Sorry you ran into problems. You can always try to click on the FeedBurner chicklet if the RSS widget doesn’t work.

Mark

We sometimes lose this in Canada because we we receive US broadcast signals (from Buffalo, Seattle, etc) in addition to our local ones, so we’re more familiar with the originating broadcast brand than most of the world. But the reason we don’t get this content is largely because CTV, Global, etc. haven’t paid for the rights. They’re now starting to…CTV has signed the first significant deal for this…but it’s a purely economic proposition.

Thanks for the comment and insight. You’re right, it is multi-faceted, complex issue with different players and interests intimately and actively involved.

What I would hate to see happen is the Web controlled to the point where the innovation and joie de vivre disappears. It’s been a fascinating ride so far, and it will be interesting to see how it evolves over the next few years.

Mark

Net neutrality is primarily an issue between ISP’s and publishers (writ large). It’s an extremely important one, in the same way that regulation of the broadcast airwaves has been an important one for the last 60 years, because it dictates who can get what information to whom. It’s an area where market power can have an adverse affect on what we normally consider the basic tenets of a free society. But it’s quite a bit more complicated than is often presented by EFF and other, for the simple reason that the costs of ensuring those freedoms are not equally spread among market participants. Technologies like P2P skew the costs entirely in the ISP’s direction, almost completely removing any delivery costs the publishers once bore (i.e. for CDN’s)

Network Utilization Management is primarily an issue between ISP’s and their customers. It’s certainly debatable that ISP’s are gouging customers at the same time as they’re scaling back service (unlimited –> limited). Personally, as a consumer, I don’t think the value proposition is all that skewed, but ultimately, competition should take care of much of this issue. Sure, we don’t have competition as robust as I’d like, but we’re a country of 11M households, and given the network costs involved, it’s unreasonable to expect much more than we’ve got. The fact that most markets do have 2 players is something we couldn’t always say. But if you do want to spur more competition, open up the market to foreign entrants…I’m sure Sprint/Clearwire would love to rollout WiMax in Toronto, and it would end the cozy relationships our entrenched players have with the regulators.

Finally, there’s the issue of privacy, which has recently jumped a level. Charter’s announcement is abhorrent to me, as is, to a lesser extent, Rogers taking over my browser to deliver system messages (though this is probably just intrusive, rather than a violation of privacy) . Canadian ISP’s have traditionally been more protective of customer privacy than their US counterparts (AT&T probably being the most obvious example). For example, they’ve been loathe to cooperate with the music industry in tracking down file sharers, typically doing so only with a court order. But if Charter shows they’re money in violating our privacy, that will change in a heartbeat. You’ve rightly pointed out that our regulator is clueless and hamfisted, and I have no faith whatsoever that they’ll get out in front of this issue.