Bell Canada has a problem with piracy

[Len]

AT CIRA (Canadian Internet Registration Authority), WE BELIEVE Canadians have a right to a safe, reliable, and open internet—but we also believe in staying within the boundaries of the law.

Bell Canada has a problem. Some Canadians are infringing on Bell’s rights by accessing pirated content online. If Bell believes this is happening it has the right to pursue legal action. I am fine with this. However, Bell is offside in seeking the power of the state (and Canadian tax dollars) to help solve their problems. Unfortunately, this is exactly what they are proposing.

In the pressured environment of NAFTA negotiations, Bell requested a new administrative agency that can target websites that house pirated material and to require internet service providers to block access to these websites. In short, Bell is asking Canadian taxpayers to help it bear the costs to go after those who may be sharing content illegally.

This alone is enough to cry foul, but my greatest concern is that Bell’s actions ignore the root cause of the issue – the inability of Canadians to find the content they want, on a platform of their choice, at a reasonable price. It is Bell’s right to market its products as it sees fit. It is not the government’s responsibility to bear the consequences of these choices.

Bell, like many incumbents, relies on a broadcast model Canadians are increasingly rejecting—a large cable bill that forces consumers to pay for dozens of channels they don’t want in order to access one or two shows they do want. Cord cutting is on the rise, and blocking sites that house pirated content only addresses the symptoms, not the problem. Canadians are embracing new platforms, which is creating a division between what companies like Bell are offering and what the market is seeking.

"Bell’s problem is not Canadian pirates; it is global innovation, changing consumer tastes, and the disruption of its industry."

Most recently, if a Canadian wanted to find out what happened to Jon Snow, the only way to legally do so in Canada is with a cable subscription. The cheapest package offered by Bell that includes HBO is about $50-60 per month (not including activation fees and installation). U.S. residents, on the other hand, can stream HBO Go for $US15 with no cable subscription. That means Canadians must pay two to three times more than Americans to watch Game of Thrones.

Bell’s problem is not Canadian pirates; it is global innovation, changing consumer tastes, and the disruption of its industry.

Fifteen years ago, during its peak, Napster had 80 million users, illegal music downloads were common and the music industry was in disarray. There were legal ramifications for Napster (and this was appropriate), but it was the introduction of iTunes in 2003 that changed the industry by offering a legal option to download music at a price consumers could live with. In its first week iTunes had over 1 million downloads, and today, streaming services such as Spotify, have more than 60 million subscribers. This underlines my point: People will pay for content they want on a platform of their choice at a reasonable price. Businesses that meet this demand will thrive.

If Bell and others hang on to dated business models, they will continue to drive the very behaviour they are looking to stop. Napster was brought down through legal action, but downloading illegal music continued until iTunes offered a viable alternative.

If the government sides with Bell on this issue, it is incentivizing the status quo, rather than boosting innovation. Canada is full of innovators, including in the halls of Bell’s headquarters. It’s time for Bell to seize this opportunity – or someone else will.