PIAC releases backgrounder on AWS-3 Auction costs and benefits for consumers
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) today released a backgrounder on the AWS-3 Auction costs and benefits to Canadian consumers entitled The AWS-3 Spectrum Auction – What is the Best Deal for Consumers? The backgrounder concludes the possibility of a 4th national player in the Canadian wireless market could easily offset any reduced auction proceeds due the announced set aside of 60% of this auction’s spectrum for new entrants.
Canadian AWS-3 Auction good for consumers: will increase competition; encourage fourth national wireless carrier
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OTTAWA – Industry Canada’s announcement today of the upcoming auction of “AWS-3” spectrum with rules requiring a large “set aside” for new entrant wireless companies is good news for consumers, said the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC).
Canada’s “big three” cellphone companies, Bell Mobility, TELUS Mobility and Rogers already control more than 90% of the retail cellphone market and 90% of Canada’s spectrum and have moved aggressively to foreclose the possibility of a fourth national wireless competitor. However, today’s announcement means competitors can acquire spectrum and offer competitive services – especially superfast “LTE” data service – to more Canadians once the auction is completed, late this year or early in 2015.
“Wireless competition is lacking in Canada,” said John Lawford, Executive Director and General Counsel for PIAC. “The set-aside of AWS-3 spectrum provides an on-ramp for competitors to get on the wireless data highway with smartphones” he added.
“New entrants” are defined for this auction as wireless carriers with less than 10 percent national and 20 percent provincial/territorial wireless subscriber market share. In addition, these companies will have to be actually offering wireless service to Canadians in areas they wish to bid on in the auction. This means companies such as WIND Mobile, Mobilicity, and regional carriers such as Videotron (outside of Quebec) will be able to bid on the set-aside where they already have committed by providing service.
“Canadians are waiting for a fourth national wireless company,” said Bruce Cran, President of the Consumers’ Association of Canada. Added Cran: “Prices won’t fall and wireless competition will not really work until Canadians have another choice.”
For more information:
John Lawford
Executive Director and General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
ONE Nicholas Street, Suite 1204
Ottawa, Ontario
K1N 7B7
(613) 562-4002×25
lawford@piac.ca
Bruce Cran
President
Consumers’ Association of Canada
(604) 418-8359
bcranbiz@telus.net
Civil Society Coalition Declines to Endorse OECD Communiqué on Principles for Internet Policy-Making; Urges OECD to Reject “Voluntary” Steps For Filtering and Blocking of Online Content
CSISAC Press Release 06282011
Download File: csisac_press_release_0628011_final_1.pdf [size: 0.09 mb]
Paris – The Civil Society Information Society Advisory Council to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (CSISAC) today declined to endorse an OECD Communiqué on Internet Policy-making principles. CSISAC believes that the Communiqué, which was presented today at the OECD’s High Level Meeting on the Internet Economy in Paris, could undermine online freedom of expression, freedom of information, the right to privacy, and innovation across the world.
The OECD Communiqué covers a broad range of current Internet-related policy issues. CSISAC supports many of the proposed principles, in particular, policies that support the open, interoperable Internet, and multi-stakeholder policy development processes.
CSISAC strongly supports OECD multistakeholder policy development processes and sees much value in working at the OECD. While CSISAC appreciates the efforts made by the OECD Secretariat and various OECD member states to accommodate CSISAC’s concerns with the draft Communiqué, CSISAC was not able to accept the final draft’s over-emphasis on intellectual property enforcement at the expense of fundamental freedoms, and its movement away from the longstanding principle in many OECD countries’ laws of granting “mere conduit” online service providers limitations on liability for the actions of their users.
The final Communiqué advises OECD countries to adopt policy and legal frameworks that make Internet intermediaries responsible for taking lawful steps to deter copyright infringement. This approach could create incentives for Internet intermediaries to delete or block contested content, and lead to network filtering, which would harm online expression. In addition, as has already happened in at least one country, Internet intermediaries could voluntarily adopt “graduated response” policies under which Internet users’ access could be terminated based solely on repeated allegations of infringement. CSISAC believes that these measures contradict international and European human rights law.
CSISAC is also concerned about limits on access guarantees to “lawful” content and references to lawful behaviour throughout the Communiqué. This language ostensibly would require Internet intermediaries or other private parties and interests to make determinations about the legality of content and of user behavior on their platforms and networks. Internet intermediaries are neither competent nor appropriate parties to make such rulings., CSISAC believes Internet intermediaries should not be responsible for identifying infringement and enforcing intellectual property rights, and requiring them to do so compromises transparency, accountability and due process. All restrictions must be based on court orders obtained after due process and judicial review.
