CloudWifi says other small ISPs need access to in-building fibre

CloudWifi Inc. has gone to bat for other small internet service providers as it continues to fight with BCE Inc. over access to in-building fibre wiring, arguing companies should be allowed to access it in buildings where there is no other infrastructure. In its latest review-and-vary submission to the CRTC during the long-running dispute, CloudWifi argues competitive local exchange carriers should continue to have interim access to fibre inside wiring in multi-unit dwellings where no other wiring already exists, until the new tariff structure is in effect. In December, the CRTC announced a halt on in-building wire access while it consulted on what would constitute a fair price for access to fibre in MDUs, meaning CLECs who accessed the fibre in-building wire would no longer be authorized to do so. But it upheld an earlier ruling from June that allowed CloudWifi to continue accessing Bell’s wiring in multiple buildings while the consultation took place. CloudWifi’s access to Bell’s in-building wiring in a Toronto condo initiated the proceeding in 2018. In its Jan. 3 submission, CloudWifi CEO Arif Hudda argued the amount of new buildings with only fibre in-building wiring meant other CLECs could no longer provide services in many MDUs unless they installed inside wiring of their own, “harming end-user choice and competition”. Interventions in the Part 1 proceeding are due Feb. 7. “While the Commission is doing the right thing in supervising the creation of a tariff for fibre inside wire, the process of doing so should not prevent CLECs from having access to fibre inside wire, as they have had for the past twenty years,” Hudda said in his submission. According to CloudWifi’s submission, the interim access to the wiring should be provided with the knowledge of the provider and at a rate of 52 cents per subscriber each month, which is the existing tariff for accessing copper wiring. The access would require local exchange carriers to “respect the integrity of property they neither own nor control.” The CRTC consultation, set to close on April 2, asks for comments on whether or not ISPs like CloudWifi should have access to in-building wire, whether in-building wire access in MDUs should be expanded to include all carrier ISPs and telecom service providers, and what appropriate rates for access, if allowed, should be. Canadian Network Operators Consortium (CNOC) president Matt Stein said in an email that he agreed with CloudWifi that access to in-building wiring should be maintained until a new tariff structure was implemented, which could take years. “If CLECs cannot access in building fibre, they cannot offer services and bring the benefits of competition to the building in question,” he said. Iristel CEO Samer Bishay said major telecoms asking for CLECs to be prevented from accessing in-building wiring while the CRTC consultation took place was a “delay tactic” that had been “unfortunately” allowed by the regulator. “I’ve always said that a late win is actually a loss for the smaller players and that’s exactly what those incumbents want!,” Bishay said in an email. In a separate request for clarification filed to the CRTC on Dec. 20, Bell submitted that the CRTC should require any ISPs who used the fibre in-building wire of another telecom provider to submit a list of each MDU where the wire had been accessed, including the particular units in each building. In the submission, Bell’s lawyer Jonathan Blakey said such a list was necessary to “prevent the proliferation of improper or damaging IBW interconnections” until new access rules had been developed, and to prevent confusion about interim access rules. Comments in that proceeding are due Jan. 22. “We and every other Fibre IBW Owner whose fibre and other property is being used by a third party without their prior knowledge and consent are entitled to a complete inventory of all such property being used by such third parties,” Bell’s submission states. Parallel to the process at the CRTC, Bell had also asked the Federal Court of Appeal for leave to appeal the decision, but informed the CRTC on Tuesday that its December decision had rendered Bell’s appeal moot. A summary of Bell’s letter to the CRTC on the Federal Court of Appeal website states that Bell will file a notice of abandonment once it has concluded discussions with CloudWifi’s counsel about costs. — With reporting by Adam Langenberg at alangenberg@thewirereport.ca and editing by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca

CloudWifi says other small ISPs need access to in-building fibre

News | January 9, 2020

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

CloudWifi says other small ISPs need access to in-building fibre

News | January 9, 2020

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