pole or streets constantly being dug up.

      Internet service needs to be a public utility. It fits every criteria of a utility that I have ever heard of, and the benefits to society and the economy would be monstrously huge.