Telecom Commission Letter adressed to Distribution List
Our reference: 1011-NOC-2016-0293
Ottawa, 1 March 2017
To: Distribution List
Re: Wireless Code Review – Additional process: Supplementary Final Reply
Dear Sir or Madam:
This letter establishes additional procedure in the Review of the Wireless Code proceeding.Footnote 1 As described below, parties will have the opportunity to file a supplementary final reply addressing specific additional information that has been recently added to the record of the proceeding as set out in this letter.
Disclosure of information designated as confidential
In a letter dated 24 February 2017Footnote 2 Commission staff stated that certain additional information, which had been designated as confidential by parties to the proceeding in response to undertakings, was to be disclosed on the public record of the proceeding.
As a result, the following information has now been disclosed:
- On 27 February 2017, SaskTel submitted a revised version of their RESPONSE TO UNDERTAKING SASKTEL(CRTC)07FEB17-22 disclosing information on the number of customers who have returned devices pursuant to the trial period between April 2015 and 12 February 2017.
- On 27 February 2017, Rogers filed a revised version of their Response to Undertaking Rogers(CRTC)23Feb17App3-4 disclosing information on “how the $50 unlocking fee mitigates risk/fraud.”
In addition, Commission staff stated that certain additional information would be disclosed on the public record in the aggregate. The following information is provided in Attachment 1, calculated by Commission staff as described in the letters of 24 and 27 February 2017:
- The aggregated number of devices unlocked by wireless service providers (WSPs), revenues associated with unlocking, and the number of devices returned during the trial period.
Commission staff notes that not every WSP that participated in the proceeding and that filed responses to undertakings has filed information for each category and year set out in the Table below. Accordingly, it cannot be assumed that any particular WSP has contributed information to the table for a specific year under a specific category, though the specific years and categories for which particular WSPs filed information has generally been disclosed in the abridged versions of their responses to undertakings.
Additional information filed on the record
- On 27 February 2017, the Deaf Wireless Canada Consultative Committee (DWCC) filed written descriptions of the contents of sign language videos it had filed in relation to the online discussion forum, held from 6 to 20 February 2017.
- At paragraph 8 of its final submission, filed on 27 February 2017, Freedom Mobile elaborated on a previously submitted proposal, in respect of which parties may wish to provide further comment, as follows:
“It is Freedom’s view that it would be in consumers’ interests to eliminate unlocking fees and for all phones to be sold unlocked within six months of the Commission’s decision in this consultation. In addition to the direct consumer benefits, unlocking fees essentially trap customers in their existing plans, stifle competition, and have a dampening effect on the dynamism of the wireless market, and the Commission should address these issues in the Wireless Code.” [emphasis added]
All of the information referred to above is now available on the public record of the proceeding and publicly accessible through the Commission’s website.
Parties may file a supplementary final reply responding only to this additional information, by no later than 6 March 2017 at 8 p.m., Ottawa time. At the present time, Commission staff does not anticipate any further process in relation to this proceeding.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
Director, Social and Consumer Policy
Consumer Affairs and Strategic Policy
c. c.: CRTC: Meghan Wawryk, email@example.com;
Guillaume Leclerc, firstname.lastname@example.org;
Megan Maloney, email@example.com;
Adam Balkovec, firstname.lastname@example.org
Wireless Service Providers
- Bell Mobility (email@example.com)
- Bragg Communications Inc, dba "Eastlink" (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Freedom Mobile (email@example.com)
- Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its subsidiary Videotron G.P. (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Rogers Communications Canada Inc. (email@example.com)
- Saskatchewan Telecommunications (SaskTel) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- SSi Micro Ltd. (email@example.com)
- TELUS Communications Company (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- The Coalition, composed of the Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC), Council of Senior Citizens Organizations of British Columbia (COSCO), National Pensioners Federation (NPF) and Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) (email@example.com)
- Comité pour le service cellulaire équitable L'Islet (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Consumers Council of Canada (email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Deaf Wireless Canada Consultative Committee (email@example.com)
- Media Access Canada, on behalf of the Access 2020 Coalition of Disabilities Stakeholders (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Union des consommateurs (email@example.com)
- Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com)
- Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services Inc.
- Community Legal Aid (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Dr. Catherine Middleton, Canada Research Chair, Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University and Dr. Tamara Shepherd, Assistant Professor, Department of Communication, Media and Film, University of Calgary (email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Forum for Research and Policy in Communications (email@example.com; (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Group of Students from Huntington University at Laurentian University (email@example.com)
- Group of researchers composed of Marina Pavlovic, Mary Cavanagh, Sean Grassie and Lora Hamilton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Ministère de la Culture et des Communications du Québec et l'Office de la protection du consommateur (email@example.com)
- Vaxination Informatique (firstname.lastname@example.org)
|Number of devices unlocked by WSPs||734,595||922,931||943,363|
|Revenues from unlocking||$21,571,814||$28,490,569||$37,738,759|
|Number of devices returned during the trial period||156,070||238,456||218,675|
- Date modified: