Telus more

According to the Tyee, Telus blocked many more sites than we knew - and the result may be much closer scrutiny over the actions of ISPs in general:

In the past, ISPs such as Telus argued that they served the role of a common carrier, similar to telephone companies, which are not liable for the content of calls made on their telephones.

As neutral carriers, ISPs in the past have blocked sites only after being ordered to do so by a court. But by unilaterally moving to block access to Voices For Change before a court issued an order, Geist said, Telus appears to have taken a step away from that neutral approach...

So far, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has largely taken a hands-off approach to the Internet. But Telus’s action may lead the commission to revisit that decision, Geist said.

(T)here appears to be legal authority for intervention under the Canadian Telecommunications Act, Geist said.

Section 27(2) of the act, for example, prohibits unjust discrimination in the provision of a telecommunication service. Section 36 states that a “Canadian carrier shall not control the content or influence the meaning or purpose of telecommunications carried by it for the public.”

Ottawa is already reviewing a broad range of issues related to telecommunications policy and the Telus issue may well affect the outcome of that review.

For the sake of trying to win a labour battle, Telus has opened it - and all ISPs - up to the argument that they are responsible for the content conveyed. After all, if ISPs reserve the right to block access solely to improve their hand in a labour dispute, why can't access be blocked for any other purpose the CRTC (or any government) sees fit to impose?

Telus' argument is that this was a unique situation, but the only difference appears to be that the sites were blocked purely as pressure in a labour dispute rather than out of any sort of public service. And that's not a difference that works in Telus' favour. It seems plain that Telus has violated at least the second of the above statutory provisions; what's not clear is what action will be taken in response.

As I noted yesterday, the aftermath of the lockout doesn't look good at this point...and it may be all the worse if Telus feels the need to gain more from the lockout to make up for added regulation and liability. But there's much more at stake now than simply the contents of the next CBA.

In fighting dirty in a minor battle, Telus has opened up a war which could fundamentally change the way the Internet is regulated in Canada. We'll see how long it takes the CRTC to fire the first shot in response.