(WEB HOST INDUSTRY REVIEW) — The government body that regulates and supervises broadcasting and telecommunications in Canada has ruled that large telephone companies must make their existing Internet access services available to alternate Internet service providers at speeds that match those offered to their own retail customers – and are allowed to charge ISPs a 10 percent premium on their own costs.
According to a Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission announcement this week, this requirement will help ensure the health of alternate ISPs, giving Canadians more choice by offering competing and innovative Internet services.
“Access to broadband Internet services is a key foundation for the digital economy,” CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein said in a statement. “The large telephone and cable companies are bringing their fibre networks closer to Canadian homes and businesses, which allows for faster Internet connections. Requiring these companies to provide access to their networks will lead to more opportunities for competition in retail Internet services and better serve consumers.”
Industry news site DSL Reports notes that similarly to the US, smaller Canadian ISPs have been shut out of being able to provide faster fiber-based networks because of deals with incumbent providers, yet those providers have quelled calls for similar such legislation south of the border from a weakened FCC. “Here in the States incumbent carriers have lobbied and threatened regulators away from the concept, but studies have shown that countries with ‘open access’ regulatory policies do ultimately see more competition — and as a result, lower prices,” the article notes. “Of course the CRTC still has to enforce this policy.”
The CRTC has also taken steps to make the obligations imposed on large telephone and cable companies more equitable – making them modify their existing Internet access services in such a way that alternate ISPs can connect to their networks at as few points as possible. This, in effect, enables competitors to make use of the cable companies’ services just as easily as those of the telephone companies.
Furthermore, the cable companies are already required to provide access to alternate ISPs at speeds that match those offered to their own retail customers. It appears, however, that the legislation does not account for Internet Traffic Management Practices or “traffic shaping” that the carrier may have in place. This would mean that the regulation falls short of the “network neutrality” principle that Internet users, not ISPs, governments or other bodies, should be in control over what content they view and what applications they use on the Internet.
