The folks at Rogers think that customers actually like having all of their telecom services consolidated. I asked David Purdy, vice-president of Rogers Video and former son-in-law of the late Ted Rogers, whether Canadians would be better served if his company were broken up. “Preposterous,” he said. “People want to have one billing relationship with one player.” Purdy insists that the cutting of data limits to 15 gigs had nothing to do with Netflix entering the market—it was a complete coincidence. I asked how Rogers justified charging customers as much as $5 per extra gig of data when the hard cost was reported by the Globe and Mail to be about three cents. Again he used the word preposterous to denounce the Globe’s estimate, but when I asked him for the real figure, he said, “I don’t have it with me, but if you want, we can have that conversation.” We never did, because it turns out Rogers won’t disclose the numbers, for “competitive reasons.”
The CRTC is supposed to regulate our telecom sector and prevent monopolies from forming, but it recently approved Shaw Communications’ purchase of Global TV, as well as consolidating acquisitions by Rogers and Cogeco. (A BCE–CTV megadeal is also imminent.) Most famously, the CRTC approved usage-based billing, resulting in an online consumer backlash that, by February, had become something of a phenomenon. The ruling would have allowed Bell (the applicant in the case) to jack up the wholesale rental fees it charges to the small Internet service providers who are supposed to be a competitive alternative to the big guys. But after more than 400,000 Canadians signed a petition, Stephen Harper stepped in to ask for a review.
It was a victory for the consumer, but one that hardly matters. Indie Internet providers barely make a dent in Canada. Stunted at every turn by their mammoth competitors, they collectively comprise only six per cent of the market. Petitions aren’t enough. But piracy might be.
A widespread embrace of the underground market may be the only form of protest to which our telecom masters will respond. Consider it an act of consumer disobedience—sort of like buying bootleg cigarettes. Rather than continuing to pay some of the highest cable and Internet rates in the free world for some of the crappiest service in the free world, we abandon cable TV en masse and leech free video through the Internet until we are offered a fair deal.
It may sound crazy, but piracy has already pushed markets toward innovative solutions. The Napster-era question “How can we compete with free?” was answered by Steve Jobs. It seems you can compete with free by making music easy to find and buy, and by pricing it at 99 cents a song. At a certain point, piracy just isn’t worth the effort to most, and Apple has sold more than 10 billion songs through its iTunes music store. If a sharp turn to piracy scares our media monopolies badly enough, they will compete with it by making online TV an affordable and viable option.
Does the desire for better television justify theft? Perhaps not, but this is about more than our nation’s channel-surfing habits. Canada’s backward telecom sector also isolates us from new gadgets. Walk into a Best Buy in Buffalo and you’ll find that 3-D TVs are already old news. Internet connectable and “smart” TVs are the new vanguard. Sony is now selling Google TV—a hardware and software mash-up that seamlessly turns online video into searchable television. But Google TV is unavailable in Canada, and won’t be coming any time soon. Why would it? There wouldn’t be much to watch on it.
Now, you may say that stealing is wrong. And I say, yes, you’re right, it is—but must we be fundamentalists about it? There are different kinds of stealing, and on my moral spectrum, pirating videos from the Internet lies somewhere between snacking on a Jelly Belly at the bulk food store and stealing cars. Toy cars.
Of course, there is our reputation to consider. Do we really want to be known as a rat’s nest of thieves and bootleggers, a pirate’s haven like China and Pakistan? Or would we prefer to retain our standing as a polite and patient nation of compliant consumers, gladly accepting second-rate services at twice the price?
It’s a no-brainer. I’d rather be a thief than a sucker.
Ha! The US already considers us a “rat’s nest of thieves and bootleggers, a pirate’s haven like China and Pakistan”, so we might was well take advantage of our reputation. Just sayin’
March 14, 2011 at 2:21 pm | by Kim KellnBravo Jesse! Took the words right out of my brain. I cut my cable in Oct 2009. I tend to watch podcasts and stream video from the crappy TV-network websites, rather than watching illegally obtained material, but I’m not above it. Our household generally “tries out” shows by pirating a few episodes; if we like it, we tend to go buy it on DVD. We just cut out the middleman.
March 14, 2011 at 2:23 pm | by Krash CoarseWell Jesse, at least you acknowledge that what you’re doing is stealing. Most pirates won’t even do that. But your argument is really just a sad attempt to justify your theft.
Are you really surprised that the movies in theatre are not available on Netflix? Please.
