said by freejazz_RdJ:
The issue with an oral cross exam under oath
is that it bears a substantial risk for those with proprietary information that could be used by competitors to the detriment of those under examination. It also has limited value overall since the considerations I think are largely technical with a subset of issues being the costs of implementation of a solution.
I'm not entirely sure what value it has either. What kind of questions did they intend to ask that require an answer from the other party under oath
? Every single one I can think of would be competitively sensitive information, which they don't have to provide anyways. If they lie about something technical, then it's easy to refute that, but I don't think the providers are lying at CRTC hearings. A lie and a difference in opinion are two different matters... Bell isn't lying when they blame all their congestion woes on P2P, they're just stating their belief.
A belief has no legal or scientific value. I want to see the evidence indicating P2P is causing congestion, and I want the participants to be under oath
when they answer the question. If a company is saying one thing, but the evidence is indicating something entirely different, then to me that company is lying.
We already have one Commissioner who firmly believes congestion exists despite all the third-party evidence that indicates the contrary. The evidence that was presented to him in secret made him believe this, and no one was given the opportunity to refute those claims because no one was given access to this information.
For the hearings process to properly become fair and balanced, the CRTC must start ignoring any and all evidence that is filed in confidence. Any evidence that can't be properly cross examined by third parties must must be rejected in all decision makings.
The current CRTC process is no better than the process that surrounds security certificates where the accused isn't even allowed to see the evidence being used against them.
We need to eliminate miscarriages of justice, not encourage them.--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com (click "Watch Live!")