Spidey answered your question accurately. I'm not sure what you're not understanding. Delivering video from close to the consumer is a lot more efficient than delivering it from a centralized location. It passes over a very small portion of the network.
Think of it this way - if every user wanted to view streaming video over Netflix at the same time, they'd probably need to substantially increase the capacity of the network. But if everyone wanted to watch pay per view at the same time that'd be no problem, because the data wouldn't be traveling through the whole network. It's where people start sharing the same pipe that one person can degrade the service for others.
Perhaps I am not explaining the situation appropriately. Independent ISP is leasing the last mile from the big ISPs. I don't care where your data origin is, all data arriving to the customer is through the last mile. How is content from Bell different than content from some independent ISP? If there is a bandwidth shortage in the last mile, how is Bell going to offer IPTV? And if there is a bandwith issue and Bell is not charging bandwidth use with their video service, is that not racketeering? You are using one division to subsidise another in order to kill of your competition.
2. Bell did not pay for the last mile 100%. The people of Canada paid most of it (through levies). Bell Canada was given a charter to build out the network. Basically a contractor.
interesting read
http://www.itworldcanada.com/blogs/...justify-questionably-lawful-throttling/47800/
here is a chunk from netflix copy and pasted from
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/Netflix-Heres-What-We-Think-siliconalley-2045228165.html?x=0
This may or may not be accurate, but it should be noted that because we pay for the data to be delivered to regional ISP front doors, little of this traffic goes over the Internet or ISP backbone networks, thereby minimizing ISP costs, avoiding congestion, and improving performance for end-using consumers. An independent negative issue for Netflix and other Internet video providers would be a move by wired ISPs to shift consumers to pay-per-gigabyte models instead of the current unlimited-up-to-a-large-cap approach. We hope this doesn’t happen, and will do what we can to promote the unlimited-up-to-a large-cap model.
Wired ISPs have large fixed costs of building and maintaining their last mile network of residential cable and fiber. The ISPs’ costs, however, to deliver a marginal gigabyte, which is about an hour of viewing, from one of our regional interchange points over their last mile wired network to the consumer is less than a penny, and falling, so there is no reason that pay-per-gigabyte is economically necessary. Moreover, at $1 per gigabyte over wired networks, it would be grossly overpriced.
Facebook
Twitter