The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today announced that it has denied the Canadian Association of Internet Providers’ (CAIP) application to end Bell Canada’s practice of “throttling” its wholesale internet services.
In a decision that defies all logic, the federal agency told the coalition of 55 ISP’s that Bell Canada’s decision to discriminate against particular applications and types of content was “not discriminatory” because Bell throttled both wholesale and retail customers in an equal fashion.
“Based on the evidence before us, we found that the measures employed by Bell Canada to manage its network were not discriminatory. Bell Canada applied the same traffic-shaping practices to wholesale customers as it did to its own retail customers,” said Konrad von Finckenstein, Q.C., Chairman of the CRTC.
CAIP and advocates of Net Neutrality argued that, if Bell and other internet service providers can’t keep up with subscriber demands and must throttle traffic, then they should implement neutral measures for dealing with internet congestion rather than arbitrarily picking on one type of application and content.
Read the full story in Digital Home Canada here.
4 Comments
Rohan Samarajiva
I see the logic of the decision. They were looking to see if undue discrimination, in terms of competition law, was being exercised. The assumption that many people have that all discrimination is bad is simply wrong; we would not be able to get through life that way.
All that competition law and public utility regulation says is that one may not unjustly or unduly discriminate, with the prohibited forms being defined in the statute, subsidiary legislation or case law. It is always acceptable to treat the members of one class differently from those of another, as long as those within the class are treated the same.
The difficulty arises in defining the class. Sometimes the regulator/judge will not accept the class that has been defined and thus find the discrimination unjust or undue.
Here they have been looking to see if Bell Canada treated its own traffic differently from those of the ISPs. Bell was treating different classes of traffic differently, but not different suppliers. Therefore, no anti-competitive effects. So the CRTC found no unjust discrimination.
This goes to one of the founding myths of this debate. The Internet has always discriminated among classes of traffic, but most of the proponents of net neutrality want to believe that in the Golden Age there was no discrimination, and do so irrespective of contrary facts.
Rohan Samarajiva
A different view: http://canadasworld.wordpress.com/2008/11/22/network-neutrality-the-first-word-is-in/
Rohan Samarajiva
The opinion of one of the co-chairs of the Canadian Telecom Policy Review: http://news.mccarthy.ca/en/news_template_full.asp?pub_code=4235&news_code=952
Play Learn Vote: Training Community Leaders to Build Resilience Against Election Misinformation
LIRNEasia developed Play Learn Vote, an interactive educational game designed to strengthen democratic participation while building resilience against election-related misinformation. The game introduces players to Sri Lanka’s electoral process through realistic scenarios that promote critical thinking, informed decision-making, and responsible civic participation.
Request For Proposals: Sri Lanka Educational Technology Survey
LIRNEasia is inviting proposals from qualified research organisations to develop a study on Sri Lanka’s Educational Technology (EdTech) landscape. The study aims to examine the current state of EdTech adoption, innovations, and the enabling and constraining factors across Sri Lanka’s education system, while assessing how educational decision-makers perceive and use EdTech and data systems.
Protecting Children Online: What is Missing from Sri Lanka’s Proposed Bill?
In an article published in the Daily FT on 30 June 2026, Attorney-at-Law and LIRNEasia Researcher Sachini Ranasinghe examines the Private Member’s Bill proposed by Opposition MP Faiszer Musthapha, which seeks to restrict social media access for children under the age of 16 in Sri Lanka. She argues that the key question is not whether children need stronger protection online, but whether Sri Lanka is proposing the right solution and has undertaken the groundwork necessary to make such legislation effective.
Links
User Login
Themes
Social
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Contact
9A 1/1, Balcombe Place
Colombo 08
Sri Lanka
+94 (0)11 267 1160
+94 (0)11 267 5212
info [at] lirneasia [dot] net
Copyright © 2026 LIRNEasia
a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank active across the Asia Pacific