ARCHIVED - Commission Letter
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.
Mr. Mirko Bibic
Regulatory & Government Affairs
160 Elgin Street, Floor 19
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
Re: Follow-up Report to Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2011-765, Complaint by TELUS Communications Company against BCE Inc., Bell Canada or Bell Mobility Inc. (collectively, Bell) alleging undue preference and disadvantage, contrary to the provisions of the New Media Exemption Order
Dear Mr. Bibic,
This is in response to Bell’s Follow-up Report dated 30 January 2012 to the above noted Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2011-765. This will also acknowledge receipt of TELUS’ letter of 7 February 2012 containing comments on the Follow-up Report.
Upon review of Bell’s report, the Commission notes that Bell’s agreements with the National Hockey League (NHL) and National Football League (NFL) were entered into prior to the issuance of a temporary moratorium against certain new exclusive programming agreements, as announced in Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2011-173 and prior to the publication of Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-601 (CRTC 2011-601) regarding the Vertical Integration Framework prohibition against content exclusivity, which rendered explicit the prohibition against certain content carriage exclusives on new media platforms.
The Commission notes Bell’s statement to the effect that its previous agreement with the NHL has expired and that Bell has since reached a new, non-exclusive mobile content agreement with the NHL. As such, the Commission considers that the situation regarding Bell Mobility’s distribution of NHL content on mobile devices has been resolved.
With respect to Bell’s current agreement with the National Football League (NFL) and distribution of the content in question, the Commission now has confirmation from the NFL that Bell has no right to sub-license the content at hand to a third party mobile service
provider. The Commission also notes that the NFL has expressed opposition to amending the current agreement with Bell.
In light of the circumstances, the Commission is satisfied with Bell’s Follow-up Report.
Original signed by
cc. Mr. Michael Hennessy
Regulatory and Government Affairs
215 Slater Steet, 8th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 0A6
- Date modified: