In its submission to the CRTC, Vonage described the QoS surcharge as a possible "red herring" because Shaw had refused to provide a technical explanation for how its enhancement works or why it is necessary. The company went on to say that "Because Vonage competes directly with the telephone services of the network operators that also provide the high-speed Internet access, the incentives to discriminate against us are clear." It isn't about discrimination. The software (the same one used to limit the amount of traffic bittorrent uses) is designed to help with the prioritizing of packets -- specifically voice packets used in VoIP service. This service costs Shaw money and therefore it must be passed onto the customer if they wish to use 3rd party carriers for VoIP. It isn't a case of Shaw being anti-competitive. It's a case of Vonage having a shitty service that should do the hardware QoS on the customer's "Vonage Router". Shaw shouldn't be responsible for every 3rd party company's services. Just like with my side business, we shouldn't be responsible because our DID lines don't work in synch with a 3rd party application like AMP (Asterisk Management Portal). Shaw's explanation is pretty clear: http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/ProductsServices/Internet/ServiceEnhancement.htm