In this, the second instalment of PIAC's series on the 'CRTC Gone Astray', Monica notes that the CRTC has abandoned data collection, and its public disclosure and has not measured results in implementing the new Online Streaming Act (which amends the Broadcasting Act), which means it is impossible to know if the requirements of the Broadcasting Act, to in part ensure the amount and quality of Canadian content (CanCon), or indeed any other objectives.Although the discussion is at times technical sounding, the principles being ignored are easy: first, making decisions based on evidence and measuring results. Second, procedural shortcuts also taken by the CRTC appear to us to undermine the rule of law and risk the spectre that "might makes right". Let's avoid that.We close with more examples of disclosure of information in CRTC telecommunications that would benefit the public if it were not kept confidential: the Rogers outage in 2022 (and the related full Report to the CRTC); the BCE (Bell) - Northwestel sale to Sixty North Unity; and a CRTC hearing on historical inmate calling rates in Ontario.  Make a donation to PIAC, right now, through Canada Helps: https://www.piac.ca/become-a-donor/

PIAC introduces a new series of podcasts on why the CRTC has gone all funny in the last few years and why no one is laughing.Our first instalment sees Ted Woodhead, the regulatory 'face of the Rogers-Shaw merger', joining the podcast to give his very experienced take on the challenges faced by and perhaps poor choices and general inertia towards mediocrity at our national communications regulator. Ted provides many possible options to fix the problems of slowness, inconsistency and opaqueness that presently plague the Commission.PIAC could not resist asking about the Rogers-Shaw deal and Ted provides a fascinating view from the other side and a strong argument that the Competition Tribunal and Federal Court of Appeal got it right and the deal is benefitting Canadians. After that viewpoint, we turn to the issue of wireless and Internet pricing in Canada and argue about what a price increase is made of and why the Canadian market is unique, uneven, surely odd, and why ARPU is not a good competition yardstick . I guess we have the market we deserve?Like all great interviews, this one makes you think.

NOTE : apologies for a mistake about what the Broadcasting Act actually says about affordability.  Also, please follow Prof. Geist's podcast: Law Bytes .We recap the inaugural appearance of Professor Michael Geist, law professor at the University of Ottawa where he holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law and is a member of the Centre for Law, Technology and Society.Professor Geist was greeted with an incantatory acknowledgment and it just got weirder from there.We discuss this first public hearing on Canada's new version of the Broadcasting Act, which is the result of Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act, which Prof. Geist appeared before Parliament on, on many occasions. It seems his reputation proceeded him, and the questioning was bizarre and perhaps revealed more about the CRTC's view of viewers and consumers than it did about Prof. Geist's opinions on how much money should go from the "online streamers" to the "Canadian broadcasting system".The public and consumer interest in broadcasting got a bit of an airing but not much progress appears to have been made despite the new Act and the raising of the consumer interest directly by Prof. Geist.Much speculation on the role such consumer concerns might play in the first of many decisions to follow ensues, including worries that the consumer interest has not been stated strongly enough.  We also discuss the order of the proceeding, which can be viewed as weirdly backwards, perhaps for political reasons.Advocacy, it turns out, is hard, but hopefully worthwhile, because someone has to make sure this thing works out.

Well, we are back after a long hiatus (sorry, stuff going on in Canadian communications!) to survey the competitive landscape after the Rogers-Shaw deal closed in Spring of 2023 - two years and 15 days after being announced.We speak with George Burger, Chief Operating Officer, about the Canadian home Internet market post-Rogers-Shaw; why VMedia and Videotron (Quebecor) are a strong independent disrupter outside Québec that will only help consumers, and why the wireless market may just reward us with a strong 4th player (yes, please!).Not quite sure if it's going to come true, but hopium at this stage is good.We end with a dunk on those people who thought Bill C-11 meant more money for Canadian creators.  Turns out traditional broadcasters are not as keen on funding it when they think someone else will pay.

This episode recounts the dramatic, rapid decision(s) of the Competition Tribunal allowing the merger of Shaw and Rogers (with divestment of Freedom Mobile to Videotron) and why that is weird, appealable, and not a good sign for Canadian wireless and other telecommunications markets.Ben Klass again joins the podcast to give his opinion on the meaning of the decision(s), the appeal, the possible state of the market if the merger proceeds and the weaknesses of Canada's Competition Act and related entities.We close with an update on the CBC-Radio-Canada licence renewal decision that was overturned by Cabinet and welcome new CRTC Chairperson Vicky Eatrides. She has a lot to do.

