BC Business
Should people using the Internet as a plaything pay for this privilege?
No matter what happens regarding the current argument over internet bandwidth restrictions, limits are coming. Someone has to pay for the increased use of the Net. Hands up everyone who’s ever used the phrase “I don’t have the bandwidth for this!” You know you have. It’s become part of the business lexicon. Well, now it appears it’s going to actually be true. Unless something is done soon, you may really not have the bandwidth, period.
Hands up everyone who’s ever used the phrase “I don’t have the bandwidth for this!”
You know you have. It’s become part of the business lexicon. Well, now it appears it’s going to actually be true. Unless something is done soon, you may really not have the bandwidth, period.
I’m referring, of course, to the current fight going on in Ottawa over bandwidth restrictions the big Internet infrastructure providers want to impose on the resellers who use their bandwidth to provide Internet services.
Companies like Shaw, Rogers, and Bell want to install caps on the bandwidth the resellers use, and charge a goodly sum for anything over the caps. The resellers are screaming, naturally, and even the federal government is getting in on it by demanding an accounting from the Canadian Radio Television Commission (CRTC), the telecommunications regulator, for approving the move.
Right they should. The move is a gouge, pure and simple, and an attempt to corral all Internet use through their own systems.
But it also raises other issues. Such as, should infrastructure providers be expected to provide unlimited use of their systems by an increasing number of Internet users who are merrily downloading movies, television shows, games, and other bandwidth-gobbling activities?
And there’s also the sticky little issue of who’s going to pay for it all.
Oh, that. Get used to it. This decision only put the ball in play and, despite what happens this time around, the issue is going to come up again and again as ever more uses are found for the Internet.
This isn’t a popular issue for debate. The general thinking is that if we’re to be a modern country with a strong telecommunications system that fosters innovative business, the Internet should be unrestricted for all. Certainly, the columnists have been weighing in against the “evil” providers.
So here’s my proposal. If it’s a national asset, then the government should control it.
Legislate that providers offer unlimited Internet use to everybody who wants it. But tax it at a certain rate of provision. When more is used, then the providers get some tax relief. The relief can then be recovered from those who use more than others.
To me this is the only fair way to regulate internet use. Like many people, I never break my bandwidth limits because I’m not downloading and watching movies on my computer a couple of times a day.
My proposal doesn’t mean the government should become the gouger instead of the private corporations. There will have to be some sense about it all so as not to stifle Internet use.
The Internet is essential to our business and communications structures, and it will be ever more so in future. But those who insist on using their computers as playthings, or entertainment, or because they’re completely addicted, should pay for the privilege.
Bandwidth is a national asset, and it should be controlled by the people, who are represented by the government. Not by a select group of corporations who are fighting over the spoils, or by a few users who out-use everybody else.