|
Tuesday August 16, 2011 |
Telecom policies, particularly Internet and wireless issues, have
generated enormous public interest over the past year. Politicians have
evidently taken note with all political parties expressing concern over
Internet data caps, net neutrality, and the competitiveness of Canadian
wireless services.
The political shift toward consumer-focused telecom concerns has
unsurprisingly attracted the attention of the large incumbent telecom
providers such as Bell and Telus, who have found their regulatory plans
stymied by political intervention and the admission by some Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission commissioners that
the current policy environment has failed to foster sufficient
competition.
My weekly technology law column (Toronto
Star version, homepage
version) notes the incumbent telecom providers recently served
notice that they are
gearing up to fight back, with Bell adding former Industry Minister Jim
Prentice to its board of directors and Telus doing the same with former
Public Safety Minister and Treasury Board President Stockwell Day. The
addition of two prominent, recently departed Conservative cabinet
ministers makes it clear that Bell and Telus recognize the increasing
politicization of telecom policy.
bell, day, lobby, prentice, telecom, telus Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday August 16, 2011 |
|
View
|
|
|
Tuesday August 16, 2011 |
Appeared
in the Toronto Star on August 14, 2011 as Telecoms Lure Ex-Ministers in
Boardrooms
Telecom policies, particularly Internet and wireless issues, have
generated enormous public interest over the past year. Politicians have
evidently taken note with all political parties expressing concern over
Internet data caps, net neutrality, and the competitiveness of Canadian
wireless services.
The political shift toward consumer-focused telecom concerns has
unsurprisingly attracted the attention of the large incumbent telecom
providers such as Bell and Telus, who have found their regulatory plans
stymied by political intervention and the admission by some Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission commissioners that
the current policy environment has failed to foster sufficient
competition.
The incumbent telecom providers recently served notice that they are
gearing up to fight back, with Bell adding former Industry Minister Jim
Prentice to its board of directors and Telus doing the same with former
Public Safety Minister and Treasury Board President Stockwell Day. The
addition of two prominent, recently departed Conservative cabinet
ministers makes it clear that Bell and Telus recognize the increasing
politicization of telecom policy.
The addition of former politicians to telecom boards is nothing new. As
Carleton professor Dwayne Winseck recently chronicled, the path between
politics and telecom boardrooms is well trodden, with the likes of
Brian Mulroney (Quebecor), former Liberal cabinet minister Ed Lumley
(Bell), former BC Finance Minister Carole Taylor (Bell), and former
Ontario premier David Peterson (Rogers) all making the jump. Moreover,
former New Brunswick premier Bernard Lord heads the Canadian Wireless
Telecommunications Association.
The mix between politics and telecom policy is nothing new either.
Since its very beginnings as an industry, telecom and competition
regulators have played a crucial role in establishing the limits of
companies that have frequently enjoyed near-monopolistic market power.
While politics and telecom have been frequent bedfellows, this round of
appointments signals an important shift. The companies were at pains to
emphasize that the addition of Prentice and Day is not about lobbying
per se since both face five year "cooling off" periods under the
Lobbying Act before they can formally lobby their former colleagues.
Yet there is no need for Prentice or Day to engage in formal lobbying.
Bell alone has registered over 30 meetings with politicians and
government officials since the start of 2011. Given its ability to
garner weekly government meetings, access is clearly not a concern.
Rather, it is the emergence of consumer-oriented voices at the very
time that government is preparing to establish the broadband and
wireless rules that will govern the sector for years to come. The CRTC
was long viewed as the most important regulatory channel (hence the
revolving door between Commission staff and telecom companies), but the
government has left little doubt it is prepared to intervene early and
often if it disagrees with Commission policy.
Given the sheer number of policies on the agenda - spectrum allocation,
data caps, net neutrality, foreign investment, copyright, Internet
provider liability, lawful access, digital economy strategy, and the
appointment of next CRTC chair among them - telecom policy has moved
across the river from the CRTC's Gatineau offices to Parliament Hill.
This represents a big shift and garnering inside information into the
backroom mechanics of the current government's decision makers provides
an enormous advantage for Bell and Telus since Prentice and Day held
ministerial responsibility for all these issues during their time in
government.
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.
bell, day, lobbyists, prentice, telecom, telus Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareTuesday August 16, 2011 |
|
|
Thursday April 28, 2011 |
A new Wikileaks
cable confirms
that the Conservative government delayed introducing copyright
legislation in early 2008 due to public opposition. The delay -
which
followed the decision in December 2007 to hold off introducing a bill
after it was placed on the order paper (and the Fair Copyright for
Canada Facebook group took off) - lasted until June 2008. The
U.S.
cable notes confirmation came directly from then-Industry Minister Jim
Prentice, who told U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins that cabinet
colleagues and Conservative MPs were worried about the electoral
implications of copyright reform:
From December 2007 to mid-February,
senior GOC officials and well-informed private sector contacts assured
the Embassy that legislative calendar concerns were delaying the
copyright bill's introduction into Parliament. Our contacts
downplayed
the small - but increasingly vocal - public
opposition to copyright reform led by University of Ottawa law
professor Dr. Michael Geist. On February 25, however, Industry
Minister Prentice (please protect) admitted to the Ambassador that some
Cabinet members and Conservative Members of Parliament - including MPs
who won their ridings by slim margins - opposed tabling the copyright
bill now because it might be used against them in the next federal
election. Prentice said the copyright bill had become a
"political"
issue. He also indicated that elevating Canada to the Special 301
Priority Watch List would make the issue more difficult and would not
be received well.
2008, copyright, dmca, prentice, wikileaks, wlcan Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareThursday April 28, 2011 |
|
View
|
|
|
Monday July 20, 2009 |
The Canadian copyright consultation has launched with a site that offers Canadians several ways to ensure that their voices are heard. As expected, there is a direct submission process, an online discussion forum, and a calendar that includes information on roundtables (by invitation only) and public town halls (the public can register for the town halls to be held in Montreal and Toronto). The site features an RSS feed, there will be audio/video transcripts of the roundtables, and there is even an official twitter feed.
The consultation features five key questions:
- How do Canada’s copyright laws affect you? How should existing laws be modernized?
- Based on Canadian values and interests, how should copyright changes be made in order to withstand the test of time?
- What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster innovation and creativity in Canada?
- What sorts of copyright changes do you believe would best foster competition and investment in Canada?
- What kinds of changes would best position Canada as a leader in the global, digital economy?
In a nutshell, the government is asking Canadians to describe why copyright matters, how to ensure that reforms remain relevant, and what reforms would best foster innovation, creativity, and competition.
There has been some criticism over the past week about perceived "A" lists for those invited to roundtables and those excluded. My view is that the only list that really matters is the list of people who take the time to make a public submission. That process is open to everyone and this is the ideal opportunity to ensure that Canadians voices are heard. The government has not consulted on copyright since 2001 and this consultation represents both a crucial opportunity and a potential threat. While Canadians can ensure that the government understands that copyright matters and that a balance is needed, some groups will undoubtedly use the consultation to push for a return of Bill C-61. Indeed, the recording industry has already said that that bill did not go far enough. That means we could see pressure for a Canadian DMCA, a three-strikes and you're out process, and the extension of the term of copyright to eat into the public domain.
Countering those calls will require broad participation. To help foster that participation, tomorrow I will be launching a new website geared specifically to the copyright consultation along with my short form response to these questions. I plan to blog a long form response throughout the summer. consultation, copycon, copyright, moore, prentice Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Newsfeeder, Reddit, StumbleUpon, TwitterTagsShareMonday July 20, 2009 |
|
|