We return to look at the Rogers-Shaw deal and possible different solutions than the divestment of Shaw's wireless business to Videotron (Quebecor) - solutions that might include a "maverick" once and future(?) independent wireless competitor, Globalive, best known as the operator of WIND Mobile before it was sold to Shaw and renamed "Freedom Mobile".  Globalive's Simon Lockie joins the podcast to give the inside scoop on a past and future competitor's efforts to start a fourth national wireless company and whether Globalive can acquire Shaw's "Freedom Mobile" assets if Shaw (or Rogers) must sell them to obtain regulatory approval of the larger Rogers-Shaw deal, which is now before the Competition Tribunal. What Canadians pay for wireless service for the foreseeable future will be decided in the next few months and we discuss all of the possible futures at this hinge point.

We discuss Bill C-27, the Consumer Privacy Protection Act, Personal um, something AI and a tribunal, I think? It does not matter, because the federal government took the last bill ('the other' Bill C-11) to try to replace the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) and MADE IT WORSE.  Wow.The new Bill C-27 guts consumer privacy by simply abolishing it and replacing it with a regime of business use of consumer information. All done without your knowledge and consent. But don't worry, it will all be used by the artificial intelligence (AI) industry to do whatever discrimination they say is important to do with all of that big data. Oh, sprinkle on the bacon bits of all of the exceptions (legitimate interests (of business)) from the European Union's GDPR with none of the constitutional rights to privacy of the individual they have there, ignore the mismatch with provincial privacy laws (especially Quebec), and just dare Europe to call this Bill what it clearly is: inadequate. Plus a bonus update on CRTC's continued low-effort non-proceeding into the Rogers outage.With Executive Director John Lawford and PIAC staff lawyer Yuka Sai, who had to figure out the problems with C-11 back in Episode 5.  Ah well, on with the show.

Black swans, red dawns and consumer pawns. I had a longer summary but the Internet ate it. Not typing this again. Just listen.

NOTICE TO LISTENERS: THIS EPISODE DISCUSSES A RACIAL SLUR (BUT WE DON'T USE IT)We also note both commenters are racially white and do not pretend to be able to speak to systemic racism, except in general terms and that this episode is not intended, even indirectly, as a collateral attack on the decision's holding. Rather, the CRTC's way of approaching the issue legally and procedurally is what is discussed.  Since the recording, the CBC has claimed to appeal the decision, but is also agreeing to follow the CRTC's expectations (to issue an apology), which is interesting given the discussion on the episode (see below).Returning guest Monica Auer of Canada’s Forum for Research and Policy in Communications (FRPC) discusses the procedural and legal oddities of the CRTC's N-word decision such as why this decision was not dealt with as part of the CBC's licence renewal proceeding, which ran in parallel, and whether the decision can be appealed or petitioned to Cabinet. We also review the more traditional ways to enforce inappropriate language in broadcasts, previous CRTC rulings on broadcast content and similar situations in the past, as well as the unexpectedly difficult efforts to get the CBC's 'Tandem' service discussed in the CBC's licence hearing, a consideration that the complaint at issue in this episode did not get. We then have a discussion of how the decision is structured avoids finding the CBC in breach of its licence or the Radio Regulations and the requirements to alert Parliament or to face a fine. Finally, we close with the concept of freedom of expression as filtered through the Broadcasting Act and the limits on that expression when speech is broadcast, under the Act's s. 3(1)(g) "high standard" requirement. We close with a discussion of whether Bill C-11 can be amended to avoid this type of awkward approach by the CRTC in the future.

PIAC discusses Bill C-11 - the "Online Streaming Act" with Scott Benzie of Digital First Canada, a group representing Canadians making user-generated content on social media and related platforms.  We discuss PIAC's proposal of "statIc" versus "dynamic" discoverability as a method to reach a compromise between promotion of Canadian content and user-generated content. We also discuss algorithmic platforms and the present environment for digital creators in Canada as well as several scenarios and their effect on viewers and creators if C-11 passes as is. Part 2 of 2 part special.PIAC remarks to Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage on Bill C-11 are found here. PIAC argued for a fix to the “discoverability” sticking point to solve the “user-generated content” question.  Too bad we got no questions on our proposal from MPs. We are not sure ignoring consumers helps.  PIAC will seek to appear before the Senate of Canada during its consideration of Bill C-11.

