<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is C-552 Net Neutrality bill a waste of time?</title>
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16070</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net offers not-your-lamescream news on movies music digital media P2P peer-to-peer TV television file sharing freedom of speech open source product news Wifi mobiles company</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 17:30:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: CHRoNoSS</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16070#comment-497665</link>
		<author>CHRoNoSS</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 14:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16070#comment-497665</guid>
		<description>and as the above person in the article notes, this bill would not stop the throttling , instead woudl enshrine the ability of them to do it into law, which is exactly what I NOR ANYONE IN CANADA wants.

Look south of the border about the stories that they are getting like what 10000-15000 kilobit speeds when we are getting 250Kbit, this is a crime and we shoudl take away some of the rights these corporate greedy mongers are doing.

my version of the law would state that if you are ANY type of ISP you must invest in expanding your networks ( certain percentage of profits ) and ONLY sell accounts you can offer. To those that had 5 megabit unlimited on bell we should be compensated for a whole year a internet costs for the harrassment, the lies, the defrauding of termination of the contracts and then trying to charge 100$ to me for them breaking a contract.

Also it would make early termination fees illegal outright. If they have as i suspect been breaking contracts for a while they have tons a canadians money they should not and thus they should not be allowed to make such contractual offers.

Bell should immediately forced to double the network bandwidth and stop the proposed throttling.

Sympatico should be sold off in region parts and rogers control on regions should also be diminished. IF they can't play nice at the big level we need to bring them all down to size.

Perhaps a new law on monopolistic sectors of the economy might also address these issues. The third parties should be given a better break so they can save cash to build up networks in there primary city of origin, and then potentially also branch out.
Competition will bread the issue away.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and as the above person in the article notes, this bill would not stop the throttling , instead woudl enshrine the ability of them to do it into law, which is exactly what I NOR ANYONE IN CANADA wants.</p>
<p>Look south of the border about the stories that they are getting like what 10000-15000 kilobit speeds when we are getting 250Kbit, this is a crime and we shoudl take away some of the rights these corporate greedy mongers are doing.</p>
<p>my version of the law would state that if you are ANY type of ISP you must invest in expanding your networks ( certain percentage of profits ) and ONLY sell accounts you can offer. To those that had 5 megabit unlimited on bell we should be compensated for a whole year a internet costs for the harrassment, the lies, the defrauding of termination of the contracts and then trying to charge 100$ to me for them breaking a contract.</p>
<p>Also it would make early termination fees illegal outright. If they have as i suspect been breaking contracts for a while they have tons a canadians money they should not and thus they should not be allowed to make such contractual offers.</p>
<p>Bell should immediately forced to double the network bandwidth and stop the proposed throttling.</p>
<p>Sympatico should be sold off in region parts and rogers control on regions should also be diminished. IF they can&#8217;t play nice at the big level we need to bring them all down to size.</p>
<p>Perhaps a new law on monopolistic sectors of the economy might also address these issues. The third parties should be given a better break so they can save cash to build up networks in there primary city of origin, and then potentially also branch out.<br />
Competition will bread the issue away.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
