Mobile TV not undue preference, promotes Canadian content: Rogers

Rogers Communications Inc.’s mobile-TV service upholds the Broadcasting Act by making Canadian content available and is not an undue preference, the company told the CRTC Wednesday. Rogers made the comments in a filing on a mobile-TV complaint currently underway at the CRTC. In the proceeding, the commission is considering three complaints regarding mobile-TV services offered by Rogers, BCE Inc.’s Bell Mobility subsidiary and Quebecor Inc.’s Videotron subsidiary. The complaints say the three companies give their own services an “undue preference” over other online video services by allowing their mobile subscribers to watch videos without it counting against their monthly data cap. The proceeding is being considered under both the Telecommunications Act and the Broadcasting Act. Rogers said that its mobile-TV service “is making a valuable contribution to the Canadian broadcasting system.” “ objectives of the Broadcasting Act are actually furthered because mobile TV services provide Canadian consumers with the ability to access Canadian programming services and content that is, generally, not available from other OTT service providers,” it said. Rogers said its service offers Canadian programs that aren’t available through other services, such as those provided by Netflix Inc. “Our efforts to develop innovative strategies for offering mobile video content necessarily result in more Canadian programming accessible to Canadian consumers,” it said. Ben Klass, a University of Manitoba political studies master’s student with a focus on communications, spurred the proceeding when he filed an undue preference complaint against Bell last fall. That complaint was later combined with similar complaints filed by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) against Rogers and Videotron. Klass, who also filed a reply Wednesday, said in a phone interview Thursday that the Telecommunications Act and the Broadcasting Act have different objectives. “In broadcasting, is shielding Canadian content from market forces, whereas in telecom, they’re supposed to be promoting market forces, they’re supposed to be encouraging competition,” he said. “This is an opportunity for the commission to demonstrate which one of these tacks it’s going to take.” Klass noted that in its response to the initial complaint against Bell’s mobile TV service, BCE also emphasized its service as a “Canadian success story.” He said the hope on the companies’ part is that the CRTC will “look at this and say, OK, the Broadcast Act in this case is more important. We need to protect this content, so we’re going to decide that under the Broadcasting Act, we’re allowed to ignore the .” In its filing, Rogers also said that, even if an argument can be made that its billing practices regarding its mobile TV service do constitute a preference or disadvantage, “there is certainly no evidence it is undue.” “Competition among digital media services continues to be robust. There is no evidence that any competitor to Rogers or any Canadian consumer has been materially harmed by these offerings,” it said, noting that the number of Canadian subscribers to Netflix has grown 70 per cent since 2012. It said that the market for online video content is highly competitive, and that Rogers and other wireless providers do not have a significant share of it, adding that “ are attempting to catch up to the global companies that dominate the online space.” “The Commission has consistently rejected allegations of unjust discrimination and undue preference under subsection 27(2) of the Telecommunications Act in circumstances where the market has been characterized by rivalrous behaviour and is robustly competitive,” it added. Videotron also filed a response to the CRTC on Wednesday, in which it reiterated its support for the arguments made by Bell and Telus Corp. in their earlier responses to Klass’ complaint. It said in a French-language filing that the complaints against the companies were not able to establish an undue preference or unreasonable disadvantage. It also pointed to the growing popularity of Netflix in Canada, and said that through the pricing of its Illico Mobile service, Videotron is only looking to promote a new way for customers to access the television content of their choice. Telecom analyst Jean-Francois Mezei of Vaxination Informatique said in a filing that it’s necessary to go beyond statistics demonstrating the state of competition in recent months, “but also consider whether a precedent setting business practice, if allowed by the Commission, will expand to a point where serious harm will be caused to many players.” He added: “Opening the door to differential pricing or treatment of data packets will let incumbents build fortresses which will prevent new players from emerging.” In its filing on Wednesday, PIAC wrote that “no matter which way Bell and other vertically integrated service providers turn —be it the Telecommunications Act or Broadcasting Act or forbearance orders or exemption orders made respectively under each, these service providers are giving their own services an undue preference to the detriment of their customers and competition in the marketplace for OTT services.” The next step in the proceeding will be for the CRTC to “issue requests for information in the form of interrogatories,” which it said it would do by April 4. — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and editing by Derek Abma at dabma@thewirereport.ca

Mobile TV not undue preference, promotes Canadian content: Rogers

Broadcast | March 6, 2014

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Mobile TV not undue preference, promotes Canadian content: Rogers

Broadcast | March 6, 2014

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

CRTC launches consult on challenges in broadcasting market

OPINION: More competition does not require new competitors

CAB local news plan draws support from industry, jeers from music firms

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us