Call for class action against Bell Canada
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- A group of Canadian companies has come together because its members are seriously concerned about the way Bell Canada, with the tacit approval of the Stephen Harper government, is trampling roughshod, over its own customers, including smaller ISPs.
And they’re making sure the CRTC (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission) is fully informed about their anger.
Around August, 2007, Bell Canada started throttling its own Bell Sympatico (users 2pnet – P2P Black List) and we told people how to get out of their contracts, , wrote p2pnet’s Ottawa Gal yesterday, going on »»»
To counter the p2pnet article, Bell Canada later made a script for its phone reps to use in an unsuccessful bid to prevent the exodus to the unthrottled wholesalers, whom Bell later also throttled, in the process of opening the doors to a serious competition problem.
The Canadian Competition Bureau (headed by Ms Sheridan Scott) and at-the-time industry minister Jim Prentice wouldn’t touch it, telling people to go sort it out themselves with the CRTC. In other words, our supposed Canadian watchdog shut out the Canadian people. Then on November 20 last year, the CRTC Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-108 opened the door to DPI and throttling, the story being told in detail in the p2pnet traffic shaping digest.
Now, a coalition of consumer groups and indie telecommunication groups are standing up for your rights, your privacy, and their right to function in a business environment that hasn’t been competitively crippled and hijacked by vested corporate interests, she said.
p2pnet reader Charles had a few thoughts, saying »»»
I have a different legal angle that nobody has taken and that is all people such as myself with a Bell telephone line but use a 3rd party ISP for high-speed Internet sue Bell in a class action lawsuit! This is simply based on contract law, I have a Bell home phone line that I pay strictly for local calling even for long distance I use a different company. When I switched from dial-up Internet access many years ago to high-speed, I went with a 3rd party ISP, I’ve never been with Bell and my ISP contacted Bell on my behalf to get my local line connected to Bell’s high-speed line. So then in my next Bell bill under monthly services a new item appeared it said: 1 High Speed-up to 4.0 Mbps and there was no extra charge for this service!
So by contract law, Bell isn’t charging anything for my residential line to be connected to this high-speed line, so please tell me where is it written in the contract that Bell can interfere with this service?
Because essentially the bottom line to throttling ends with the final consumer and not with the ISP’s who have rented Bell’s line’s to resell it to people like me. The CRTC is irrelevant here because 3rd party resellers of Bell’s capacity aren’t truly being capped with so much bandwidth or aren’t being throttled; it’s the last few feet of the line that Bell still is trying to control that connects the end customer!
My 3rd party ISP isn’t being capped, I’m paying for a high-speed package with no monthly upload/download limits. Just as my 3rd party ISP isn’t being throttled, they’re offering me a high-speed line but it’s only Bell that is throttling me!
Thus my suggestion or rather my plea is for one law firm to launch a massive class action lawsuit (publicize it and get people to sign up) that acts on the behalf of all Bell residential customers who have high-speed Internet through a 3rd party ISP.
The legal case is based on contract law, just as people like me pay a 3rd party ISP for high-speed Internet, we as Bell customers get our residential lines connected to Bell’s high-speed service to complete the transaction.
Where is it written in the contract that just because Bell completes the high-speed connection between 3rd party resellers of Bell’s capacity with Bell’s final few feet of line that connect its residential customers to the Internet that Bell has the right to interfere with the flow of information?
By contract law, either Bell has a legal right to interfere with this Internet content or they don’tperiod!
And that’s the reason to sue them because I don’t believe they have the right because what Bell is saying is that they can break in to my private communication, determine what is being sent/received and at will Bell can choose to vary the speed of my communication!
This makes no legal sense! If I’m sending/receiving them same type of information at 8 PM as I am at 8 AM, everything being equal except the time, where does Bell have the legal right to deliberately interfere and slow down my connection speed at 8 PM but not at 8 AM?
Please show me in writing where it says that Bell can do this just because they connect my Bell residential line to their high-speed line? I’m paying a 3rd party reseller of Bell’s capacity, I have a written contract with them regarding my Internet access, all that Bell is doing is allowing me to connect my Bell residential line to Bell’s high-speed line so that I can connect to my 3rd party ISP. All Bell is doing is making the connection between my ISP and my home phone line but I’m paying my ISP for Internet service not Bell, I don’t have any written contract with Bell other than the terms to my Bell residential phone line.
Thus Bell has no legal legs to stand on in terms of contract law! Just show me where in my contract it says that Bell has control over Internet content and speed of service just because it completes the circuit between my residential phone line and my 3rd party ISP.
And that’s the crux of my legal argument, the throttling issue can only be legally determined between Bell and it’s residential customers who use 3rd party ISP’s. All Bell is doing is completing the circuit, its residential customers aren’t paying Bell directly for access, they are paying 3rd party resellers of Bell’s capacity. At present there is no contract that allows Bell the legal right to interfere between 3rd party ISP’s and its residential customers. Therefore Bell can’t at will comb through private transmissions, determine the type of data being transferred and set a predetermined limit on that data (especially select specific future time frames to restrict certain types of data); all Bell is doing is completing the circuitthat’s it!
They have no legal right to control the rate of flow of data being sent/received just because they are connecting the end user to the 3rd party ISP.
I therefore ask for a law firm to represent all Bell residential phone customers who have high-speed Internet via a 3rd party ISP and sue Bell in a class action lawsuit solely based on the merits of contract law.