PIAC discusses, once again, Bill C-11 - the "Online Streaming Act" which is an Act to Amend the Broadcasting Act, to, among other things, require "Internet broadcasters" to be registered under Canadian law and contribute to the creation of "Canadian content" or more simply, "CanCon". We recap PIAC's appearance before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage at the House of Commons (CHPC) and in particular, detail our idea to "fix" C-11, in particular, the user-generated content issue.We argue that the "discoverability" issue and the "exemption" of "YouTubers" and other online content creators that has roiled the House and the (Canadian) Internet can be managed by reducing its scope. Our idea is to define discoverability as not not one concept but two: static discoverability and dynamic discoverability. "Static discoverability" is a banner on YouTube or another platform that simply links, upon a consumer click, to selected CanCon. It is “static”, unobtrusive and, likely, unobjectionable to consumers but still clearly “promotes and recommends” CanCon. "Dynamic discoverability" requires AI prediction tools to insert a CanCon video or song into a user’s autoplay feature, or to ‘dynamically’ suggest links.  It is intrusive and disruptive to the user’s expectations and experience. It is overkill to achieve the goal to “promote and recommend” CanCon.Our recommendation is to amend the Bill by removing language requiring dynamic discoverability but leaving language requiring static discoverability. This will also take pressure off the question of what CanCon should be defined as.  Discuss.This is Part 1 of 2 part special. Our second part will feature a representative of the user-generated content community.

Guarav Arora, University of Ottawa Master's student in the law department and recent tech law intern at PIAC, sits down to describe, and in some cases to defend against the host, cryptocurrencies (and blockchain and distributed ledger technologies in general) and their derivative products like non-fungible tokens (NFTs), stablecoins, initial coin offerings (ICOs), decentralized finance (de-fi), distributed autonomous organizations (DAOs), smart contracts, and the coming metaverse and its relation to finance. We try to see the potential benefits while being realistic about the relative lack of regulatory controls in this area (currency controls and investment regulation) and why consumers should be cautious about this area while waiting for it to be made more safe and consumer-positive.  Because this is such a new and challenging area, we essentially run out of time, so likely this will be the first of a few podcasts on crypto.  Enjoy!

We interview Howard Maker, Commissioner of the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-television Services (CCTS) about the Canadian ombudsman service that helps Canadians - for free - to resolve their consumer complaints with Internet, wireless (cellphones), home phone and paid TV services.  You never heard of the CCTS? You should get acquainted because they just may get your money back.  But it's not quite that easy, and we ask Howard to describe the challenges of being an independent agency charged with being fair in a notoriously difficult communications market.We also break down the CCTS' 2021-22 Mid-Year Report and why the 26% drop in complaints doesn't necessarily mean that things are improving rapidly.Link to the website of the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-television Services (CCTS): https://www.ccts-cprst.caLink to CCTS 2021-22 Mid-Year Report: https://pub.ccts-cprst.ca/2021-2022-mid-year-report/ 

In this first of several podcasts on troubles with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), we concentrate on the CRTC's egregious slowness in both running regulatory proceedings (both broadcasting and telecommunications) and in releasing its decisions after these proceedings - all of which can take years.  During this time, the smaller, or more vulnerable, less powerful parties, such as small competitors, consumers, politicians and the public are disadvantaged while larger players reap the benefit of delay that allows them to exploit their marketplace advantages.CNOC's Geoff White joins us to explain his take on why this situation has arisen and opines on what to do to reform the CRTC.  Hint: change their governing legislation and keep an eye on them.  We concur. This situation is now hurting consumers and Canadians.

Competition in Canada is enforced by the Competition Bureau of Canada.  In this episode, we discuss all things competition in Canada and how it can be promoted with Anthony Durocher, Deputy Commissioner, Competition Promotion Branch at the Competition Bureau of Canada.  First up, possible reform of the Competition Act and the Competition Bureau's submission to Senator Howard Wetston's review.  Next, we hear about two consumer-centric, proactive campaigns by the Bureau upcoming next week and next month.   First up is #SwitchWeek , this year from 21-27 February 2022, during which the Competition Bureau encourages Canadians to shop around for better deals on essential services such as like banking, telecommunications and insurance.  Turns out you could save around $1860 a year just by shopping the market to renegotiate or change contracts with your service providers.  Then we turn to "Fraud Prevention Month" which is always in March.  This year's campaign ( #FPM2022 ) kicks off 1 March 2022 with the tagline: "Recognize, reject and report fraud". We discuss why it is so important for Canadians to do all of these things and why we are all vulnerable to a scam at some times in our life and why there is no shame in being targeted.  Help out others and yourself with these tips. We close with a harder question: why do consumer complaints seem to go into a "black hole" at the Competition Bureau? Finally, we get an explanation. It may be better than you think - but you're not wrong - it is somewhat secret.Finally, we promise a PIAC blog on wireless pricing - we examine the government's big claims of prices going down.

