|
|
Telecom Order CRTC 2003-299
|
|
|
Ottawa, 24 July 2003
|
|
|
Bell Canada
|
|
|
Reference: Tariff Notices 6683, 6683Aand 6683B
|
|
|
Internet Call Display
|
|
1.
|
The Commission received an application by Bell Canada, dated 8 July 2002, and amended on 13 September 2002 and 21 March 2003, proposing changes to its General Tariff item 4699, Internet Call Display (ICD) Service, and item 2025, Integrated Voice Messaging Service (IVMS).
|
|
2.
|
ICD service is a discretionary service that provides customers, via their computer screen, the originating name and number associated with an incoming telephone call received while they are connected to the Internet using dial-up access. ICD service provides the called party with options to dispose of the call while, at the same time, the caller is notified that the call is being announced and is asked to hold.
|
|
3.
|
The Commission received 559 comments filed by customers in response to Bell Canada's initial application. A further 123 comments were received in response to Bell Canada's amended proposal.
|
|
|
The application
|
|
4.
|
Bell Canada originally proposed the following:
|
|
|
· to destandardize ICD service effective 30 September 2002;
|
|
|
· to withdraw the service effective 29 November 2002; and
|
|
|
· to transfer the following elements of the ICD service tariff: Call Forward Busy - separate destination, Call Forward No Answer - separate destination, and Call Forward Busy to a single destination Internet Server, to tariff item 2025, IVMS.
|
|
5.
|
In support of its application to withdraw ICD service, Bell Canada stated that its platform vendor had ceased providing technical support effective 31 December 2001. The company noted that the vendor was no longer providing network components for maintaining the service or support for the software associated with the service. Bell Canada stated that there had been an average of 1.5 trouble complaints per in-service customer per year over the three-year life of the service. Bell Canada submitted that it was concerned that the absence of vendor support, in combination with the high volume of customer trouble reports, had resulted in an unacceptable level of service for its customer base.
|
|
6.
|
Bell Canada noted further that no software updates had been completed for ICD service since the year 2000 and, as a result, the service was not compatible with several of the newer operating systems for personal computers.
|
|
7.
|
Bell Canada stated that the ICD service was initially introduced to provide Internet dial-up customers with alternatives for handling inbound calls when these customers were using the Internet. Bell Canada submitted that ICD service and dial-up Internet service were becoming secondary elements of the Internet access market, since high-speed Internet access was growing rapidly. Bell Canada further submitted that there were several competitive service providers offering ICD service.
|
|
8.
|
Bell Canada submitted that pursuant to the terms and conditions of Telecom Order CRTC 98-497, 22 May 1998 (Order 98-497), it was under no obligation to allow customers who subscribe to competitive providers of ICD service to connect with Bell Canada's Call Answer service or Call Answer Message Manager service. Bell Canada submitted that any of its ICD service customers who choose to migrate to competitive ICD service arrangements would also be required to terminate their existing Call Answer or Call Answer Message Manager service in order to continue the application of the terms of Order 98-497.
|
|
9.
|
Bell Canada amended its application on 13 September 2002, stating that, based on customer feedback, it was withdrawing its proposal to no longer provide ICD service as of 29 November 2002, but retaining its proposal to destandardize the service in view of technical support considerations. On that basis, Bell Canada proposed to limit the technical support for its ICD service to customers that were equipped with personal computers with operating systems in existence prior to the introduction of Windows 2000, Millennium Edition and Windows XP.
|
|
10.
|
Bell Canada stated that, although it was concerned about the lack of support from the supplier of the platform, it believed that it could continue to provide ICD service, in its current format, to the existing customer base. Bell Canada noted, however, that any major failure of the service platform or associated servers could force the company to reconsider and file to discontinue the service.
|
|
|
Parties' comments
|
|
11.
|
Customers generally opposed Bell Canada's initial proposal to withdraw ICD service.
|
|
12.
|
Customers who opposed the terms associated with Bell Canada's proposal to destandardize the service raised the following concerns:
|
|
|
· ICD service should be available as long as dial-up Internet service continues to be available;
|
|
|
· it was unacceptable that customers would lose their ICD service in the event of a move, change or rearrangement to their telephone service; and
|
|
|
· it was unacceptable that Bell Canada would not assist customers in ensuring that ICD service would continue to function in the event that they changed their computer operating systems to a more current version of operating software.
