|
Thursday April 11, 2013 |
The Canadian wireless sector was hit by a shock yesterday as the three
major new entrants - Wind Mobile, Public Mobile, and Mobilicity - announced
that they were withdrawing from the Canadian Wireless
Telecommunications Association. The companies argued that the CWTA has
shown consistent bias in favour of Bell, Telus, and Rogers, the three
incumbent providers. All three used strong language to emphasize their
frustration with the CWTA, speaking of a "blatant disregard" for new
entrants and failures to honour promises of fair representation.
The move is a major blow to the CWTA, which has long promoted itself as
the voice of the industry. For example, during the recent CRTC consumer
wireless code hearing, it opened by stating:
CWTA represents virtually all of the major companies in Canada's
wireless telecommunications ecosystem. Our members include wireless
service providers, handset manufacturers, builders of network,
infrastructure and numerous other companies that develop and produce
products and services for the industry and for consumers.
No longer. So why the change?
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareThursday April 11, 2013 |
|
View
|
|
|
Tuesday October 23, 2012 |
Earlier this month, the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission invited the public to help create a national
code of conduct for wireless companies such as Bell, Rogers,
and Telus. The consultation is expected to generate widespread
interest, providing frustrated consumers with an outlet for
grievances on lengthy contracts, problematic terms and conditions,
exorbitant roaming costs, or onerous cancellation fees.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto
Star version, homepage
version) notes the decision to embark on a national,
enforceable code of conduct for wireless services supported by the
wireless carriers represents a dramatic policy shift that was
scarcely imaginable only a few years. Indeed, when then-Industry
Minister Maxime Bernier pushed through a policy direction to the
CRTC in 2006 aimed at limiting regulation by calling for "greater
reliance on market forces", consumer-focused regulations were viewed
as an impossibility. Consistent with the market-led approach, the
Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association introduced a
voluntary code of conduct in 2009 with no expectation of government
regulation.
The move toward new regulations provides a valuable lesson on the
role that the provinces can play to jumpstart otherwise stagnating
issues. In the case of wireless services, the introduction of
provincial consumer protections geared specifically toward the
wireless sector ultimately encouraged the carriers to drop their
opposition to new regulation as they recognized that a uniform
federal policy was preferable to the emerging piecemeal provincial
framework.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday October 23, 2012 |
|
View
|
|
|
Friday April 13, 2012 |
|
The Ontario Government has announced
plans to introduce new consumer protection legislation to increase
transparency on wireless plans and to establish some contractual
limitations. The wireless industry has indicated
it would prefer a national code of practice. I wrote
about the issue last year during the provincial election campaign.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareFriday April 13, 2012 |
|
|
Tuesday September 13, 2011 |
Appeared
in the Toronto Star on September 11, 2011 as Digital Issues Largely
Missing From Ontario Election Campaign
The Ontario election campaign kicked off last week with the Liberals,
Progressive Conservatives, and NDP promoting their policy platforms and
quickly jumping into debates on the economy, health care and education.
While the dominance of those three issues is unsurprising, those
Ontarians hoping for some discussion of digital policy were bound to be
a bit disappointed.
The Liberal platform references the importance of jobs in the
technology and media sectors, but offers little else on the digital
economy. The Progressive Conservatives are the only party to make a
commitment to open government - their platform follows developments in
many other jurisdictions that pledge to make government data more
readily available for public use - but other digital issues are
ignored. The NDP makes no reference to digital policies at all.
The federal government tends to lead on digital policies, though its
much-anticipated digital economy strategy is months overdue. Yet for
constitutional reasons that grant the provinces jurisdiction over
property and civil rights, many important issues fall to the provinces.
For example, the federal government addresses most telecom issues
including carrier regulation and spectrum allocation but many consumer
protection concerns associated with wireless carriers falls to the
provinces. In recent months, both Quebec and Manitoba have moved
forward with legislation to create consumer protections on cellphone
contracts and locked devices.
Similar concerns have been raised in Ontario. Last year, Ontario MPP
David Orazietti introduced a private members bill that would have
established a requirement to unlock devices if the consumer pays full
price or once the contract expires. Moreover, the bill identified
a long list of disclosure requirements including the costs associated
with service plans, advertisements, roaming charges, or when consumers
are nearing their monthly cap. The bill also established the right to
cancel a service contract with 30 days notice with a maximum liability
of one-month service fee. Despite clear public interest in the
issue, the platforms of all three provincial parties are silent on the
issue.
Copyright is also a federal matter, but if the government moves forward
with the digital lock rules discussed in the recently uncovered
Wikileaks cables, the provincial governments should consider the
significant consumer protection issues that are likely to follow.
Most consumers know little if anything about digital locks and the
limitations that may be placed on consumer entertainment products such
as CDs, DVDs, video games, or ebooks. For many consumers, these
digitally locked products are simply not fit for purpose - they may not
play on their DVD player or permit usage that most would expect is
permissible. Moreover, consumers frequently can't obtain a refund for
their purchases as many retailers won't accept returns on opened CDs
and DVDs and digital download services do not offer refunds to
disgruntled downloaders. Other countries have established
specific consumer protections on digital lock use and it falls to the
Canadian provinces to do the same.
With privacy reform stalled at the federal level, there is an important
role to play for provincial governments, yet the issue is not discussed
by any of the three provincial parties. Several Canadian provinces
including Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec have enacted
broad-based privacy legislation. Ontario has not, raising the question
of where the parties stand on developing provincial privacy protections
that raise the bar by establishing tough penalties for violations and
mandatory disclosures of privacy breaches.
Internet access is yet another issue where a provincial voice is
needed. As the federal government dithers, it may fall to the provinces
to establish universal broadband initiatives. Where do the three
parties stand on broadband access, community wifi networks, or support
for computer ownership for those who find it unaffordable?
Like most other digital policy issues in this campaign, seemingly none
of the parties have much to say.
Michael Geist holds the Canada
Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of
Ottawa, Faculty of Law. He can reached at mgeist@uottawa.ca or online
at www.michaelgeist.ca.
Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday September 13, 2011 |
|
|