CSISAC notes that the direction of some of the text in the Communiqué is inconsistent with the approach taken by other intergovernmental organizations including the United Nations and the Council of Europe, and could result in divergent regulatory approaches across countries, undermining the stated goal of the Communiqué to provide assistance to policymakers in OECD member states. In his 2011 Report to the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression has specifically criticized national laws that impose liability on Internet intermediaries if they do not agree to adopt filtering and blocking measures. Furthermore, the Rapporteur has stated that cutting off users from Internet access, regardless of the justification provided, including alleged violations of intellectual property rights, is disproportionate and thus a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Council of Europe has previously published in 2008 Recommendations to member states and Guidelines to Internet intermediaries on measures to promote the respect for freedom of expression and information with regard to Internet filters and in 2007 Recommendations on measures to promote the public service value of the Internet. It is in the process of publishing a Declaration on Internet Governance Principles.
CSISAC supports the strong emphasis on the need for multi-stakeholder process regarding the development of Internet policy. CSISAC recognizes that several international bodies and organizations are currently discussing whether and how to regulate the Internet at the global level. Unlike such intergovernmental meetings such as the recent eG8 and G8 events, in which civil society was not invited to participate, the OECD has demonstrated commitment to developing Internet policies in a genuine multi-stakeholder process.
CSISAC calls on OECD member states to take a stand to combat digital censorship and uphold international human rights standards, including the fundamental rights to freedom of expression, to freedom of information, to privacy and to the protection of personal data, which are the cornerstones of democracy. Any Internet policy guidelines developed by the OECD should be grounded in legal principles that are widely accepted, and be compliant with international human rights standards. It is inappropriate for such guidelines to be derived from ad hoc regulations and policy experiments that have been adopted in a small number of countries, especially since the impact of these regulations is still far from clear. We invite member states of the OECD to protect the open Internet and make a public commitment to opposing Internet filtering and blocking by intermediaries, to affirm existing limitations on intermediaries’ liability, and to support due process and judicial review of allegedly illegal content and behavior.
A more detailed explanation of CSISAC members’ concerns with the text of the Communique is available : here [pdf file: 0.07mb]
About OECD:
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development is an intergovernmental body that produces economic and policy analysis and promotes policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world. The OECD provides a forum in which its 34 member governments can work together to share experiences and seek solutions to common problems. Its reports and recommendations are highly influential and have formed the basis for national laws and policies in its member states.
About CSISAC:
CSISAC is a coalition of more than 80 civil society groups and several concerned individuals from across the globe that, since 2009, has provided input into the development of OECD policies relating to the Internet, and formally represents the civil society perspective at certain OECD meetings.
More information is available at: CSISAC
Contact: liaison@csisac.org
Public interest groups welcome CRTC decision to make Do-not-call number registrations permanent
OTTAWA – The permanent registration of telephone numbers on the national do-not-call list (DNCL) today ordered by the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) will strengthen the list and protect consumers said the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Council of Senior Citizens’ Organizations of British Columbia (COSCO).
Prior to today’s decision, Canadians who wished to avoid receiving unsolicited telemarketing calls had to register their number on the DNCL, and then remind themselves to re-register every several years.
“Today’s decision is positive for consumers”, said Geoffrey White, Counsel to PIAC and COSCO, “as it ensures that ‘once registered, always registered’ unless the subscriber says otherwise, and eliminates the hassle of periodically having to renew registration, a hassle which the Commission recognized in today’s decision.”
PIAC and COSCO supported the CRTC’s proposal to make registration permanent, arguing that the industry’s inability to arrive at a solution to ensuring the DNCL most accurately captured the true intentions of all registrants was not the problem of Canadians who generally did not want to receive unsolicited telemarketing calls.
A copy of the CRTC’s decision can be found on the CRTC website.
For more information:
Geoffrey White
Counsel to PIAC and COSCO
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×24
(613) 612-1190 (cell)
gwhite@piac.ca
Non-refundable deposits and fine print a violation of CRTC’s Wireless Code, consumer groups complain
OTTAWA – The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) today filed a joint application challenging wireless device deposit programs offered by Rogers and TELUS.
The Rogers “NEXT” and TELUS “T-Up” programs require subscribers to pre-pay a monthly fee in addition to their usual service charges for at least 12 months. These payments, which range from $17 to nearly $30 a month, go toward the partial cost of a new cellphone. If the customer stays subscribed and returns their old phone and signs a new two year contract, then they receive a new phone at a discounted rate and any balance owing on the previous cellphone is forgiven. However, a key element of these programs is that the fees paid into them are non-refundable. A customer will lose any money already paid towards the new cellphone if he or she wishes to switch service providers and will still have to pay off any remaining balance on their old phone to switch companies.