Sarah Bradley, the Ombudsman and CEO of the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments (OBSI)  discusses how OBSI can help consumers resolve investment disputes in Canada.  OBSI (https://www.obsi.ca/) is the single independent ombudsman service if you cannot resolve your complaint with your investment company or investment adviser.  OBSI's services are free to consumers. We discuss the scope of OBSI's services and the limitations on their potential monetary awards to consumers, limitations periods and OBSI's interaction with Canadian courts. We also discuss potential changes to OBSI's powers, notably, binding decision authority (so investment companies and advisers can no longer ignore or try to reduce financial compensation awards by OBSI). Typical consumer experiences and what to expect if you file a complaint with OBSI are covered. We also discuss the emerging challenge of cryptocurrency regulation and the types of crypto complaints OBSI receives already.  Note OBSI's informative bulletin on cryptocurrency frauds here:https://www.obsi.ca/en/news/consumer-bulletin-cryptocurrency-scams-increasingly-targeting-and-exploiting-canadians.aspxFinally, in our "Told you so" segment, PIAC and the National Pensioners Federation (NPF) celebrate arecent CRTC decisionthat,like we said 5 years agoshould be the case, gives some consumers (seniors, persons with disabilities, those without a home internet package from the same company) the right to request a paper bill for telecommunications (Internet, cellphone, home phone) and broadcasting (paid TV services, including cable TV, IPTV and satellite TV) service. We worked for five years to get at least this. Consumers stand up!

PIAC's articling student, Rene Kimmett, guests on this episode to explain how consumers can complain about banking services to their own financial institution and to third-party resolution services - yes, there are two "external complaints bodies" in Canada - OBSI and ADRBO.  No need for that - which we get into. The Federal Department of Finance and the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) are presently implementing improvements to the internal complaints system inside banks, but we still have battling third party ECBs. Finance can fix this in a wink. We argue why they should and how consumers can advance their complaint, and hopefully get their money back, in this bizarre system.  Advice to consumers: push, push, push!This is the first of a series of four podcasts on financial matters.  Future podcasts: investment complaints; payday and installment loans; cryptocurrencies for consumers (not!).

This episode recaps the major consumer set-backs of 2021, which, during a pandemic, are inexcusable. We cover three terrible CRTC decisions that will make your wireless phone and home Internet connections much more expensive.  We cover a mega-merger that will raise prices and reduce choice. We recap the airline refund fiasco and finish up with banking problems and a warning about crypto-assets.  Fun fun fun.  See you next year!

Returning champ Monica Auer visits to preview PIAC and FRPC's online conference, "C-10: The Legal Issues".Please register for this free webinar on Wednesday, November 3, 2021 from 9:00 am to 4:30 pm ETMore information and registeration are found here:https://www.piac.ca/2021/10/19/c-10-the-legal-issues/We discuss the scope and definition of "broadcasting" under the Broadcasting Act and former Bill C-10, which the re-elected minority government has vowed to move through Parliament in the first 100 days post-election.  Also discussed are the limits of CRTC discretion and ability to police the vast new powers delegated to the CRTC to try to control not only traditional broadcasting but now also online platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Twitch, Netflix, Crave, Disney+ and Apple+, etc. in Canada.We eventually consider what makes Canadian content and how one might try to enforce cultural policy on the new platforms.We invite everyone to listen to the lawyers let loose on this proposed legislation and how to improve it. 

