ARCHIVED - 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This page has been archived on the Web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.
Ottawa, 20 February 2014
File No.: 8650-C12-201310060
DELIVERED BY EMAIL
To: bell.regulatory@bell.ca; regulatory@bell.aliant.ca; regulatoryaffairs@nwtel.ca; reglementa@telebec.com; jfleger@piac.ca; piac@piac.ca
Re: Telecom Notice of Consultation 2013-337 - Fact-finding process on the role of payphones in the Canadian communications system – Request for disclosure of information
On December 13, 2013, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC) and the Council of Senior Citizens’ Organizations of British Columbia (COSCO), (PIAC/CAC/COSCO), submitted requests for information from Bell Aliant and Bell Canada and their affiliates (the Bell Companies).
PIAC/CAC/COSCO requested that the Bell Companies make certain studies that were cited in their November 15, 2013 submission available on the public record.
On January 24, 2013, the Bell companies responded to PIAC/CAC/COSCO’s request stating that each report is subject to copyright and that the Bell Companies’ licence to use these documents does not allow them to provide full copies of the documents on the public record. The Bell Companies provided web links to websites where each document could be obtained:
1.) Media Technology Monitor, Cell Phone Only Households, Analysis of the Canadian Market, October 15, 2013 (referenced by the Bell Companies in their 15 November 2013 submission in paragraphs 5,6,7,12 and 29 and in footnotes 9,10,14,15, and 17)
http://www.mtm-otm.ca/reports.asp.
2.) International Data Corporation, Canadian Wireless Services 2013-2017 Forecast and Analysis: Wireless Wars 10, November 2013 (referenced by the Bell Companies in their 15 November 2013 submission in paragraph 6, Figure 1, and on page 13)
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=CA11TM13.
3.) International Data Corporation, Mobile Apps in the Canadian Enterprise, September 2013 (referenced by the Bell Companies in their 15 November 2013 submission, chart titled “Figure 5: Changes in the Mobile Client Device Market, 2007-2017” at page 13)
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=CA6MS13
4.) Ipsos Reid, The 2012 Ipsos Canadian Interactive Reid Report, July 2012 (referenced by the Bell Companies in their 15 November 2013 submission, table titled “Figure 6: Current Uses of Smartphones”)
http://www.ipsos.ca/common/dl/pdf/Ipsos_InteractiveReidReport2012.pdf.
On February 7, 2014, PIAC/CAC/COSCO submitted further requests for information from the Bell Companies for the above-referenced documents to be made accessible to interested parties without requiring interested parties to have to enter contractual arrangements with the firms who produce these reports. PIAC/CAC/COSCO argued that the Bell Companies have relied upon these documents, quoted from them, and included graphs from these documents to support key arguments in their November 15, 2013 submission. PIAC/CAC/COSCO submitted that the websites referenced by the Bell Companies in their January 24, 2014 response provided, at most, promotional descriptions of the reports in question and that the documents were inaccessible unless parties enter contractual agreements with the firms who produce these reports. In the submission of PIAC/CAC/COSCO, interested parties have no information regarding the reasoning, evidence, conclusions and methodologies of the reports and are therefore unable to challenge the content or relevancy of the information upon which the Bell Companies have relied upon in their submission.
On February 14, 2014, the Bell Companies submitted that it would be inappropriate for complete copies of the documents in question to be disclosed on the public record because doing so would directly impact the ability of the authors/copyright holders of these documents to sell their research, resulting in material financial loss of their businesses. Further, the Bell Companies proposed to remove all references to this matter to avoid causing material financial losses to the authors/copyright holders of the documents if the Commission should determine that the references in question do not form part of the public record as submitted in its November 15, 2013 submission, or that their use should be contingent on disclosure of the full underlying report on the public record. The Bell Companies submitted a revised version of its November 15, 2013 submission.
To the extent that the Bell Companies rely on the data referenced in the reports in question in support of their November 15, 2013 submission regarding use of wireless services in this proceeding, Commission staff agrees with PIAC/CAC/COSCO that these parties should be able to examine these reports to review the methodologies and/or findings of such reports in order to have a meaningful opportunity to challenge
the submissions made by the Bell Companies. Accordingly, in such circumstances, staff considers it necessary and appropriate for the Bell Companies to arrange for access by PIAC/CAC/COSCO to such reports.
Accordingly, if the Bell Companies wish to continue to rely in this proceeding on the data from the four referenced reports, Bell is to arrange to provide PIAC/CAC/COSCO with a copy of each of the four reports referenced above by February 28, 2014. Alternatively, should the Bell Companies wish to revise their submission in this proceeding by removing all data from the documents in question, and references to such documents, Bell is to confirm that the new version of its November 15, 2013 submission, as attached in its letter dated February 14, 2014, is to replace its original submission.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Nanao Kachi
Director, Social and Consumer Policy
Cc: Adam Mills, CRTC, adam.mills@crtc.gc.ca;
Soniya Mukhedkar, CRTC, soniya.mukhedkar@crtc.gc.ca
Parties and Interested Parties
- Date modified: