TekSavvy takes pirate site blocking battle to Canada’s Supreme Court
torrentfreak.com
torrentfreak.com
Bell just installed fibre to the side of my house for free and want to give me “2 years of 1GB symmetrical” for $35/mo CAD. Nope. Never in a million years will I do business with you, Bell.
But yeah, I stick with Teksavvy. Only have Bell for a secondary house, where they removed their copper service...
I love the idea of a 50GB monthly cap on 1gbps Internet. Blow through that in under 7 minutes.
https://forums.redflagdeals.com/bell-internet-price-increase...
They are for the most part not what you would call a facilities based ISP. It's not a choice I would make, operating an ISP, because it totally removes from your control and the ability to know what's really going on with the last and middle mile segments to your customers.
I'm sure that if somebody gave the owners of TekSavvy 400 million dollars and they went to hire GPON last mile experts and build their own networks in sufficiently population-dense parts of Canada, they would do pretty good with it. But that seems unlikely.
* https://www.teksavvy.com/in-the-news/2021-press-releases/tek...
* https://mobilesyrup.com/2021/08/03/teksavvy-launches-fibre-n...
In the same vein: given the condo boom in Toronto/GTA, there are companies whose 'niche' is that they run fibre to various developments, pre- and post-construction, and offer high-speed Internet:
* https://www.canadianbusiness.com/innovation/condo-owners-are...
You need to have really a lot of existing copper to keep staying at it to have any hope to pay it off.
All "3rd world" countries in recent memory I've been all had either LX to premises, or some kind of PON.
You can now get a gigabit even in places like Pakistan.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_x
For the last few decades it has been copper, either twisted-pair or co-axial, to just about everywhere.
It's the intra-city fibre backbone which is either non-existent in the developing world, or extremely hard to get connection rights to in the developed countries.
Long ago i cancelled Bell because they would not stop the constant telemarketing calls and I wanted a new phone number and this was my only option.
After i did this, they sent me a bill for $660 in long distance charges. Turned out after "cancelling and re-enabling" they did not put me back on the "free long distance plan".
The $660 bill should have been closer to $90 which i was more then willing to pay.
They still come to my door from time to time, trying to sell me services. After doing this to me do they really think I will ever use them again?
Bell's problem is they still think it is 1970, and they hold all the cards and you MUST use them as there are no other options.
I'm curious what the ISP situation in Canada is like. East Asia is almost entirely CGNAT, for example.
I've never had CGNAT in canada with any isp, but maybe i just got lucky.
Now tired of waiting rural residents are installing Starlink at about 50 to 100 installs per week (anecdotal). Rural residents are going from "up to 1Mbps" (and poor support) to 250Mbps down/50Mbps up 50ms latency. By the end of the year Bell is going to be wiped out in rural areas.
Like you say even if it's 1Gbps and $35 it's just not worth it. Bell is a horrible company to deal with.
Seems like that might play into Bell's hand though. They've successfully grifted billions of CAD to build stuff out in rural areas, haven't done so, and can now with a straight face say "See, they don't want it!"
while every other ISP was folding, teksavvy stood up and said it will not hand over customer names without a proper court order.
*with a 2yr contract, regular price of $79.95/mo after the first 3 months etc etc
edit And done, 5 stars.
At one point I was even getting internet for free from all my referrals.
Plus, none of their sales tactics are as slimy as RoBellCos.
Hopefully one day they can offer a fibre option. But until then, they'll continue to be my ISP of choice.
On the one hand, it's unreasonable to expect a court to specify a perfect algorithm for determining which sites can and can't be blocked, but on the other hand, the fact that such a dangerous remedy has been invented by the judicial branch, with no clear guidance from the legislature, suggests that the system needs to "fail open" by protecting fundamental rights, until the government can pass a law that gives some parameters to how this censorship power may be used.
Yup, this is exactly what I'm paying for by subscribing to TekSavvy.
Absolutely wild. The way I'm reading it this was not a court case where the site was sued and lost. A rights holder company filed a complaint and the court just said "sure" and ordered private companies to censor the internet. No trial, no evidence, no nothing. Holy shit.
Goldtv did not file a response to the statement of claim and went far enough to avoid answering to rights holders that the judge mentioned it in the order. In Canada, if you don’t file a response to a statement of claim, you waive your right to present evidence and the plaintiff’s evidence is evaluated as sworn. The original defendant failed to defend itself and then decided to ignore two straight injunctions.
I’ve heard all sorts of people say that Canadian courts aren’t anything to worry about. They are serious…
Here is the order:
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2019/2019fc1432/2019fc1...
Thanks for being kind!! This has been fun! :)
TekSavvy, and other "independents", are reliant on the incumbent telcos and cablecos for physical infrastructure. They independents can access this infrastructure by paying a fee regulated by the CRTC (~FCC).
The independents say that the currently approved fee for access to FTTH is too high, and that they cannot offer high-bandwidth services in a profitable manner over incumbent last-mile infrastructure.
Teksavvy's various regulatory submissions:
* https://www.teksavvy.com/policies/regulatory/regulatory-subm...