ARCHIVED - Telecom - Commission Letter - 8622-C51-03/02 - Application by theIndependent Members of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers AgainstCertain Incumbent Cable and Telephone Carriers in respect of theAnti-Competitive Provision of High-Speed Acces

Letter

Ottawa, 6 December 2002

Our file: 8622-C51-03/02

BY TELECOPIER

To: Interested Parties

Re: Application by the Independent Members of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers Against Certain Incumbent Cable and Telephone Carriers in respect of the Anti-Competitive Provision of High-Speed Access and Retail Internet Services, including Lite Service

This letter deals with requests for disclosure of information filed under claim of confidence by the Independent Members of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (IMCAIP) in the above referenced proceeding.

Requests for disclosure were received from the Canadian Cable Television Association (CCTA) on 18 November 2002, Aliant Telecom Inc., Bell Canada, MTS Communications Inc., and Saskatchewan Telecommunications (the Companies) on 19 November 2002 and TELUS Comminations (TCI) on 20 November 2002.

Responses to the above referenced requests were received from IMCAIP on 25 November 2002.

By 13 December 2002, IMCAIP is directed to file with the Commission all information to be provided pursuant to this letter, serving copies on all interested parties by the same date.

Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, it should be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.

This letter reflects the objective of ensuring that all parties have the benefit of the maximum amount of information placed on the public record at the earliest appropriate stage, in order to facilitate a more efficient and effective proceeding.

Requests for disclosure of information for which confidentiality has been claimed were assessed in light of sections 38 and 39 of the Telecommunications Act and section 19 of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure. In the case of each request, the public interest in disclosure was weighed against the specific direct harm, if any, likely to result from disclosure.

With respect to the report by EKOS Research Associates entitled, "The ISP Marketplace" (the Report), it is noted that in previous proceedings, similar reports have been directed to be placed on the public record, notwithstanding specific contractual agreements a party might have entered into with respect to those reports.

IMCAIP is to disclose and file on the public record, serving, except in the case of the Report, a copy on the respondents, all information filed in confidence that is not specifically identified in the Attachment. In the case of the Report, IMCAIP is to file one copy at each of the Commission's head office and Vancouver regional office in order that such copies be available for inspection in each of the Commission's public examination rooms at Gatineau and Vancouver.

Respondents and other parties to this proceeding have until 20 January 2003 to file their answers or interventions to IMCAIP's application, as appropriate, serving a copy on IMCAIP.

Yours sincerely,

Paul Godin
Director, Competition and Technology
Telecommunications

Attachment

Attachment Page 1 of 3

Attachment to Commission Staff Letter of 6 December 2002

Application

Paragraph 102

Appendix A - Affidavit of Charles Rifici

Paragraph 5

• Disclosure not required for only the number of dial-up customers and the reference to what the majority of dial-up customers are.

Paragraph 6

• Disclosure not required for only the second, third and fourth sentence.

Paragraph 11

Paragraph 16

Paragraph 24

• Disclosure not required for only the names/identities of specific service providers.

Paragraphs 25 to 28 inclusive.

Paragraphs 30 to 33 inclusive.

Paragraph 35

• Disclosure not required for only the first sentence.

Paragraph 37

Paragraph 40

Paragraphs 56 to 60 inclusive.

Paragraph 62

• Disclosure not required for only first sentence.

Attachment Page 2 of 3

Appendix B - Affidavit of Paul Mercia

Paragraph 5

Paragraph 8

Paragraph 10

Paragraphs 15 and 16.

Paragraph 18

Paragraphs 20 and 21

Paragraph 24

Paragraph 36

Paragraph 37

Paragraph 39

Paragraph 41

Paragraph 44

• Disclosure not required for only third sentence.

Paragraph 48

Appendix C - Affidavit of Marcel Mercia

Paragraph 5

Paragraph 8

Paragraph 12

Paragraph 13

Paragraph 15

Attachment Page 3 of 3

Paragraph 19

Paragraph 21

Paragraphs 23 to 25 inclusive.

Paragraph 27

Paragraph 28

• Disclosure not required for only last two sentences.

Paragraph 34

• Disclosure not required for only last part of first sentence commencing with, "Cybersurf began negotiations...", and first part of second sentence up to the phrase commencing with, "Cybersurf learned that smaller ISPs.."

Paragraphs 67 and 68

Paragraph 76

Paragraph 77

Paragraph 82

Paragraph 83

• Disclosure not required for only last sentence.

Paragraphs 84 to 86 inclusive.

Attachment 1, referred to in the Affidavit of Marcel Mercia.

Attachment 2, referred to in the Affidavit of Marcel Mercia.

Attachment 3, referred to in the Affidavit of Marcel Mercia.

Attachment 4, referred to in the Affidavit of Marcel Mercia.