dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
11959
share rss forum feed


hm

@videotron.ca

The New Wireless Code Hearings. Live Stream @ 9-am

The hearings on the new wireless code starts at 9-am today.

English: »crtc.gc.ca/streaming/stream1-eng.htm

French: »crtc.gc.ca/streaming/stream1-frn.htm

Also to be carried on cpac.ca

Schedule of events of who is speaking when:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/telecom/eng/heari···1_02.htm

Monday, 11 February 2013

1. Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), Consumers’ Association of Canada and Council of Senior Citizens' Organizations of British Columbia (int. #1,073)

2. CWTA - Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (int. #1,048)

3. Union des consommateurs (int. #1,066)

4. TELUS Communications Company (int. #1,074)

On Thursday, Feb 14th, JF's turn will come up.

Today may set a lot of the tone. It seems that Bell and PIAC both commissions some sort of legal advice and were given legal advice that Provincial Consumer laws are trumped by any code the CRTC may come up with (or something like this).

I find this a bit hard to believe that some code with no teeth administered by a group of telco owners (ie CCTS) will trump consumer laws, but this is what Geist tweeted.

Quebec pulled out of the hearings stating it will not allow their consumer laws that protect people to be diluted. However, I believe this to be an attack on all prov's who made their own wireless consumer laws, and to prevent other prov's from doing the same.

The Consumer groups kick this off...


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
The CCTS would not be the one administering the code and I saw a tweet recently that Federal policy in this case can override Provincial so Quebec can complain all they want but it will be applied to them regardless.


derekm

join:2008-02-26
kudos:1
reply to hm
Anyone know the url for VLC? I tried:

»www.crtc.gc.ca/streaming/stream1-eng.asx

Thx!


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
That's for Windows Media, you just need the right codec. I'm not sure if there is another format you can stream with VLC.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Reviews:
·VMedia
said by mlerner:

That's for Windows Media, you just need the right codec. I'm not sure if there is another format you can stream with VLC.

VLC plays just about anything you throw at it.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to mlerner
said by mlerner:

The CCTS would not be the one administering the code and I saw a tweet recently that Federal policy in this case can override Provincial so Quebec can complain all they want but it will be applied to them regardless.

How anti-quebec of you. However, this *is not* only against Quebec. But rather Manitoba and PEI who put out tougher consumer laws than Quebec's.

In other words, they are fighting every province, in all of Canada, who want to protect their citizens from vultures and deceptive practices. This isn't about Quebec. Very myopic of you.

However, I can see a fight coming of this, depending on how it goes. And it would be justified.


hm

@videotron.ca
reply to derekm
said by derekm:

Anyone know the url for VLC? I tried:

»www.crtc.gc.ca/streaming/stream1-eng.asx

Thx!

»www.cpac.ca/eng/direct/cpac2 ?

The_Hatta

join:2011-08-16
canada
reply to derekm
»mms://STREAMER.crtc.gc.ca/stream1-english

Will get it on VLC


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to hm
said by hm :

said by mlerner:

The CCTS would not be the one administering the code and I saw a tweet recently that Federal policy in this case can override Provincial so Quebec can complain all they want but it will be applied to them regardless.

How anti-quebec of you. However, this *is not* only against Quebec. But rather Manitoba and PEI who put out tougher consumer laws than Quebec's.

In other words, they are fighting every province, in all of Canada, who want to protect their citizens from vultures and deceptive practices. This isn't about Quebec. Very myopic of you.

However, I can see a fight coming of this, depending on how it goes. And it would be justified.

I am just stating the info as I've received it, I am not anti-Quebec and if I was, it would be unlikely I was living in Ottawa. Since consumers are having input on this as well as consumer groups in a public proceeding and consultation, I don't see why there would be a fight other than the provinces but if the consumers are happy with the code as the code is intended for us only, there is no justified reason.

How do provincial laws with no public feedback justify blanket rules?