PIAC and CAC challenged this practice, arguing that it violates the CRTC’s Wireless Code, and asking that the Commission order that all deposits be made fully refundable, with interest, at any time, and that Rogers and TELUS return any fees from previously cancelled deposit plans.
“The fees imposed by these programs, by virtue of being non-refundable, act as a termination fee, and prevent people from switching service providers. That’s against the letter, and the spirit, of the Wireless Code which exists to protect consumers, and also to ensure customers do not face unreasonable limits on their ability to switch“, said John Lawford, PIAC’s Executive Director and General Counsel.”
Bruce Cran, President of CAC added that: “These programs convince people to throw good money after bad, and lock customers into a perpetual cycle of contract renewals with their current service provider, which lessens wireless competition and consumer choice.”
The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) joint application to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission challenging wireless device deposit programs offered by Rogers and TELUS is available at this dropbox link.
– – – – – –
For more information:
John Lawford
General Counsel and Executive Director
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 447-8125 (cell)
jlawford@piac.ca
Bruce Cran
President
Consumers’ Association of Canada
604-418-8359
bcranbiz@telus.net
700 MHz Spectrum Auction Results a Disappointment for Consumers
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
OTTAWA – Today’s announcement of the most recent spectrum auction results is a disappointment for Canadian wireless consumers said the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC).
PIAC had called upon the government to “set-aside” valuable 700 MHz spectrum in the auction for “new entrants” who would challenge the incumbent wireless providers Bell, TELUS and Rogers. Unfortunately, the list of bidders, and eventual winners, preserve the competition status quo in Canada, with the exception of Videotron, which has acquired some spectrum that may, by acquiring and piecing together spectrum licences from a previous auction, be enough to launch a national wireless service.
“Despite efforts by the Federal Government to promote competition, and previous efforts to improve access by competitors to towers and roaming requirements, little has changed with today’s results”, said John Lawford, PIAC’s Executive Director and General Counsel. “We urge the government to use other methods to attempt to address the lack of competition in the Canadian wireless market as consumers in Canada will continue to pay more for wireless than in other countries, at least in the short to medium term.”
Those methods include enforcing the new competition-focused policy on spectrum transfers; strengthening the roaming and tower-sharing framework; following through on the Government’s promise to cap domestic roaming rates; releasing more licensed and unlicensed spectrum; and creating a more open and predictable environment for foreign investment. PIAC also encourages the Government to ensure that spectrum licence holders use their spectrum throughout their licenced territories, instead of using the licence as an investment to sell to a higher bidder.
For more information:
John Lawford
General Counsel and Executive Director
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 447-8125 (cell)
jlawford@piac.ca
Geoffrey White
Counsel to PIAC
(613) 562-4002×24
(613) 612-1190 (cell)
gwhite@piac.ca
PIAC Welcomes Funding to Improve Broadband Internet Access for Rural and Remote Canadians
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, Feb. 11, 2014
OTTAWA – PIAC welcomed the announcement in Budget 2014 that $305 Million will be provided to improve access to broadband internet service for rural and remote Canadians.
“Canadians continue to need more choice, better service and lower prices for broadband internet service,” noted Geoff White, Counsel to PIAC. “Many consumers in rural or remote areas are not able to harness the full potential of the internet” said White.
“In 2011, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) denied a request from PIAC to create a structured rural broadband subsidy for rural broadband access,” noted John Lawford, PIAC’s Executive Director and General Counsel. Moreover, in 2010, PIAC produced a report concluding that access to broadband has important economic, social and cultural ramifications for Canadians and without it, Canadian consumers risk falling behind in today’s increasingly online interconnected world. The report called for establishing broadband as basic service for Canadians in the same way that telephone service was established as a need for every citizen in the last century.
The Public Interest Advocacy Centre is an Ottawa-based consumer organization specializing in telecommunications services.
– – – – – –
For more information:
Geoff White, Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
ONE Nicholas Street, Suite 1204
Ottawa, Ontario
K1N 7B7
(613) 562-4002×24
(613) 562-0007 (Fax)
gwhite@piac.ca
John Lawford
Executive Director and General Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
ONE Nicholas Street, Suite 1204
Ottawa, Ontario
K1N 7B7
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 562-0007 (Fax)
jlawford@piac.ca
PIAC and Chimo Community Services Ask CRTC to Eliminate Cell Phone Charges for Calls to Helplines
OTTAWA –- The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and Chimo Community Services (Chimo) filed an application today with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, asking it to eliminate charges for Canadians who call helplines and crisis lines from their cell phones, and to protect helpline users’ privacy.