We explore the Canadian wireless industry's best-kept secret (with CRTC help): their problem with SIM-swap fraud!Randall Baran-Chong, Co-Founder of Canadian SIM-swap Victims United (CSSVU) joins PIAC to explain his personal experience with fraudsters switching his cell service to a new SIM-card (twice!) and his advocacy for victims before the CRTC, the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology (INDU), in the media and with politicians. John Lawford, PIAC Executive Director and General Counsel, outlines PIAC's ongoing regulatory and other efforts to shed light on the issue, despite regulatory headwinds. Even the politicians know that this is a big deal and one that should be fixed in a transparent way, as INDU's Report on Phone Fraud makes clear - even supporting PIAC's call for a public hearing of the CRTC into SIM-swap.At the end of the episode, PIAC's Tahira Dawood brings us up to date on airline refunds for COVID-19 cancellations.  Looks like some Westjet customers may be out of luck.SIM-swap linksCanadian SIM-swap Victims United (CSSVU): search Facebook for this group. You will be asked to show you are a victim of fraud.Randall Baran-Chong's Brief to INDU Committee: https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/431/INDU/Brief/BR10699964/br-external/Baran-ChongRandall-e.pdfINDU Committee's Report on Phone Fraud (see recommendations 12 and 13 re: SIM-swap fraud:https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/43-2/INDU/report-1/CRTC's much redacted inquiry into "Fraudulent Wireless Customer Transfers":https://crtc.gc.ca/otf/eng/2020/8665/c12_202000280.htmAirlines COVID-19 Refunds - UPDATEWestJet: Refunds due to COVID-19Air Transat: Refunds of travel credits issued as a result of COVID-19Sunwing: Refunds for Vacations cancelled due to COVID-19Porter Airlines: Claim Your COVID-19 Credit Bonus, or Refund

The CRTC's recent reversal of its wholesale internet rates decision will impede small non-profit Internet Service Providers (ISPs) such as Ottawa's community-centred National Capital Freenet (NCF).Shelley Robinson, NCF's Executive Director, joins PIAC's ED John Lawford to break down the CRTC's increase in rates and how it will impede NCF's desires to offer its "Community Access Fund" and low-cost connectivity at basic service speeds (50 Mbps download / 10 Mbps upload) to its qualifying customers. Shelley also details the pressures the higher rates will place on all non-profit and community-based ISPs  and the CRTC's overconfidence in thinking that its coming "disaggregated" model will rescue small ISPs and better serve customers. Instead, this approach and the higher rates will actually leave a large number of Canadians without internet or relying upon corporate handouts, even if they are solicited by the government (Connecting Families program). This must change to a sustainable model to ensure affordable internet access - based on a model like the U.S. Lifeline program.

We discuss the CRTC's disastrous decision on wholesale internet rates from late May 2021 with Andy Kaplan-Myrth, VP Regulatory of Teksavvy, a well-established wholesale-based Internet service provider and its effect on Teksavvy, other wholesale-based ISPs, the market, consumers, the rest of the industry and even the CRTC itself.We spend a full hour and a half (sorry) to get way into the history and actual details of the rate set by the CRTC - details that usually are not reported on or discussed outside the CRTC - but that will affect the price for Internet access and who delivers it in Canada.  The CRTC's recent decision likely means reduced business investment by smaller providers, some of whom may go out of business, and undoubted headwinds for the business of Teksavvy and others that will stop things like these companies offering wireless service or more rural broadband service.We discuss Teksavvy's various efforts to continue the fight in a Petition to now overturn this decision and the futility, at some point, of this groundhog day of Internet rate-setting.We explore the twisted regulatory process and how we arrived at a point where the CRTC could say they were completely right in court, then completely wrong only 2 years later but, despite making many mistakes, it is now not worth their time to fix it properly.  Just, wow. Really? What can consumers do to help break out of this current loop?CRTC's Wholesale Rate Reversal, here: Telecom Decision CRTC 2021-181Teksavvy Petition to reverse the reversal, here: TekSavvy Petitions Federal Cabinet to Overrule CRTC’s Arbitrary Rate Decision

