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.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

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

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Mattsworknamejob they wanted without the unions getting involved. The problem is, it has some unexpected side effects, like the ones Info mentioned07/07/2015 - 8:49am
MattsworknameThe problem being, right to work states exsist specificly as a counter to Unions, as the last 20 or so years have shown, the unions have been doing this countries economoy NO favors. The right to work states came into being to allow people to work any07/07/2015 - 8:49am
Infophile(cont'd) discriminatory. This can only be done for protected classes which are outlined in law (race, sex, religion, ethnicity everywhere, sexual orientation in some states). So, a gay person could be fired because they're gay and have no recourse there.07/07/2015 - 7:27am
Infophile@Goth: See here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/firedforbeinggay.asp for a good discussion on it. Basically, the problem is that in the US, most states allow at will firing, and it's the burden of the fired person to prove the firing was ...07/07/2015 - 7:25am
Goth_SkunkAssuming that's true, then that is a fight worth fighting for.07/07/2015 - 6:58am
Yuuri@ Goth_Skunk, in many states being gay is not a protected status akin to say race or religion. It's also in the "Right to work" states. Those are the states where one can be fired for any reason (provided it isn't a "protected" one.)07/07/2015 - 6:07am
Goth_Skunkregarded as a beacon of liberty and freedom that is the envy of the world, would not have across-the-board Human Rights laws that don't at the very least equal those of my own country.07/07/2015 - 5:47am
Goth_SkunkI find that hard to believe, Infophile. I have difficulty believing employers can *still* fire people for being gay. I would need to see some evidence that this is fact, because as a Canadian, I can't believe that the United States,07/07/2015 - 5:46am
InfophileFor that matter, even women don't yet have full legal equality with men. The US government still places limits on the positions women can serve in the military. And that's just the legal side of things - the "culture wars" are more than just laws.07/07/2015 - 5:43am
InfophileAnd that's just LGB issues. Get ready for an incoming battle on rights for trans* people. And then after that, a battle for poly people.07/07/2015 - 5:41am
InfophileA battle's been won. In many states employers can still fire people for being gay. And in many states, parents can force their children into reparative therapy to try to "fix" being gay. Those battles still need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:40am
Goth_Skunkand now they've switched to battles that don't need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:37am
Goth_SkunkIn my opinion, it was the final legal hurdle denying homosexual couples final and recognized statuses as eligible spouses. But even though this war's been won, some people are still too keen to keep fighting battles,07/07/2015 - 5:28am
Goth_SkunkAnd it's a trend I don't mind seeing continue. Same-sex marriage was at long-last made definitively legal by SCOTUS, and it's about time. I'm glad it's finally happened, as it was desperately needed.07/07/2015 - 5:25am
Infophile(cont'd) It started long before that. Perhaps the American Civil War comes to mind?)07/07/2015 - 3:59am
InfophileOn Goth's linked article: Historically speaking, there may have been cycles, but remember that the left has steadily gained ground. Is there a good reason to expect that to be different this time? (Oh, and no, Culture War 1.0 wasn't with the Baby Boomers.07/07/2015 - 3:59am
Goth_Skunk"THIS VIDEO IS PROBLEMATIC:" About Social Justice Warriors, by J.T. Sexkik. Excellent video. http://ow.ly/PgGnD07/07/2015 - 3:22am
Goth_Skunkand repeats the cycle, over and over. Presently, the far left culture is overreaching, and is about to lose their stranglehold on power.07/06/2015 - 10:01pm
Goth_SkunkAs far back as the 60's, according to the writers. The culture war moves in cycles from one generation to the next. The left rebels against the right, takes over, overreaches to the point where the right rebels right back, takes over, overreaches ->07/06/2015 - 9:58pm
MattsworknameGoth, what "Comming overreach" , the media and goverment have been overreaching for years07/06/2015 - 9:34pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician