Post Tagged with: "spam"

Text-Message Fight Obscures Real Consumer Costs

Of all the recent controversies involving Canada’s wireless carriers – and there have been many – my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) argues that the fight over the 15-cent charge for the receipt of text messages must surely rank as the most puzzling. The issue, which generated an enormous amount of attention from politicians, company executives, and consumers, effectively came to a conclusion on Friday after Industry Minister Jim Prentice acknowledged that he was not prepared to intervene.

Scratch below the surface and it is difficult to understand what all the fuss was about. Text messaging has admittedly become an enormously popular form of communication and the new charges feel like an ill-advised cash grab by Bell and Telus. To be fair, however, the charges are also a relatively minor consumer issue given that the overwhelming majority of wireless subscribers are not affected by it. Moreover, the political reaction reeked of opportunism. Prentice had endured weeks of criticism from consumer groups across the country over his copyright reform bill and may have been looking for a way to re-make himself as a friend of Canadian consumers by briefly vowing to fight over the issue.

With the saber rattling over text-messaging charges now concluded, the issue should serve as a wake-up call on several festering problems with telecommunications in Canada.

August 11, 2008 — 19 comments — Columns

Text-Message Fight Obscures Real Consumer Costs

Appeared in the Toronto Star on August 11, 2008 as Text-Message Spat Obscures Costlier Issues Of all the recent controversies involving Canada’s wireless carriers – and there have been many – the fight over the 15-cent charge for the receipt of text messages must surely rank as the most puzzling. […]

August 11, 2008 — Comments are Disabled — Columns Archive

The Spectrum Surplus

Each week millions of Canadians buy lottery tickets as they "imagine the freedom" of hitting it big. My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) notes that while the federal government may not have won the lottery, it has certainly hit the jackpot with the wireless spectrum auction that is now in its final stages. The auction was expected to yield roughly $1.5 billion for the federal treasury, yet it may now top $4 billion as the bids have far exceeded initial estimates. That represents a huge windfall for the federal government as an extra $2.5 billion does not come around every day.

The surplus revenues do more than just conclusively rebut the claims of the big three wireless providers (Bell, Rogers, Telus) who aggressively lobbied against a "set aside" that reserved some spectrum for new entrants on the grounds that it would reduce auction revenues. As telecom consultant Mark Goldberg noted earlier this month, the auction's success also raises the important question of what to do with the money.

The immediate response from Ottawa is likely to be that the 2008 Federal Budget earmarked the spectrum auction proceeds to debt reduction. However, that promise was made when $1.5 billion was expected to be on the table. With nearly triple that amount at stake, the government could fulfill its commitment to allocate the expected revenues to debt reduction and simultaneously use the surplus proceeds for purposes more directly connected to the issues of wireless, the Internet, and communications in Canada.

At least three possibilities come immediately to mind.

June 23, 2008 — 9 comments — Columns

Spectrum Surplus Offers Chance To Pay Net Policy Bills

Appeared in the Toronto Star on June 23, 2008 as Spectrum Auction Bonanza Allows for Proactive Thinking Each week millions of Canadians buy lottery tickets as they "imagine the freedom" of hitting it big. While the federal government may not have won the lottery, it has certainly hit the jackpot […]

June 23, 2008 — Comments are Disabled — Columns Archive

Senate Spam Bill Important First Step After Years of Inaction

The Canadian government's lack of action against spam has been one of the most puzzling policy failures in recent years. While addressing a problem that has grown from a mere nuisance to a costly scourge that raises criminal concerns would seem like a no-brainer, successive Industry Ministers have failed to prioritize the issue. The need for Canadian anti-spam legislation was the unanimous recommendation of the 2005 National Task Force on Spam, which included members from the Internet, marketing, and consumer communities (I was a member of the task force). The final report, which was received with approval from the current Conservative (then Liberal) Minister David Emerson, noted that Canada was quickly becoming one of the only Western countries to neglect the issue and was at risk of developing into a haven for spammers seeking refuge in countries with lax anti-spam regulations.

While a government-backed anti-spam bill is still nowhere to be seen, my weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) focuses on the fact that earlier this month Senator Yoine Goldstein quietly stepped into the policy void by introducing the Anti-Spam Act (ASA). Modeled after widely lauded Australian anti-spam legislation, the ASA is the most comprehensive Canadian anti-spam proposal floated to date and even if it languishes in the Senate (private member's bill rarely become law) it promises to place additional pressure on the government to reveal its own anti-spam plan.

May 19, 2008 — 3 comments — Columns