“Just because Bell connects its residential customers to its high-speed service so that these consumers may use 3rd party ISP resellers of Bell’s capacity; does that give Bell any legal right to sift through this private data, set parameters of access to Internet speed based on the type of data being sent/received and set predetermined time frames in order to restrict the flow of data?” – Charles asks, adding:
“I say sue the bastards and let it be settled in a court of law!!”
Ottawa Gal – Bell Canada throttling, DPI fight isn`t over, May 21, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy! Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
May 22nd, 2009 at 8:56 am
There are already class actions started, but they require you to be, or have been, with Bell when you were throttled.
There is nothing for those using wholesale services that have been throttled without notice.
The only ones I can see being able to handle this would be the likes of PIAC, C.A.C., or the Quebec Consumers Union, maybe CIPPIC if its in their mandate.
Other than them, no clue.
So if Charles is serious, and wants to make four phone calls or write four Emails, these are the four groups I would pose my questions to.
This theme and topic comes up about twice a month. Most don’t want to go beyond writing a rant.
Based on the evidence provided by this coalition, you may also have the right to file with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (which is free). But you will have to write it and word it according to how your rights are being invaded, and open for exploitation, since we all know this is Bell’s (and Rogers) next move (same with Cell).
May 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
To the editor: Charles’ quote is too long and rambling. It detracts from the core issues.
I agree that the CRTC, and the Canadian government in general have failed us as consumers, and that Bell should be accountable to the courts, and the people they screwed over. It could be said with far less words.
This article makes the idea of a Class-Action look like only rambling fools with loose interpretations of reality are really interested in it.
Instead, I suggest a point-by-point interpretation – which I do not have time to write.
May 22nd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
P.S. – The Canadian government *wants* DPI – it will allow us to enforce ACTA when it comes through. They *want* Bell to be inspecting communications.
May 22nd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
I don’t see how Charles’ “angle” is any different from anyone elses in this matter.
Whether you get your phoneline from Bell or not, the throttled 3rd party service is still the same issue.
Phone service is one thing.
Internet is another.
It is also why I’ve been saying all along that Bell should have been segregated into separately-owned and independent companies way back after Sympatico was born. If you’re going to have any kind of fair competition or even fair service pricing, the “telephone provider” should never have been allowed to also be an “internet service provider”, as well as a “satellite service provider” and “content provider”.
Bell’s been getting away with operating 4 companies with “separate” brands that we’re supposed to believe “can’t interact”, yet the shared resources between the “phone company” and the “internet company” are being used as a weapon against any fair competition. The same goes for the “content company” and the “internet company”.
If just the “internet company” alone had been taken out from under the Bell umbrella, we wouldn’t be having even half of these discussions. The infrastructure, which wouldn’t even have emerged without public money, should never have been run by anyone who is also competing for internet service.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:39 am
>>Bell Canada, with the tacit approval of the Stephen Harper government, is trampling roughshod, over its own customers, including smaller ISPs.
TO BE FAIR THE lIBERALS ALSO GO ALONG WITH BAD BELL. I had spoken and asked directly Quebecs fininance minister Monique Foreget to deal with bad bell but she was hesitant to and i wondered why till I had next read that the new head of the Quebecâs pension fund is Michael Sabia, former head of Bell Canada Enterprises, who took over in March of this year.
QUEBCERS AND THE Quebecâs pension fund IS NOW IN REAL TROUBLE, JUST LOOK AT THE BAD EFFECT THE SAME PERSON SABIA HAD ON BELL, WHOSE STOCKS, SALES, SERVICES, CUSTOMER SATISFACTION HAVE GONE DONE DRASTICALLY. I HOPE THEY ARE ALL NOT STUPID ENOUGH TO LET HIM INVEST OUR MONEY INTO BELL AS WELL
so what does IGGY say about all of this?
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:53 am
>”all people such as myself with a Bell telephone line but use a 3rd party ISP for high-speed Internet sue Bell in a class action lawsuit! This is simply based on contract law, I have a Bell home phone line that I pay strictly for local calling . When I switched from dial-up Internet access many years ago to high-speed, I went with a 3rd party ISP, and my ISP contacted Bell on my behalf to get my local line connected to Bellâs high-speed line. So then in my next Bell bill under monthly services a new item appeared it said: 1 High Speed-up to 4.0 Mbps and there was no extra charge for this service!” .. Just because Bell connects its residential customers to its high-speed service so that these consumers may use 3rd party ISP resellers of Bellâs capacity; does that give Bell any legal right to sift through this private data, set parameters of access to Internet speed based on the type of data being sent/received and set predetermined time frames in order to restrict the flow of data?â
Therefore I have a contract with Bell and I can sue them for interfering with my phone line. But why do we need a government and pay taxes if we have to fend ourselves?
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:50 pm
My only question is a simple one, that also shows only corporations have any rights in Canada. Why is it that the RCMP must obtain a search warrant to inspect your electronic communications and yet a private company can inspect every single packet you send and receive with no regulation at all ? I would really appreciate an answer on that one. One other little thing is why does everyone pick on the CRTC it protects what the acronym stands for Canadian Rogers & Telus & Corporations service
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:34 am
”I M UNDER SIEGE” for the almost four years, my voice was recorded and any time i make a call or get one when say”HELLO”I’M cut off. I made over 30 (thirty )complains nothing has changed. any sugestions/?