Consumers in Canada are now eligible for refunds for flights cancelled due to COVID-19 from two airlines and more are likely to be added soon.  Our guest this episode is Tahira Dawood, PIAC's second articling student and former researcher at PIAC (and she is also a foreign-qualified lawyer and worked in the aviation industry!). We break down the airline bailouts at Air Canada and Air Transat, and what consumers must do and by when to get their money back and how to apply for these refunds and other details.We also cannot help ourselves as we talk about the challenges for consumers of passenger air travel in the best of times, and now in the worst of times. We also discuss possible bailouts (and refunds!?!) for travellers on other Canadian airlines such as WestJet, Sunwing, Porter, etc.We talk about the problem of prepayment for flights that cannot fly and why consumers usually do not get refunds.  However, this episode really celebrates the power of consumers to get fair treatment when they band together and use their collective power to ask for a clear remedy like a refund.  Way to go Canadian consumers! You are getting your money back. Enjoy this rare event - but don't delay or you might miss it.Important links:Air Canada Refund information (from Air Canada - see link below for refund page):"Air Canada is extending a refund option to all eligible customers with tickets for travel dates on or after February 1, 2020 and who purchased their ticket before April 13, 2021. Refunds are available to those customers whose flight was cancelled or who voluntarily cancelled their flight for any reason, and who wish to submit a request for a refund to their original form of payment. Customers can request a refund online at www.aircanada.com/refund until June 12, 2021. The policy also applies to Air Canada Vacations packages.Customers who booked through a travel agency must contact their agent directly. In support of its travel agency partners, Air Canada confirmed today that it will not recall agency sales commissions on refunded tickets that they process."Air Transat Refund Information: https://www.airtransat.com/en-CA/refundsYou must submit your request using the online form by August 26, 2021, 11:59 p.m.If you experience difficulty with refunds, you may be able to complain to the Canadian Transportation Agency, which has an information page for those who made CTA complaints prior to the bailout refunds being announced. Consumers should check with CTA on their complaint.  See: How the CTA will be processing Air Canada and Air Transat refund-related complaints resulting from the pandemic

Will the CRTC's recent decision on mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) provide new wireless competition in Canada? We discuss this in excruciating detail with Ben Klass, PhD Candidate and telecom policy wunderkind. The answer: not likely, sorry.  This likely result leads the conversation to frustrations with Canadian telecom regulation of competition, including wholesale rates that end up affecting how many competitors consumers have to choose from and how much they charge for cellphone service as well as telecom mergers, such as Rogers buying Shaw, which appear to be a way for industry to avoid regulation.  This leads us to consider how much public interest should be in telecommunications and how to get more for consumers.  Retail rate regulation? Structural separation? Political action?  All are on the table. There may be some hope for consumers needing low-cost wireless services, however, as the MVNO decision requires the Big 3 to offer affordable cellphone plans.  We shall see.Ben mentions two books in the podcast.  Find them here:Mariana Mazzucato, The Entrepreneurial State https://marianamazzucato.com/books/the-entrepreneurial-stateandRob MacDougall, The People's Networkhttps://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/15154.html

John Lawford, PIAC's Executive Director and General Counsel welcomes special guest Konrad von Finckenstein, PIAC's current Chair of the Board, to work through options the Competition Bureau, the CRTC and the Industry Minister could have to modify the deal to preserve at least some competition.  In a spirited conversation, Mr. Lawford attempts to outline consumer frustration with the process and the deal, while Mr. von Finckenstein calmly discusses the cold, hard calculations in the regulatory, merger and political fields and how they could play out in a frankly challenging merger with no easy way to ensure the same level of competition before and after. He should know: he has been Commissioner of Competition,  Chair of the CRTC,  advisor on mergers to the Industry Minister,  Federal Court of Appeal justice and much more. But that doesn't stop Mr. Lawford from trying. Both agreed, however, that the CRTC's upcoming MVNO decision, expected the very next day, would change the context and maybe the entire conversation.We hope that this lively exchange of views will help consumers understand the complexities of mergers in Canada and that their voice is needed.

John Lawford, PIAC's Executive Director and General Counsel, explains merger review in Canada in light of the proposed Rogers-Shaw merger. What fun.Competition law basics are described but the real process of applying them to a deal by the Competition Bureau and the parties is covered, along with the roles of the CRTC and the Minister of Innovation Science and Industry in the Department of Industry, Science and Economic Development (ISED).This convoluted process has previously resulted in blocking 0 of 6 previous wireless mergers.  What do you think are the odds of stopping number 7?Consumers can have an effect and should express their views to all of these government bodies. PIAC will be as well, but the only real voice belongs to the consumers who buy and use wireless, Internet and other services of these large telecommunications companies.  Have your say!

