Why Can't We Just Buy Phones Direct?

The ongoing debate about how Canadians pay too much for mobile phone data services, how we lack competition, and how we always get locked into long-term contracts, has begun to heat up again with the upcoming launch of the iPhone next month. A CBC News report just pointed out that, while customers of the 3G iPhone in Australia will be able to buy the phone outright and carriers like AT&T in the U.S. ask customers to sign-up for a two-year agreement, Canada's Rogers Wireless is requiring that you purchase a lengthy three-year plan if you want the highly coveted device.

From a business perspective, the reasons for this decision are obvious. Why not? There is currently no competition in the GSM arena in Canada, and, with the wireless spectrum that's currently underway, there just might be in the near future. We recently employed number portability in Canada, which lets a wireless customer take his number and port it to a new carrier, should he so desire. Of course, if you're locked into a contract when a more desirable carrier pops up, you're out of luck. You have to either wait for that contract to finish, or pay through the nose to cancel it early. Naturally, anyone I know who wants an iPhone is gritting their teeth at this news, and actually considering foregoing the device based solely on principle. Why should they have to lock in for three years, the longest term reported anywhere in the world thus far, if they want it?

What would make things so much easier would be to simply start selling mobile phones directly to consumers. Sure, their sale prices would no longer be subsidized by the wireless carriers, but customers would be 100% untethered, able to purchase whatever data plan and options best suit their needs from their desired wireless carrier. Contracts are contracts, and if they are still to be offered, than so be it. But carriers should not be able to essentially hold a mobile device ransom in order to tie a customer to their services for a set period of time. I can't think of any other media and entertainment offering that works in such a manner.

I've long talked about a day when we'd actually buy the SIM card itself outright, load it up with desired options and features, and slap it into any mobile phone we like. We're a long way from that sort of open source landscape, but it really would be the most ideal option for the customer. Not only would it have the potential to improve customer service on the provider side, but it would also make it much easier (and likely!) for more people to get involved with the latest and greatest mobile phone options; and even to purchase that brand-spanking new phone as a gift for a loved one.

Bell Won't Back Down, Says Traffic Shaping a Must

A few weeks ago, the issue arose of Bell Canada engaging in Internet traffic "shaping" practices. Bell admits to purposely slowing down the Internet connection for heavy users of P2P and similar sites that are doing things like downloading full-length movies, and thus gobbling up a lot of bandwidth. Since then, there has been a flurry of commentary about the topic. Should Bell be able to shape or "throttle" its traffic? Should the use of P2P and torrent sites be considered "abuse" of Bell's unlimited plans?

The Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP), which represents many small ISPs that use Bell's network to offer their services, sent a request to the CRTC for Bell to stop its shaping activities. The CAIP claims that Bell is "in breach of a number of regulated activites", and called the behaviour "anti-competitive interference in the activities of Internet users." Bell's response was a big fat "no". The telecommunications company feels that slowing down P2P and BitTorrent use is necessary in order to improve overall bandwidth performance for all users. Interestingly, when speaking to CBCNews.ca, Primus President Ted Chislett, who agrees with the CAIP, said that he doubts Bell has any congestion issues related to bandwidth at all.

Assuming issues of traffic congestion do exist as a result of heavy bandwidth usage, does Bell have the right to slow things down? After all, these customers pay the same monthly fees that everyone else does; they're just using the services more. The situation can be likened to an unlimited cell phone data plan: some users might send hundreds of e-mails per month, and chat on the phone for hundreds and hundreds of hours, while others might send a couple of e-mails here and there, and chat less frequently. They're both paying the same monthly fee, but what they get out of their packaged plan is up to them.

