Anti UBB Wants You

February 1, 2011 -

Are you a Canadian ticked off at the newly concocted scheme to charge you based on the bandwidth you consume? Then you might want to check out Anti UBB, an organazation dedicated to stopping "usage-based billing" in Canada. As a consumer in the U.S. this should scare you, because if usage-based billing is implemented without complaint from consumers, it will most definitely make its way here.

So what exactly is usage-based billing? From the site:

"With Usage-Based Billing, large Internet Service Providers (ISP) provide you with a ridiculously-low download cap, and charge you as you download more than it. Caps recommended have been as low as 25GB. As Bell is losing its fixed-line telephone customers and soon television customers, Usage-Based Billing is yet another way to increase profits and gouge customers."

ISPs have already started crying about the cost of supporting services such as Netflix and YouTube and want to pass the cost directly to those services or end users. It won't be long before it becomes a reality, really. This is just the sort of thing that true net neutrality was intended to fight, but the FCC caved into stakeholder concerns while ignoring the will of the people.

So I urge all Canadians to join the site and follow the links therein to start the fight against this horrible practice.

[Disclaimer: The opinions in the story are mostly my own and do not necessarily reflect the view of GamePolitics or the ECA.]


Comments

Re: Anti UBB Wants You

I don't have a problem with limiting speeds to plan X,Y,Z at 10,20 and 99 prices. Bandwidth itself I dunno 10$ per 100GB sounds resonable that way most users wil pay less than 35$ a month while some will spend 60-90$.Anything beyond that is just redicoulous.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Anti UBB Wants You

Hmm... seems hell hasn't frozen over... no airborne pigs in sight... and yet I agree with you Zippy.

I too have no problem with paying for a certain data rate.  And I'd have no problem paying based on usage if the prices were reasonable.  But paying the full price I'm paying now, plus $1-2 per GB above my cap (whatever that ends up being (no news from Shaw that I've heard yet)) is ridiculous.

It costs pennies per GB to support the lines and the installation of the lines was subsidized by tax dollars.  The ISPs, phone companies, etc have already made back their investment.

It would be reasonable to have a low initial price ($10-20 based on how fast you want) and then charge purely based on usage at a reasonable price (~$0.10/GB) on every byte transferred (no silly caps).  Even that price is several times what it costs them for maintenance.  Barring that kind of system (and I'm sure we wont see that kind of system pop up) I'd be quite happy with the status quo.

I see one way to turn this around.  The CRTC has no requirement to listen to consumers.  We can file complaints, but they don't have to care.  We need to make it an election issue.  Every MLA and MP has published (e/snail) mail addresses.  Get writing.  I know I will.

===============

Chris Kimberley

===============

Chris Kimberley

Re: Anti UBB Wants You

I would have NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER with monthly metering charges, if the basic monthly charge was a small amount, and the usage charges were in line with how much it actually cost the ISP to get the bandwidth.

The fact is that most ISP's already charge enough to more than purchase their connections, and they don't need more money to cover the costs which, on average, don't change from month to month!

Re: Anti UBB Wants You

It's really simple. The internet is a luxury item. If the ISP's are going to "triple dip" at the money troth then I will just cancel and use the internet from work.

I do agree with the poster above me though. Netflix, Steam, OnLive, and any other company that relies on net neutrality needs to step it up. Since us consumers dont have a voice as far as the ISP's are concerned then these companies need to represent our wishes for us.

I am already part of every group and petition I can sign up for, it time for corporations to start backing these efforts as well.

Re: Anti UBB Wants You

For whatever reason, GP seems to cover a certain subset of Slashdot-type articles that don't really fall under the GP header.

However, in this case, you could have actually tied the issue back to games yet you only mention Netflix and Youtube as examples of affected services.  You're completely overlooking the shift to digital distribution for a lot of modern games, some of which can chew up a third of the monthly quota for a single download.

Here's an (admittedly low content) reddit blurb from one poor Canadian saying goodbye to Steam: www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/fbvje/good_bye_steam_i_hardly_knew_ye/  One interesting comment from someone in Australia:

"As an Australian, I feel your pain. A few years back, it was a choice between two options - have moderately decent browsing speeds for a month, or, grab that Steam game you picked up on sale, and endure a month of snail-slow internet (or ridiculous per-MB-over-cap costs)."

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenWhen I write about these massacres, I don't use the shooter's name or picture. I'm not saying everyone has to play it that way but that's how I prefer to do it.10/25/2014 - 12:44am
Andrew EisenYep, it's why the news media stopped spotlighting numbnuts who run out on the field during sporting events.10/25/2014 - 12:01am
Matthew Wilsonin media research its called the copycat effect. it simply says that if the news covers one mass shooting shooter, it increases the likelihood of another person going on a mass shooting.10/25/2014 - 12:00am
Andrew EisenAgreed. It bugs me that I know the names, faces and personal histories of a bunch of mass shooters but I couldn't tell you the name of or recognize a photo of a single one of their victims.10/24/2014 - 11:51pm
AvalongodAgree with Quiknkold. @Mecha...if that worked we would have figured out how to prevent these long ago.10/24/2014 - 11:32pm
MechaCrashUnfortunately, you have to focus on the perpetrator to figure out the whys so you can try to prevent it from happening again.10/24/2014 - 10:55pm
quiknkoldpoor girl. poor victims. rather focus on them then the shooter. giving too much thought to the monster takes away from the victims.10/24/2014 - 10:15pm
Andrew EisenFor what it's worth, early reports are painting the motive as "he was pissed that a particular girl wouldn't date him."10/24/2014 - 10:12pm
quiknkoldwell then I suck as a man cause I ask for help when necessary :P10/24/2014 - 10:07pm
Technogeek(That said, mostly I was making the smartass evopsych comment because your post seemed like the kind of just-so story that has come to dominate 99% of its usage.)10/24/2014 - 10:04pm
TechnogeekHell, Liam Neeson built his modern career around it. Cultural factors likely play a far greater role than you appear willing to admit.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
TechnogeekSeriously, though, the idea of "because women are protectors and that's why they never commit school shootings" is, at best, grossly overreductive. There's nothing inherently feminine about being willing to kill in order to protect one's offspring.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
MechaCrashThe "toxic masculinity" thing refers to how you have to SUCK IT UP AND BE A MAN because seeking help is seen as weakness, which means you suck at manliness, so it builds and builds and builds until something finally snaps.10/24/2014 - 10:01pm
quiknkoldthere, I'm done. And thats what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldand I am not spouting Evopsych, technogeek. tbh I never heard the phrase till you said it. I'm going off my observations.10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldmoreover, the guy who did this isnt even white. He was native american according to the news report I read. Also that he went for a specific target. That's a much different picture than a certain Sandy Hook guy who will not be named10/24/2014 - 9:53pm
quiknkoldbut I am also certain nobody in their right mind is committing these shootings singing the Machoman song. these are sick individuals who have given up on life10/24/2014 - 9:51pm
Technogeekevopsych lol10/24/2014 - 9:49pm
quiknkoldWhen you suffer from mental illness, youre more likely to go by instinct. yes. I came off as sexist.10/24/2014 - 9:46pm
quiknkoldmore on somthing they are fixated on. Post Partum Depression is an example. This is why a woman is less likely to go off on a rampage.10/24/2014 - 9:44pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician