CRTC asking new questions on mobile-TV and wireless data throttling

The CRTC has issued new interrogatories in its proceeding looking at an undue preference complaint about mobile-TV services, asking BCE Inc., Rogers Communications Inc. and Quebecor Inc.’s Videotron about their throttling of customers’ wireless service. The proceeding began last year when telecom blogger Ben Klass said that Bell gives its mobile-TV service an “undue preference” over other online video services by allowing BCE’s mobile subscribers to watch videos without the traffic counting against their monthly data cap. It was later combined with complaints by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) against mobile-TV services offered by Rogers Communications Inc. and Quebecor Inc.’s Videotron subsidiary. Among other questions, the new interrogatories ask the companies to explain why they need to use traffic management practices on their networks while encouraging customers to use mobile-TV services which “ considerable bandwidth.” In the letter, issued Tuesday, the CRTC noted that each company said it reserved the right to throttle the connection of customers once they have used a certain amount of data. The CRTC noted that Bell considers usage above 25GB to be “disproportionate and excessive for network management purposes,” Videotron sets the limit to start managing the traffic at 5GB, while Rogers does not specify an amount. The commission asked the companies whether they would treat a customer who used the same amount of data through their mobile-TV services in the same way. Klass said in a phone interview that that question gets “to the heart of the issue,” which is net neutrality. “When I originally saw that they were offering this service, this is exactly what was on my mind. How can they offer you limited, capped service, while at the same time providing a back door so long as you purchase products from them?” He said the practice amounts to “punishing consumers for using competitors’ products.” Rogers and Videotron did not respond when asked for comment Wednesday, while BCE spokeswoman Jacqueline Michelis said in an email that the company will “be responding to the CRTC’s questions in due course.” Jean-Francois Mezei, a Montreal-area telecom consultant with Vaxination Informatique who filed an intervention in the proceeding supporting Klass’s challenge, said this proceeding is the first case dealing with CRTC’s Internet traffic management practices framework that applies to mobile services. “It’s also the first major true net neutrality challenge under rules,” he said, referring to the CRTC’s guidelines on Internet throttling. He noted that a previous challenge dealt with “more of a mistake in application as opposed to purposefully treating certain types of traffic differently than others.” He said that Bell agreed in previous comments that it gives a preference to its own content, but that “it didn’t matter because this isn’t telecom, it’s broadcasting.” Previous arguments in the proceeding centered around this question, with Bell arguing that its mobile-video service should be treated more along the lines of a television-broadcast service as opposed to an Internet service. In response to a CRTC question about why the companies feel their services do not constitute an undue preference, Bell answered: “Mobile TV is a broadcasting service whereas other apps such as Netflix, YouTube or CTV News Go are over-the-top (OTT) services which rely on the Internet for the distribution of their services. In other words, the fact that the service is accessed through an ‘app’ does not alter the fact that a broadcast service is a broadcast service or an Internet service is an Internet service.” The deadline for the last round of reply comments was May 12, and Mezei said the decision was expected in September. He said the introduction of new evidence allows the CRTC to push a tough decision “out to early next year.” “If they’re going to side with the consumers they have to tell the incumbents, you have to change the way you bill for these services, which for the CRTC is a big decision because it impacts retail,” he said. “And if you side with the incumbents, then it’s a big net neutrality loss for Canadians a big PR problem.” — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and editing by Peter Henderson at phenderson@thewirereport.ca

CRTC asking new questions on mobile-TV and wireless data throttling

News | August 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

CRTC asking new questions on mobile-TV and wireless data throttling

News | August 6, 2014

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

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

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Telecom industry players look to Senate for greater copper theft prevention

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us