Telecom by yum9me (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) https://flic.kr/p/53jSy4

Telecom

Government Introduces Bill To Require Surveillance Capabilities, Mandated Subscriber Disclosure

As expected, the Government has taken another shot at lawful access legislation today, introducing a legislative package called the Investigative Powers for the 21st Century (IP21C) Act that would require mandated surveillance capabilities at Canadian ISPs, force ISPs to disclose subscriber information such as name and address, and grant the police broad new powers to obtain transmission data and force ISPs to preserve data. Although I can only go on government releases (here, here), the approach appears to be very similar to the Liberal lawful access bill of 2005 that died on the order paper (my comments on that bill here) [update: Bill C-46 and C-47]. It is pretty much exactly what law enforcement has been demanding and privacy groups have been fearing. It represents a reneging of a commitment from the previous Public Safety Minister on court oversight and will embed broad new surveillance capabilities in the Canadian Internet.

The lawful access proposal is generally divided among two sets of issues – ISP requirements and new police powers.

1. ISP requirements

There are two key components here. First, ISPs will be required to install surveillance capabilities in their networks. This feels a bit like a surveillance stimulus package, with ISPs making big new investments and the government cost-sharing by compensating for changes to existing networks. The bill again exempts smaller ISPs for three years from these requirements. While that is understandable from a cost perspective, it undermines the claims that this is an effective solution to online crime since it will result in Canadians at big ISPs facing surveillance while would-be criminals seek out smaller ISPs without surveillance capabilities.

Second, the bill requires all ISPs to surrender customer name, address, IP address, and email address information upon request without court oversight. In taking this approach, Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has reneged on the promise of his predecessor and cabinet colleague Stockwell Day, who pledged not to introduce mandated subscriber data disclosure without court oversight.

June 18, 2009 — 90 comments — News

Expert Says Text Message Mark-Up Is 4,900 Percent

Canwest reports that a Canadian researcher has told a U.S. Senate committee that the major telcos mark-up the cost of sending a text-message by as much as 4,900 percent.

June 17, 2009 — 7 comments — News

Bell Calls for “Spectrum Fee Holiday”

The Toronto Star reports that Bell has written to Industry Canada asking for a "spectrum fee holiday" that would suspend the millions of dollars the company pays in licensing fees for wireless spectrum. Bell said it was "too early to say what impact a change in government policy would have […]

June 12, 2009 — 4 comments — News

Canada’s Telecom Crisis: My Appearance Before the Senate Transport and Communications Committee

Two weeks ago, I appeared before the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications to discuss the state of telecommunications in Canada. The committee is conducting a study on the wireless sector and access to high-speed Internet. The full hearing last over 90 minutes and the transcript has just been posted online. My opening statement is posted below.

Appearance before the Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications
May 26, 2009

Good morning. My name is Michael Geist. I am a law professor at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law, where I hold the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law. I am also a syndicated weekly columnist on law and technology issues for the Toronto Star and the Ottawa Citizen. I served on National Task Force on Spam struck by the Minister of Industry in 2004 and on the board of directors of the Canadian Internet Registration Authority, which manages the dot-ca domain name space, from 2000 – 2006.

I appear before the committee today in a personal capacity representing only my own views. I grateful both for the opportunity to appear before you and for your decision to address this issue. As you know, Canada was once a global leader in the telecom field. Companies like Nortel led the world and – befitting a country with our geography – Canada consistently ranked toward the top on most telecom measures. No longer. While RIM has carved out an important niche and become a household name, the Canadian telecommunications scene is in a state of crisis. This is no exaggeration. Following years of neglect by successive governments, the absence of a forward-looking digital agenda, and cozy, uncompetitive environment, we now find ourselves steadily slipping in the rankings just as these issues gain even more importance for commercial, educational, and community purposes.

I know that you are focused primarily on the wireless sector, but I think the problems within our telecommunications infrastructure are not so easily divisible. I would like to briefly discuss three issues – wireless, broadband access, and net neutrality.

June 8, 2009 — 26 comments — Committees, News

CRTC New Media Decision: Hands Off The Internet. . . For Now

The CRTC has released its 2009 new media decision (full decision here) and it looks not unlike the 1999 new media decision. Days of hearings, thousands of pages of submissions and the Commission has side-stepped the pressure to "do something," by maintaining its hands-off approach. It concluded that regulatory intervention would get in the way of innovation and that a compelling case was not made that additional support through an ISP levy was needed. Indeed, the decision notes that "the Commission is of the view that parties advocating repeal of the exemption orders did not establish that licensing undertakings in the new media environment would contribute in a material manner to the implementation of the broadcasting policy set out in the Act."

There is at least one very noteworthy change to the new media exemption, however. The CRTC was clearly troubled by allegations of undue preferences being granted by wireless providers (the issue raised by the Weather Network and discussed in this March column). It has therefore proposed amendments prohibiting such practices:

June 4, 2009 — 16 comments — News