My column on the decision to kill the cellphone cost calculator generated considerable reaction: The Liberal party issued a press release criticizing the decision and arguing that it placed the wireless industry ahead of consumers. The CBC covered the story, including comments from the CWTA, PIAC, and Bell (it should […]
Post Tagged with: "bell"
How Telco Lobbying Helped Quietly Kill Consumer Cell Phone Cost Calculator
Last week I discussed the well-known challenge faced by millions of Canadians as they sort through a myriad of cellphone pricing plans in a marketplace still lacking in robust competition. The subject of this week's technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) is that previously unreported, however, is Industry Canada officials identified much the same problem and worked for years to develop an online tool to address it.
After spending tens of thousands of dollars creating and testing an online calculator designed to help consumers select their ideal wireless plan, Industry Minister Tony Clement killed the project weeks before it was scheduled to launch. Government records suggest intense lobbying this spring by Canada’s wireless companies, who feared the service would promote lower cost plans, played a key role in the decision.
How Telco Lobby Helped Kill Consumer Cell Phone Cost Calculator
Appeared in the Toronto Star on August 31, 2009 as Telco Lobby Helped Block Cellphone Cost Calculator Last week I discussed the well-known challenge faced by millions of Canadians as they sort through a myriad of cellphone pricing plans in a marketplace still lacking in robust competition. Previously unreported, however, […]
CRTC Seeks UBB Pricing Answers From Bell
The CBC reports that the CRTC has asked Bell to provide specific answers about its implementation plans for wholesale usage-based billing.
Bell and Rogers Square Off Over Internet Speed Claims
As two of Canada's biggest Internet service providers, Bell Canada and Rogers Communications are fierce rivals that frequently battle for the same customers. That marketplace fight rarely spills into the courtroom, yet my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, Ottawa Citizen version, homepage version) notes that last month a Rogers advertising campaign prompted Bell to file a $50 million dollar lawsuit. The result was an end to the campaign and evidence both companies over-promise the speed of their Internet services.
The case began when Rogers launched a direct mail and Internet ad campaign called "Check Your Speed." The campaign warned users the Internet services "you are paying for may not be what you're getting" and encouraged them to test their connection with an independent third party. The campaign unsurprisingly offered Rogers services as an alternative, promising a "reliable speed every time you connect." Just days after the launch, Bell filed suit, arguing in court documents violations of the Trade-Mark Act, Competition Act, along with various torts. The company sought $50 million in general damages, $1 million in punitive damages, and an injunction blocking Rogers from continuing with its campaign.
Two days later, Rogers dropped the third party testing feature. Rather than using a fully independent third party service, Rogers had used a server located in Seattle, Washington to run its tests. The court found that the distance between users in Ontario and the speed test server in Washington might help account for slower speeds. Even more telling was the evidence that placed the spotlight on a Canadian industry practice of advertising the maximum or "up to" speeds for customers, rather than minimum or actual speeds that customers typically obtain. The Rogers campaign was effectively premised on this discrepancy since it encouraged users to check their speeds where they would undoubtedly learn their typical speeds were lower than those promised by their ISP.