Rogers’ disclosure of data throttling in ‘Infinite’ plans inadequate, Competition Bureau alleges

In the latest filing in its proceeding against Rogers Communications Inc. and its “Infinite” high-speed data plans, the Competition Bureau maintains that the company’s advertisements for the wireless phone plans are misleading, alleging that Rogers’ disclosure that customers’ speeds will be throttled after passing a certain data usage threshold are inadequate. The Competition Bureau late last year accused Rogers of “falsely advertising” its Infinite wireless phone plans, alleging that they are misleading because these plans have data caps after which speeds are significantly reduced, contradicting the promise of “unlimited” data. Rogers filed its response to the bureau’s application with the Competition Tribunal earlier this month, arguing its advertising contains disclosures of plan features and that the plans are pro-competitive and pro-consumer. Rogers argues in its Feb. 6 filing that the bureau did not consider its “ubiquitous disclosure of key plan features, ignores widespread consumer understanding of unlimited wireless data plans,” and “presents a highly selective and misleading collection of advertisements, and unreasonably targets Rogers for an industry-wide practice.” However, the bureau denies that the “minimal disclosures offered by Rogers in other representations,” referring to potential disclosures that may be in the terms and conditions on the company’s website or certain ads that may not have been included in the bureau’s application, “were in any way adequate to overcome the claims that the product offered unlimited data.” “The implication of Rogers’ defence is that a company can blatantly engage in an extensive campaign of advertising that is false or misleading, provided at a latter stage it makes advertisements which are less misleading,” the bureau alleged in its reply. The alleged misrepresentation is made worse by the fact that the ads were “viewed innumerable times by millions of Canadians,” alleges the Competition Bureau. It claims, “in 2019, Rogers blanketed the country with these advertisements with the intention of owning the idea of unlimited data and searing it into Canadians’ brains.” The bureau also takes aim at Rogers’ assertion that the watchdog “issued no guidance” regarding the promotion of these kinds of plans, and points to Volume 3 of the Deceptive Marketing Practices Digest, published in 2017. In it, the Competition Bureau refers to marketing “‘All-You-Can-Eat’ telecom services.” “The bureau encourages advertisers to ensure that consumers are not enticed with claims that promise unlimited services, only to be disappointed by additional mandatory fees or caps. The Competition Bureau will continue to monitor and take action to correct misleading advertising practices of this kind, with an aim to ensure that consumers have truthful and accurate information, and that businesses can compete on a level playing field,” it wrote at the time. “The bureau published an article in , advising the telecom sector not to engage in precisely the kind of conduct that Rogers went on to engage in, and warning that the bureau will take action if required,” the bureau argues in its most recent filing. It also takes issue with Rogers’ claim that the introduction of its Infinite plans are pro-consumer and pro-competitive, arguing that the alleged misrepresentation has brought “no benefit to consumers” and therefore cannot be seen as pro-consumer, and that just because other companies may be doing the same, does not make it good for competition. Rogers said in its own filing that “unlimited” plans have had a “ubiquitous presence … in the market over the last five years,” which it argues is “important context for the bureau’s allegations.” It pointed to a 2019 ad from one of its peers advertising a plan with “unlimited data from $75/mo,” and another from a different company in 2022 stating “get connected with an unlimited data plan.” “The ubiquitous presence of these plans in the market over the last five years, together with carriers’ consistent marketing of them, are important context for the bureau’s allegations,” Rogers argued. “The bureau expressly denies that giving consumers less than what they were promised is a pro-consumer development, or that Rogers winning the race to the bottom should be celebrated,” the Competition Bureau states, alleging that “there is nothing pro-competitive about the fact that Roger’s misleading claims have been emulated by competitors.” The bureau also challenges Rogers’ argument that the Wireless Code allows companies to market “unlimited” data plans, as long as they do not come with overage fees and the carrier is clear about any plan limits in its fair use policies and in documents given to customers. The watchdog argues that Rogers has “mischaracterized what the Wireless Code provides,” stating that it is meant to ensure that “consumers of wireless services are informed of their rights and obligations in their contracts.” “The does not shield Rogers from engaging in misleading advertising,” argues the Competition Bureau. None of the allegations has been tested in court. With files from Hannah Daley. phalentm@thewirereport.ca

Rogers’ disclosure of data throttling in ‘Infinite’ plans inadequate, Competition Bureau alleges

Court |
By Phalen Tynes-MacDonald
| February 21, 2025

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

Rogers’ disclosure of data throttling in ‘Infinite’ plans inadequate, Competition Bureau alleges

Court | By Phalen Tynes-MacDonald | February 21, 2025

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Rogers sued by Competition Bureau over alleged false advertising in ‘unlimited’ data plans

Competition Bureau appoints professor as advisor on digital economy

Competition Bureau investigating fake reviews on Amazon

Class action suit against SiriusXM announced following Competition Bureau fine

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Court |
By Phalen Tynes-MacDonald
| February 21, 2025