I'm sorry, but I laughed out loud when I read this post.
Particularly the hand-wringing over this statement:
"In order to throttle the Internet traffic originating from/or destined for end-user customers of independent ISPs, Bell is using measures to first, open each data packet, examine the packet data and header information, and then apply certain rules to the content in question. This aspect of Bell’s wholesale throttling activities give rise to concerns that Bell’s actions violate the privacy of the communications of its wholesale customers (as well as that of their own end-user customers). It also gives rise to concerns that Bell has violated its duty under section 36 of the Act not to control the content or influence the meaning or purpose of telecommunications carried by it for the public."
Now, I may not be a total techy, but that says to me that Bell is looking at the content people are sending across the internet, and then determining what content goes fast, and what content goes slow.
Are you freaking kidding me?!?!
"by examining the packet data and packet header information of GAS customer traffic, Bell can identify, inter alia, the type of data being transferred, the ISP upon whose network the data is being transferred, an end-user’s intention to acquire certain types of Internet content and the IP address and, hence, the identity of the end-user customer who is sending/receiving the data. The collection and use of such information by Bell, which in this case would have clearly been done without the prior consent of the end-user customers so affected, violates the privacy of such individuals."
As I pointed out in Part 1, there is a world of difference between the application used to transmit data, and the actual content of the data itself. What Bell is doing is inspecting the traffic to see the type of application being used, and applying rules to that application to ensure that it is not consuming too much bandwidth. I remind you, it is estimated that 70 to 90% of online bandwidth is consumed by 5 to 10% of all users, leaving very little bandwidth for the rest of us.
We don't know 100% of the story here. As I pointed out earlier, online bandwidth is oversubscribed. If we allow true "net neutrality", where no application throttling is allowed to take place, it is entirely possible that 10% of the user community will consume 100% of the available bandwidth, leaving nothing for everyone else. Which would contradict the stated purpose of open access for all.