Comments on: Net Neutrality in Canada – The Fight is On

By: David Hughes

David Hughes — Mon, 02 Apr 2007 03:23:22 +0000

Just keep in mind we are *for* Net Neutrality, so many people hear it as a buzzword they don’t know whether they should be for or against it.

Think “neutral” as in not being connected to or controlled by one group or another, corporate or not. Control by one group is not the goal, spread it out, keep it distributed with many routes in case part of it goes down.

When you hear Neutral think open and free, distributed, no one entity controlling it. Another way to think of it is wouldn’t it be ridiculous if your phone company insisted on knowing what you were talking about to a friend on the phone? The content is none of their business.

By the way I think getting rid of ICANN and substituting a more International body that isn’t based in one country would be good for preserving Net Neutrality too.

This CBC article explains it very clearly:
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2006/11/02/tech-neutrality.html

By: Will Wants Me to Write About Net Neutrality in Canada | DarrenBarefoot.com

Will Wants Me to Write About Net Neutrality in Canada | DarrenBarefoot.com — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:04:53 +0000

[...] Will Pate is up in arms about the threat to network neutrality in Canada: We will not roll over while major corporations ruin the most democratizing force, the biggest channel of personal expression and the most powerful enabler of innovation in human history. We cannot count on these major corporations to keep the citizens interests above their own quest for profit. Enron, Worldcom and actions of these very companies in Canada (I will be talking about them soon) have shown us that we must hold their feet to the fire. [...]

By: Steve Campbell

Steve Campbell — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:48:02 +0000

I am almost 51 and have been on the internet since the day Win95 came out. It was the most amazing technology I had ever seen. To think where the internet has developed and then stick a dagger in it with Net Neutrality is a true sin of democracy. Thank you for the awarness.

By: Megan Cole

Megan Cole — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:50:59 +0000

Great post Will – thanks for instigating and challenging all on this… looking forward to tracking all opinions and posts and let the CanCon blog swarm commence!

By: Alex Williams

Alex Williams — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:25:58 +0000

Go, go, Canadians!

By: kk

kk — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:19:46 +0000

hehe… i’m not canadian but happy to be confused as one and support your efforts here.

By: Will Pate

Will Pate — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:37:24 +0000

Disparishun, thanks – I’ve update the post to reflect the innacuracy that you noted. In the interest of transparency, “the CRTC’s stance is…” is now “what the current thinking on net neutrality is in front of the Industry Minister…”

By: Disparishun

Disparishun — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 15:21:03 +0000

Michael Geist has brought to the public’s attention what the CRTC thinks of net neutrality…

No. He has brought to the public’s attention what ministeral briefing notes said about net neutrality.

The CRTC is not the Minister. In fact, the CRTC is independent from the Minister — except that the Minister can table an order to override the CRTC. (That’s happened quite a lot lately).

The CRTC is indeed the forum within which informed debate, in the context of an application, can sway a decision. When only some sides of that debate are informed, on the other hand, then only those sides are able to advocate effectively — and the best decision is correspondingly less likely to result. Get your facts straight.

By: Sameer Vasta

Sameer Vasta — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 12:13:56 +0000

I'm so in.

By: James Pate

James Pate — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 12:09:00 +0000

I won’t give them the satisfaction, anything I can do to help, I will.