A carrier having the power to do this to us has a valuable commodity in their hands: us as a captive audience, which means before long big business would be paying for THEIR content getting higher bandwidth. As a whole, the internet would take one more step towards becoming completely consumed by commercial interests.

If 5% of all Bell subscribers where in Montreal and were downloading from Vancouver over a single fibre channel (DWDM/OC192)
100% of the time at max speed of 300 KBytes/s then it would consume 234.8 GBit/s
2004000 (subscibers) * 0.05 (percent) * 2.4Mbit/s (avereage max speed) = 240480 Mbit/s = 234.8 GBit/s

DWDM can transmit at 400 Gbit/s. Hence 234.8*100/400 = 58.7% maximum consumption. Bell has how many DWDM networks, three?
In this case percentage drops to 19%.

However in P2P this does not happen, users access pattern is more like a web without concentrated nodes. Hence 400 Gbit/s
is not a measure of actual capacity, actual capacity can be measured by measuring maximum capacity for each user and
computing an average. Moreover the users do not download 100% of the available time, nor get the max speed all the time.

Imagine someone downloads a DVD which is 4gb and may be downloads 20 DVDs a month which is 640 Gbit, this can be transmitted
in 1.5 seconds on a single DWDM. There are 2592000 seconds in 30 days. Divide this by 1.5 and you get 1728000=1.7 billion
of bandwith hoggers who can be served.

Now if an extreme case of the bandwidth hogger is taken 2592000 sec * 2.4MBits = 759.38 Gbytes month. This is 189 DVDs,
some people actually get that a month, really? Most importantly only the P2P is hit, you can still download at 300Kbyte/s
from Microsoft during peak hours.

Why Bell or any other ISP dooes not like P2P? Primarily because the ISPs model their network for access to concentrated nodes
like Microsoft website or YouTube. Here ISPs can apply caching for example. However, the P2P traffic does not fit into
that model.

Hence what may be actually happening is that P2P traffic represents a more significant portion of the traffic which goes
through the backbone, because the web and video traffic can be cached by ISP. It may also be affecting how much ISP has to
pay for data transmitted over other ISPs backbone networks. But then why hit smaller ISPs like Teksavvy who pay for access to
backbone? Well, because in P2P even if you can upload only at 30KB/s, and many people upload then your download speed can still
go up to the download maximum of 300KB/s, hence rendering the 30Kb/s upload limit not effective when applied to masses. Following
this logic it makes sense to allow users only to access a predefined, controlled content, like a website hosted on the
concentrated node. This is same as telling people what to read. The above website as well pays for the used bandwidth. Now
imagine a startup artist distributing his content over P2P, which is little cost to him with P2P, can he do it in the ideal ISP
model? NO! Does it mean he has to go to a big label who can pay for bandwidth to distribute it?

With all said above, one thing I totally can not understand, is why are we paying $50/month or $1.67 CAD per 1GB for
transmitted data if we are forced into a predefined go to a company website experience? We should be paying $5, this is how
much it is worth. And if we already pay $50 for access, why can not an artist distribute his content to us paying in turn only
his $50? We have all collectively paid already. The Internet should be provided as a public service in order to uphold the
constitutional freedoms or net neutrality should be heavily enforced.

Bell has definitely detailed, advertised it’s Internet services to all with their terms, limitations and any customers who enters into mutually agreed upon terms, agreement with their services now forms the essential mutually legally binding contract.

1: A contract is a legally binding exchange of promises or agreement between competent 2 parties, persons of legal age too, that the governmental court, the law of the state or province , or country next will enforce. Contract law is based on the Latin phrase pacta sunt servanda (pacts must be kept). Anyone can enter into a contract, except minors, certain felons and people of unsound mind. It’s important to know that not all contracts details even have to be in writing., for instance, certain agreements can also be made and accepted orallly and still be legally enforceable. While the contract agreement doesn’t always have to be in writing, all the other elements of a valid contract still have to be met, included, , fulfilled by law. The bottom line is that the parties generally come to transactions in good faith, mutually trust and understanding, and not a one way approach, one way demands, one way relationship.

All valid courts, will not enforce, accept as valid any contract to perform an accepted illegal act. A contract to kill some is invalid clearly too. A person who pays for bad drugs that aren’t delivered can’t next seek the help of a court or the police in getting the money back. Unbelievable some people still do try to do this too.

A valid contract also always requires the mutual parties’ consent, which must be freely made, not forced consent, and clearly communicated to each other. Consent is not free when obtained through duress, menace, fraud, lies, undue influence or mistakes, serious errors were presented. Consent isn’t mutual unless the parties agree on the same thing in the same sense, a clear “meeting of the minds. One party now presenting only their own their terms, conditions, without the other parties approval, consent, free will clearly is still not a valid contract. In order for an acceptance of an offer to be effective, it must be made while the sales, specific, fixed service offer is still open. Any person can changes the conditions of an initial offer in responding to the offer, the old offer is clearly now rejected and the changed conditions constitute a counteroffer and that now becomes part of of any subsequent agreed upon contract. I did that with Bell now too. Once there is next a final, written contract between the parties, the parol evidence rule forbids the introduction in a court proceeding of any previous agreements between the parties on the subject matter of the contract.

