It did not attract much attention, but last week the CRTC ruled that it is extending its Internet Traffic Management Practices framework to wireless data services. The ITMP framework address some net neutrality concerns. The CRTC had previously indicated that it expected wireless companies to comply with the framework, but the decision (which is effective immediately) provides a stronger legal foundation on the issue.
CRTC Extends Net Neutrality Rules to Wireless Data Services
6 Comments
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 278: Ben Waldman on Gander Social and the Challenges of Building a Sovereign Social Network 
Canada’s Campus Antisemitism Crisis: National Survey Finds Antisemitism Nearly Everywhere and University Responses Nowhere 
Why the Answers to Hateful Content Online are Hiding in the Platforms’ Own Rules 
From CCH to ChatGPT: How Canadian Copyright Law Played the Key Role in Deciding a Leading AI Training Data Case in India 
Starting Over: Court Filing Confirms the CRTC’s Streamer Contribution Decisions Are Dead With a Full Online Streaming Act Reset to Come
Does this mean that wireless providers cannot now disallow VOIP (e.g. skype) on their networks?
dunno
Seems to me that the likes of Bell’s crippled firmwares on their “not-so-smart” phones that prevent competing apps can now get them in some heat.
Wasn’t aware of “Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-657”.
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-657.htm
Jim R. It appears they need CRTC approval before blocking VOIP, and the CRTC will want to know why VOIP needs to be blocked to ensure the integrity of the network.
sure you can use VOIP…
I’m sure you’ll be able to legally use VOIP on your cell phone. Just so long as it doesn’t involve circumventing any TPMs…
curgoth,
The terms of service of several wireless providers explicitly disallow VOIP – hence, my question, as it would appear that there’s now a conflict between those TOSs and the ITMP framework.
Jim, Many ISP prohibit hosting “servers” or sharing your Internet connection as well. By the same token, that would appear to conflict with the ITMP framework.