March 14, 2011 at 3:03 pm | by Quentin“Consider you a pirate”? No – you are. Buying stolen goods is illegal in Canada. No different than buying stolen DVDs displayed on a blanket. Someone stole a thing of value belonging to someone else, then you bought it from him. True the deals are better in the US but that is ZERO moral justification. Lots of things are better deals in the US but you wouldn’t condone buying those off the back of a truck I’m sure (at least I hope not).
March 14, 2011 at 3:08 pm | by ModerateDo you realize that the real victims of your civil disobedience will be creators? The thousands of people who work in the domestic film and television industries in Canada? The telecoms won’t be hurt by this. Just the independent filmmakers and documentary producers who can no longer get financing for their work because there’s no return on investment in Canada. Oh, and the huge ecosystem of professionals who work on their projects. Way to go.
March 14, 2011 at 3:12 pm | by AmyYou are a pirate. Actually you’re a thief. What if another writer took this article you wrote, sold it to another publication under his/her name and then made money off it, without a cent going to you – would that be ok? Even if it was ‘inconvenient’ for the other writer to write his/her original story? I’m deeply appalled that one creator would blatantly use, in an unauthorized manner, another creator’s work. I’m even more disturbed that Toronto Life let this article be published. I’ll be re-thinking my subscription.
March 14, 2011 at 3:21 pm | by schan2011wow, a blazing display of smug self-satisfaction … a blatant disregard for compensating the artists responsible for the content which Mr. Brown consumes … maybe he’ll never meet Tina Fey and need to hang his head in shame, but perhaps colleagues at the CBC might want to stare him down in the hallway. pathetic.
March 14, 2011 at 3:23 pm | by TwinkieI agree fully with this article. Telecom in Canada is a disaster, it is overpriced and offers incredibly poor service. I am not surprised that the author has turned to piracy. As he mentions, he’d be willing to pay if the services were actually available. Giving in to Rogers and Bell won’t solve the problem!
March 14, 2011 at 3:34 pm | by razmatazWow. Openly advocating theft in Toronto Life. Very disappointing and more that a little disturbing.
March 14, 2011 at 3:35 pm | by RichWhat is sad is that the writer outlines exactly how he is stealing and yet Canada’s laws for the protection of digital intellectual property are so outdated there is nothing that can be done to stop him.
March 14, 2011 at 3:41 pm | by CarterYou said it yourself, you are a thief. Regardless of what is being stolen, stealing is stealing. And stealing is illegal. The logic you use to justify your actions is pathetic. You may equate stealing movies and TV shows with stealing a few jelly beans, but I highly doubt the creators of that content would agree. I know I don’t. In my mind, a life or death situation is the only thing that might legitimately justify stealing. I would hardly call your need to watch the newest episode of 30 Rock at the same time it is airing, but without commercials, a life or death situation.
March 14, 2011 at 3:44 pm | by cabmaI applaud you for admitting that you and your wife are thieves. Using your logic, I am going pick a restaurant from the Toronto Life guide, take my wife out for dinner and skip out on the bill.
March 14, 2011 at 3:45 pm | by Stephen Coady@Jesse
Great opinion piece. I don’t think what you’re looking for will ever be permitted by the companies who own the content. Simplifying access to content is key.
Live Shows (eg.Awards, Sports, etc) are still difficult to deal with outside of Cable’s grasp. But, adding a free OTA dish to your set-up and using Windows Media Centre as the primary interface gives you a little more access at minimal extra cost (only setup costs.)
Oh, and you might want to try Newshosting. Reliable, fast, 30 connections, $5 cheaper per month.
March 14, 2011 at 3:46 pm | by nihirThis is a crazy article. Suggesting it is ok for people other than those directly involved in the creation to profit from online sales. I understand the perspective. We have all heard the cliche of a spoiled rich kid saying “I want a pony and I want it now”. I guess this guy is just so spoiled by a wonderful selection of amazing pieces of art that he feels he owns it already and is fine with paying third parties for delivering him what is not available. Even if those third parties are committing cutting out the artist. It floors me that everyone wants to cut out the record company because they are “going to rip off artists”. In watching this debate rage I see that this clown is ripping off artists and creators. It seems to me that the only group who has protected rights of creators are labels and film distributors. They take a cut and pay a cut. With streaming movie sites Google sells and ad and keeps all the money for themselves. Is at somehow cool with us?
March 14, 2011 at 3:48 pm | by Jeff RogsI think this is an interesting dilemma caused by a lack of clear up to date laws in Canada. We need legitimate ways to get copyrighted material that pay the rights holder and we need laws to back that up. But ISP’s in Canada do have a huge amount of control and are pushing out legitimate competition but I don’t think piracy is the answer.
March 14, 2011 at 3:50 pm | by Alexavla