|
|
|
Bell Canada's reply
|
|
13.
|
Bell Canada submitted that, given its amended proposal to only destandardize ICD service, customer comments relating to the withdrawal of the service had become moot. Bell Canada noted that more than half of the comments received in response to its amended plan to destandardize the service supported its revised plan.
|
|
14.
|
With respect to customers' arguments that, as long as dial-up Internet service continues to be available, so should ICD service, Bell Canada stated that ICD service was a discretionary service, which is currently used by a very small percentage of dial-up Internet service customers. Bell Canada stated that it agreed with its customers' claim that ICD service complements dial-up service, but argued that there was no public policy rationale for compelling it to maintain such a service given the technical issues.
|
|
15.
|
In response to customers' objections to the proposed condition that, in the event of a move, change or rearrangement to their telephone service, they would lose their ICD service, Bell Canada noted its underlying concerns for the service platform and the necessity to minimize changes to the service platform that could be triggered by moves or changes to customers' service. Bell Canada submitted that it was proposing this service condition in order to minimize any possible service disruption associated with the current platform.
|
|
16.
|
In response to customers' arguments that it is unacceptable that Bell Canada would not assist them in ensuring that ICD service would continue to function in the event that they upgraded to a more current version of computer operating system software, Bell Canada stated that its service platform supplier for ICD service had ceased to support the product. Bell Canada noted that no software updates were available to ensure that ICD service would be compatible with newer personal computer operating systems. Bell Canada submitted that it therefore could not guarantee that ICD service would continue to function properly for customers who choose to upgrade their personal computer software. Bell Canada argued that it should not have to provide technical support in cases where customers have selected a personal computer operating system that was incompatible with ICD service, as it does not have the necessary resources or the manufacturer's support to address compatibility issues.
|
|
|
Commission analysis and determinations
|
|
17.
|
The Commission notes that ICD service provides a customer who is using the Internet with options to dispose of an incoming telephone call. If an ICD service customer also subscribes to Bell Canada's Call Answer service or Call Answer Message Manager service, the caller is provided with the opportunity to leave a voice message if the ICD service customer is on the Internet and chooses not to take the call.
|
|
18.
|
The Commission notes that under its amended proposal Bell Canada would continue to provide ICD service to existing customers as long as they do not move, make changes to their telephone service or upgrade their computer operating systems to newer operating system software.
|
|
19.
|
The Commission notes that the platform vendor of the service has ceased to provide technical support and software upgrades for the service and is of the view that, under the circumstances, Bell Canada can no longer adequately support the service. The Commission therefore considers that it would not be reasonable to require the company to provide service to new customers or to customers who move or make changes to their telephone service or computer operating systems.
|
|
20.
|
Further, the Commission notes that ICD service is a discretionary service and that various alternatives to Bell Canada's ICD service are available.
|
|
21.
|
Accordingly, the Commission finds that Bell Canada's proposal to destandardize ICD service is reasonable. The Commission, however, finds that it would be appropriate for Bell Canada to provide its ICD service customers with a list of the relevant competitive providers of ICD service and a clarification of the application of Order 98-497.
|
|
22.
|
The Commission determined in Order 98-497 that Bell Canada was not obligated to allow a competitive provider of ICD service to provide service in tandem with Bell Canada's Call Answer service. The Commission notes that, as a result of its determination in Order 98-497, if a Bell Canada customer were to obtain ICD service from a competitive provider, a caller would not be able to leave a message in the customer's Bell Canada voice mailbox while that customer was on the Internet. The Commission considers that its determination should not preclude customers who obtain ICD service from a competitive provider from subscribing to Bell Canada's Call Answer service or Call Answer Message Manager.
|
|
23.
|
In light of the above, the Commission approves Bell Canada's proposal to destandardize its ICD service. The revisions take effect 30 days after the date of this order. The Commission directs Bell Canada to notify its ICD service customers of the effective date of the change and include in the notification:
|
|
|
·1 a list of relevant competitive providers of ICD service, and
|
|
|
·1 a statement explaining that if the customer migrates to a competitive provider of ICD service, a caller would not be able to leave a message in that customer's Bell Canada voice mailbox while that customer was on the Internet.
|
|
|
Secretary General
|
|
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca
|
Date Modified: 2003-07-24