Currently, Canadians who call helplines from their wireless phones are charged for those calls or have those voice minutes deducted if they have a voice plan. Callers’ accounts can also identify the fact that a call was made to a helpline, as well as the number of that helpline.
PIAC and Chimo argued that wireless charges and the inadequate protection of a helpline caller’s privacy were unjustly discriminatory towards helpline users and helpline operators.
“If someone were to make a local call or a call to a 1-800 or 1-888 helpline number from a landline phone, their call would be free for them”, said Jean-François Léger, Counsel for PIAC and Chimo. “That shouldn’t change just because they are now calling from their cellular phone. And more and more Canadians only have cell phones, not landline phones.”
“Cell phone users should not have to fear that calls to helplines would be traceable by anyone who has access to account information,” added Alysia Lau, Legal Counsel at PIAC. “This is particularly important in situations of domestic violence.”
Many helpline users are from socially and economically vulnerable groups, and call looking for counselling or support. Usage charges create barriers for callers who have low incomes, as many are subscribed to pay-as-you-go wireless plans. These barriers also create challenges for helpline agencies trying to provide their clients with the support they need.
“Our Crisis Line receives over 10,000 calls per year from people of every walk of life,” said Lisa Westermark, Executive Director at Chimo. “Many are youth or individuals with low income. Many have nowhere else to turn. It would be tragic if someone in need was not able to access our free service due to the cost of the call.”
PIAC and Chimo’s application is supported by eight other community organizations and associations. These are: Ending Violence Association of B.C., Family Services of Greater Vancouver, Ontario Association of Interval and Transition Houses, Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres, Richmond Youth Service Agency, Safe Communities Cranbrook Committee, Vancouver Coastal Health, and Women Against Violence Against Women Rape Crisis Centre.
They invite all Canadians to submit comments on their application, which can be found on the PIAC website at www.piac.ca
*PIAC Chimo Part 1 Application Helplines [pdf file: 0.37mb]
*PIAC Chimo Part 1 Application Helplines App A_Part1 [pdf file: 0.94mb]
*PIAC Chimo Part 1 Application Helplines App A_Part2 [pdf file: 0.92mb]
*PIAC Chimo Part 1 Application Helplines App B [pdf file: 0.13mb]
For more information, please contact:
Alysia Lau
Legal Counsel
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×38
alau@piac.ca
Jean-François Léger
Legal Counsel to the
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×28
jfleger@piac.ca
Lisa Westermark
Executive Director
Chimo Community Services
(604) 279-7076
lwestermark@chimoservices.com
CRTC asked to stop Bell Mobility’s “Relevant Ads” Program
OTTAWA – The Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) today filed an application challenging Bell Canada’s collection, use and disclosure of customer information gathered from its own wireless customers for behavioural and other marketing.
The application, which was filed with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunication Commission (CRTC), argues that Bell’s unprecedented collection, use and disclosure of customer information for marketing is contrary to Canadian telecommunications policy – rules intended to protect Canadians’ privacy.
In November of 2013 Bell announced that it would begin, without customers’ express consent, to track a range of customer information known to Bell from that customer’s use of Bell’s own services (including age, gender, location, browsing history, app and device feature usage, TV viewing, and calling patterns) in order to deliver targeted ads to their Bell Mobility subscribers based on their behaviour.
“Bell has overstepped its role as a neutral provider of telecommunications services”, said John Lawford, PIAC’s Executive Director and General Counsel. “Canadians have every right to be concerned about their personal privacy when the company they pay for telephone, wireless, internet and TV service begins tracking and using information about them in this way.”
“Bell is trying to ‘double-dip’ by taking your subscription fees and then selling information based on your use of the services you just paid for”, said Bruce Cran, President of CAC. “It’s inappropriate – and asking that Canadians “opt-out” of this program they never asked for is wrong.”
PIAC invites all Canadians to submit comments on the PIAC/CAC application, which can be found at https://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/TransferToWeb/2014/8665-P8-201400762.zip
For more information:
John Lawford
General Counsel and Executive Director
Public Interest Advocacy Centre
(613) 562-4002×25
(613) 447-8125 (cell)
jlawford@piac.ca
Bruce Cran
President
Consumers’ Association of Canada
604-418-8359
Links to PIAC Reports on Transport
Transport Reports
