My man is in IT, and telecommutes. My son gets on-line video lectures and lab demos as part of his university classes. We go over the proposed cap every month. It'll be a huge blow to our budget...
It's a prohibative cap levied across the entire population so that Bell and Rogers can continue to gouge money from internet users. If you're on an independant provider, the indie provider won't even *get* the extra money - it'll all go to Rogers and/or Bell.
Also, NetFlicks is trying to gain a toe-hold in Canada, but the cap will amount to 1.5 movies a month, assuming the NetFlicks customer uses no other internet in that month. The ruling effectively kills off another media competitor for Bell and Rogers.
This cap proposal isn't about penalizing torrents, it is *entirely* a money grab and monopoly build.
Comments 4
Reply
Reply
Reply
Also, NetFlicks is trying to gain a toe-hold in Canada, but the cap will amount to 1.5 movies a month, assuming the NetFlicks customer uses no other internet in that month. The ruling effectively kills off another media competitor for Bell and Rogers.
This cap proposal isn't about penalizing torrents, it is *entirely* a money grab and monopoly build.
Reply
Leave a comment