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10

3 edits
reply to hm
Commissioner's comments:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/com200/2013/s130211.htm

PIAC's comments:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/depot/PIAC%20Oral···ents.pdf

PIAC's positions - side by side the CRTC proposal to make it easier to understand:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/depot/PIAC.pdf

CWTA comments:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/depot/CWTA.pdf

Union des consommateurs comments:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/depot/union%20de%···eurs.pdf

Telus comments:
»t.co/FdO56bBn
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


hm

@videotron.ca
Also see:
»PIAC throwing cellphone users under the bus

If the "arms-length CRTC" wants to make some code, fine. But they shouldn't be meddling in the affairs of provincial consumer protection legislation of any province. Be it Manitoba, PEI or Quebec.

PIAC is a sell out.


PIACsellOuts

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983
Russell Mcormond makes the case as well in the comment section of Peter Nowak's blog:
»wordsbynowak.com/2013/02/11/piac-wireless/


PIAC in Bed

@videotron.ca
reply to hm
The CWTA stated that this new code should over-ride and supersede any provincial Consumer Protection regulations.

For example, some provinces has strict Consumer Protection regulations that prevent Bell and Rogers from automatically renewing contracts. This would see this eliminated if PIAC and the CWTA have their way.

People think that's right?


hm

@videotron.ca
CWTA is stating, more or less, to hell with Quebec Provincial Consumer Protect laws.

Commissioner stated, Quebecor will be bringing more up on Friday.

CWTA wants Anything that touches telecom to follow new code and not Consumer Protection laws.

Commissioner stated, Quebec threatened to withdraw from the fed code in it's entirety if they lessen Quebec Consumer Protection rights.

What have the other Prov's stated? Anything?


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to hm
Whatever the CRTC or mlerner think, the CRTC does not have the jurisdiction to overrule Quebec's consumer protection laws.

The CRTC does not create laws. It creates regulation. Regulation cannot supercede laws.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
said by Guspaz:

Whatever the CRTC or mlerner think, the CRTC does not have the jurisdiction to overrule Quebec's consumer protection laws.

The CRTC does not create laws. It creates regulation. Regulation cannot supercede laws.

I'm not sure about new regulations but that is not entirely correct. Regulations are a form of law as far as the Federal Government is concerned and the Telecommunications Act does take precedence over provincial as far as I understand.


all for

@videotron.ca
I'd be all for a Quebec CRTC if the feds start meddling in provincial contract laws and the newish wireless consumer protection laws.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to hm
I'm not aware of anywhere in the telecommunication act that gives the CRTC jurisdiction over provincial consumer protection laws...
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

penguin318

join:2008-07-23
Smiths Falls, ON
said by Guspaz:

I'm not aware of anywhere in the telecommunication act that gives the CRTC jurisdiction over provincial consumer protection laws...

I'm not aware of anything in the telecommunication act that tells the CRTC to be a puppet for the big 3, but we all know it happens


PIAC copsOUT

@videotron.ca
Telus stated that implementing the Quebec Consumer Protection laws cost them nothing much and it turned out great for them in the end. Was better for them and their customers.


hm

@videotron.ca
Telus stated they make little to no profit for the 35$ they charge people to unlock a phone because it costs them this much for a phone jockey to give you the unlock code and walk you through where to enter the unlock code.

scorpido
Premium
join:2009-11-02
New Hamburg, ON
kudos:1
reply to PIAC copsOUT
They cut it off ...lol Closed Door meetings??? lol


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to hm
said by hm :

Telus stated they make little to no profit for the 35$ they charge people to unlock a phone because it costs them this much for a phone jockey to give you the unlock code and walk you through where to enter the unlock code.

I could believe that in the case of Apple as I highly doubt Apple doesn't charge for the capability but otherwise that $35 is pure profit unless they overpay for data entry staff.