In fairness, trying to curb illegal activity is a good thing: if someone is using up gross amounts of bandwidth to acquire loads and loads of illegal content, then really, who are they to complain about slow speeds? But it looks as though P2P and BitTorrent sites can, and are, also used for legitimate activities. Take CBC's recent experimental move, for example, to offer the TV show Canada's Next Great Prime Minister as a free download through BitTorrent. The CAIP reports that it took "thousands of fans" on Bell's network upwards of 11 hours to download the program versus the minutes it should have taken. If more and more legitimate content like this CBC show becomes available via BitTorrent and P2P sites, will Bell stop its traffic shaping activity?

Either way, this issue has initiated a well-needed discussion about regulation and control of the Internet, and opened people's eyes to the rapidly growing nature of the Web world as a whole. We have so much bandwidth, and people will only continue to want to use more of it, not less. Should those who are making frequent use of faster speeds, and thus justifying continued progress in this area, be punished for doing so? Or, on the contrary, are heavy bandwidth users just abusing the capabilities of the service, and ruining the experience for everyone else?

Speaking of Lemons...

The 'net is rife with stories about the current state of the Canadian/U.S. dollar, cross-border shopping, and why Canadians should continue to shop in Canada (or, as some opine, should head to the U.S. for "better deals"). One area where many have claimed that it's much cheaper to shop in the U.S. is the used vehicle market. However, Canadians should practice caution when looking for across-the-border deals. CBC News is reporting that tons of used cars that qualify for the "lemon" designation are crossing the border into Canada, and into unsuspecting buyer's driveways. Many are via auction, with no proper history being provided to the unsuspecting buyers, who then sell them at a profit in Canada.

Reportedly, a total of 852 cars have brought forth a sour taste in the country between May 1, 2006 and November 5, 2007. More shocking, however, is that 13% of them (110, to be exact) arrived since the Canadian dollar reached parity with that of the U.S. (which, to my knowledge, was less than a month ago!)

Moral of the story: if you get excited about an amazing deal on a used car in the States, don't automatically assume that things are what they seem. Run the proper tests to ensure that it's not a lemon (http://www.carfax.com/) before you, or your customer, gets taken for a ride (or rather doesn't). Or better yet, buy your cars here, in our home and native land! (Of course, it goes without saying that you should run the appropriate back-checks either way).

As the saying goes, give us lemons, and we'll....wait a second, take them back! We don't want any of your lemonade, thank you very much.

Another DVD Piracy Ring Busted

Another counterfeit DVD shop was busted in Canada. In Mississauga, ON, just 30 minutes west of Toronto, Ontario police seized more than 75,000 illegal copies of recent hit movies, including Michael Moore’s Sicko, and The Simpsons Movie. Reports indicate that this operation, which was filmed by CBC News hidden camera, managed to create and sell copies of The Simpsons Movie a mere 14 hours after it hit theatres! As for profit, although undoubtedly healthy for those involved, this wasn’t at the expense of a consumer’s deep pockets: the discs sold for just $4 a piece!

In February of this year, the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) pegged Canada as a leading manufacturer and exporter of bootlegged movies such as those just seized, and illegal devices that facilitate pirated activity, like “modification chips” used to allow counterfeit games to be played on videogame consoles. In fact, the IIPA said that the issue of unauthorized camcording in Canada (where someone secretly films a movie in the theatre, then creates copied discs of said recording) is nearing “crisis” levels: in 2006, 20-25 per cent of pirated DVDs discovered were sourced back to Canada!

According to CBC News, the recently squashed Mississauga, ON operation had produced likely close to $21 million worth of blockbuster movies. What’s baffling is that many of the store’s “regular” customers had no problem providing their names and phone numbers for the company files; and some even stopped by as the accused were being arrested, and asked when the store would re-open! Canadians either don’t understand that counterfeit DVDs are illegal; or they simply don’t care.

It will be interesting to hear what the IIPA and the Canadian Anti-Counterfeiting Network (CACN) have to say about this: in May 2007, the CACN set out an action plan for the government to address problems relating to counterfeiting and piracy. This incident is sure to add fuel to its fire.