Only certain contracts aren’t valid unless in writing. Generally, they do deal with real property, certain specific loans, debts, money exceeding a certain amount, or contracts concerning the sale of goods worth more than $500 or one that include objects that won’t be performed within one year or within the promisor’s lifetime. Bell now being unable to supply me a promised high speed internet but only a low speed one is still a good example of an invalid contract even if was a written one originally from Bell.

2: The Specific parties. The contract must always include, identify who the agreed upon specific parties are; usually names are sufficient, but sometimes addresses or titles may be used. Bell and the specific customer. Me in this case.

3: The agreed upon object. The Offer, the thing, the value, the services being agreed to is also known as the object or subject and it itself not only must be lawful, possible but it must be a definite, fixed, measurable amount specially now even by the laws of Quebec too. For instance Bell promising to deliver a customer a 6 meg download high speed internet service, where they know they only have a 3 meg line capacity is not legal or legally binding contract. Bell promising to supply their” best services “or “up to 6 megs services” is not legal as well for it is is not really an agreed upon fixed object, rather the object is not definite and most customers have take that to mean 6 megs anyway. . The object of the contract does have to be very specific and measurable. It is Bell obligations now to to clerk up any ambiguity on the contract as agree upon by the comer now too. So if Bell promising a 6 megs internet services, and Bell by law next has to deliver 16 megs to meet their promise that is also now part of the contract too. A specified length of time, such as one year does not mean the contract is still valid if Bell has not lived up to the agreed upon previously contract terms.

4: The outcome, or the considerations. All contracts require consideration, meaning each party must gain something fixed, tangible. It may also be something that is or isn’t done or given. When a party agrees to do something (such as I will paint your house) or to not do something (I will not sell my house to anyone else for 30 days) they next also must gain something in return toy make this a valid contract, they must receive agreed upon fixed payment, a fixed reward. Generally, if I say I’ll paint your house, and you haven’t promised me anything in return, you can’t sue me next for not showing up because I will not receive any consideration firstly”. Once a contract has been created, it can be determined if there are any issues that call into question of its validity too.

5: Termination of contracts. Breach of contract. Breach of contract is recognised by the law with applicable penalties now too. Contracts generally can only be terminated if mutually agree now by both parties as to what the terminations terms included. Parties to a contract may mutually agree to rescind the contract. In that case, the parties may agree on the duties and responsibilities of each party after the rescission. Bell still expecting me to pay for their internet when they do not keep their promises is a breach of the contract, an invalid demand of me. Now is the contract price set, are promised quantities specially determined, and is the time for performance clearly stated? There should be enough information contained in the contract always that, if needed, the courts likely next would be able to enforce the contract or determine the appropriate damages. Unless it is mutually agreed upon before any subsequent court demanded decision action, is taken. Fraud is the intentional misrepresentation of an important issue of the contract. The presence of fraud in a contractual proceeding makes the contract voidable by the party upon whom the fraud was perpetrated. The contract always still now binds both parties, and not just the customer to the terms, conditions of the contract agreed upon now as well. Once it is determined that there is a contract, it it still can, must be determined whether there are any defenses that call into question the validity of the contract.

Bell Changing horses, making changes, additions to the contract in midstream is invalid, a breach, still not allowed, especially without the subsequent, and pre consent, approval of both parties now still too and is a breach of contract rather. That includes Bell capping of my bitt torent downloads too on my unlimitted download account.

Yes a Bell contract also may end because of a breach by Bell. A breach occurs when a person, or a firm does not fulfill his or her, their responsibilities as promised in the contract. A breach may be minor or major. A major breach is one that does affect the subject matter of the contract and does affect the outcome of the contract. Bell not having sufficient equipment, capacity in place to meet my high speed internet, is a breach of contract. This is also known as a breach of a material issue. When there has been a breach in a contract, the question of damages is raised. The damages due to a party when there is a contract breach depend on many factors, including: which party breaches, and what damages were incurred. In most cases when an injury results from a contract breach, the injured party receives money damages. Such as I have in Dec 2007 from Bell. Bell itself has unacceptably cause now in the last 2 years many unacceptable breaches in our contract that I have clearly even in writing not accepted and have objected too and demand restitution of as well rightfully.

Go back to a good school firstly Bell if you cannot understand and keep all of this now too.

Paul Kambulow
http://thenonconformer.blogspot.com/

Nope, Canada uses the British way of spelling.

Cheers!