Cloneman

join:2002-08-29
Montreal
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Bell Fibe
reply to hm
Please "like" my Comments on Day 1 if you agree with them. 3 key issues the CWTA was misleading the CRTC on.

»consultation.crtc.gc.ca/topic/co···ent-1441


mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Brighton, ON
Reviews:
·MTS
reply to mlerner
said by mlerner:

said by Guspaz:

Whatever the CRTC or mlerner think, the CRTC does not have the jurisdiction to overrule Quebec's consumer protection laws.

The CRTC does not create laws. It creates regulation. Regulation cannot supercede laws.

I'm not sure about new regulations but that is not entirely correct. Regulations are a form of law as far as the Federal Government is concerned and the Telecommunications Act does take precedence over provincial as far as I understand.

Correction: Regulations derives from law; they cannot override their framework.


PIACluvsCWTA

@videotron.ca
reply to Cloneman
said by Cloneman:

Please "like" my Comments on Day 1 if you agree with them. 3 key issues the CWTA was misleading the CRTC on.

»consultation.crtc.gc.ca/topic/co···ent-1441

yeah the CWTA dummy explained to the commissioner that unlocking a phone is the same as taking apart your blender and playing with the electrical or machine parts.

What a buffoon. I hope the hell these clueless commissioners didn't fall for that BS.

geokilla

join:2010-10-04
North York, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to hm
Or you can watch it here... »www.cpac.ca/eng/direct/cpac2

said by PIACluvsCWTA :

said by Cloneman:

Please "like" my Comments on Day 1 if you agree with them. 3 key issues the CWTA was misleading the CRTC on.

»consultation.crtc.gc.ca/topic/co···ent-1441

yeah the CWTA dummy explained to the commissioner that unlocking a phone is the same as taking apart your blender and playing with the electrical or machine parts.

What a buffoon. I hope the hell these clueless commissioners didn't fall for that BS.

They did. Listening and watching their facial expressions just before they took their lunch break, they both CRTC personnel and the "public" looked like they had no clue what they were talking about. In the end, CRTC gave them a lunch break to reorganize their thoughts. Then I knew that us Canadians are SOL and will continue to get raped. Only in Canada is rape legal..

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to hm
»consultation.crtc.gc.ca/comment/···ent-1181

I submitted comments to the crtc last week at the link above


nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to hm
As much as I don't like the CRTC, it was refreshing to see them call Telus out on a lot of their policies and terms of service. Even more so when Telus responded with half-assed information. Requiring them to bring numbers and actual statistics to the table rather than their word.

Realistically, I don't even care much for Telus. It's Rogers and Bell whom I can't wait to see through this. I don't know their names (as they barely showed them while I was watching), but the blonde woman with the heavy accent seriously laid the smack down on Telus when they were blubbering and trying to skirt the issue with regards to the Quebec legislation passed. She simply asked how much it cost them and they were all too happy to say "Not much at all!" until she asked if they'd passed the cost on to the consumer. All of sudden their tune changed and they didn't want to give a straight answer and she did not let them slither out so easily.

This is extremely interesting to watch. I was extremely disappointed with some of the claims from Telus and so much miss-information was spewed. Which only heightens my desire to hear Rogers and Bell. We all know their B.S. is going to be notch!
--
Weeeeeee


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to mazhurg
said by mazhurg:

said by mlerner:

said by Guspaz:

Whatever the CRTC or mlerner think, the CRTC does not have the jurisdiction to overrule Quebec's consumer protection laws.

The CRTC does not create laws. It creates regulation. Regulation cannot supercede laws.

I'm not sure about new regulations but that is not entirely correct. Regulations are a form of law as far as the Federal Government is concerned and the Telecommunications Act does take precedence over provincial as far as I understand.

Correction: Regulations derives from law; they cannot override their framework.

I stand corrected but then the having the Provincial policies with the code might end up confusing for the average consumer if both will be in effect. I think there definitely needs to be a Canada wide policy so everyone in every province will know what to expect.