PIAC's articling student, Yuka Sai, joins John Lawford to discuss the epic battle between business, with an assist from the federal government, and consumers over privacy.This battle centres on Bill C-11 and in particular, the part called the "Consumer Privacy Protection Act".This doublespeak title hides the facts that the bill will amend our present Canadian private sector privacy act, the Personal Information and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), to allow collection and use of your personal information for any "business purpose" without your consent.  This is a reversal of the law that, what, they thought we would just not notice? Seriously? Also discussed is the issue of anonymization of data, the difference of that concept with pseudonymization, and why Bill C-11 totally fails by mixing up these two concepts under the umbrella of "de-identified" data.  Guess what, under Bill C-11, "de-identified" data, whatever that is, can be used indiscriminately by business and can be shared with a third party, provided it is shared with a government-related institution for a "socially beneficial purpose".  What is a socially beneficial purpose? It's what the government defines it as. Nice.What's being done with all of this data that everyone seems to want? It's going into artificial intelligence (AI). Algorithms will be used on this massive amount of data, so that AI, not humans, can make decisions that affect you as a consumer, like, will you get an insurance policy and how much will your policy cost (if it lets you get one)? Under Bill C-11, a business will tell you if they are making decisions about you based on AI, but only if you ask. What if you object and want a human decision? Too bad. There's no constitutional right to privacy in Canada, unlike in Europe.  Is it time to change that?So, we stand on the precipice of losing consumer privacy rights in Canada.  Do you care? If so, please listen and join us in taking on the fight to defeat Bill C-11. Shame on them.Lastly, for "told you so", we discuss the dismissal of the Internet wholesale rate application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Now the CRTC has to reconsider the rates. Wait for it. Again.

The CanCon is coming! The CanCon is coming! Or not.  Today we discuss Bill C-10, An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, phew!Today's guest Monica Auer, Executive Director of Canada’s Forum for Research and Policy in Communications (FRPC) strives mightily to explain broadcasting regulation in Canada and how the federal government wants to change it.  What could go wrong? Turns out a lot, if you hurry to do it, have a very specific goal in mind but ignore the rest, and just rip the heart out of it. Surgery or a roadmap? You decide.Also, we talk about hard questions to communications service providers about moving people against their will to paper billing  and why the FRPC told the CRTC months ago that CBC's Tandem service was an abominable snowman.  Told you so.Find Canada’s Forum for Research and Policy in Communications (FRPC) at: https://www.frpc.netHappy holidays!

Wholesale regulation of Internet (and wireless, maybe?) is fundamental to competition in Canadian telecommunications services.  We give a short lecture on the concept and then interview Matt Stein, CNOC President and Chairman, and Distributel CEO, to bring listeners up to date on recent disputes about wholesale rates for Internet service and how this arcane regulatory question affects the price consumers pay for Internet as well as the choice of providers and innovation in the industry. Matt reveals why consumers should have optimism that things are going in the right direction - thanks for the positivity, Matt!  Plus, PIAC takes a victory lap on its COVID Alert Part 1 Application to the CRTC. Told you so.ISP Summit online: https://ispsummit.tech/  3 and 4 November 2020.  (Matt Stein keynote address on 4 November 2020, at 13:10 Eastern time)PIAC's "Application Regarding “COVID Alert” App, “ABTraceTogether” App and Related Matters": https://www.piac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/PIAC-Part-1-COVID-Alert-Contact-Tracing-FINAL-9Sept2020-Full.pdf You may comment to the CRTC on PIAC's Application until 27 November 2020, here: https://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/CommentForm/Default-Defaut.aspx?lang=e&EN=202005769&ET=A&S=O&PA=T&PT=A&PST=A&FN= Please note the scope of comments permitted is outlined by the CRTC in this letter: https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2020/lt201028.htm 

We interview Marina Pavlovic, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, Common Law Section at the University of Ottawa and member of its Centre for Law, Technology and Society about the CRTC's recent "mystery shop" of communications services in Canada. We also talk about another CRTC report claiming Canadians get all the speed they need from Internet services in Canada. And we fall on our own sword (sort of), explaining why we want CRTC to outline some rules for the COVID Alert app - because we want people to trust it cannot be misused, not that it should not be used.  Ah well.

"We fight for that" - is the new podcast from the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) focussing on consumer protection in Canada.  This first episode includes an introduction to PIAC, asking and answering why you, as a Canadian consumer, keep asking "Am I Going Crazy?" when you have a problem with your purchases and subscriptions; and a detailed explanation of PIAC's COVID Alert app CRTC Application, that seeks to limit government access to any personal information from contact-tracing in Canada.  Our last segment, which we hope will be fun, is "I told you so!" - where we call out government, regulators, the industry or even ourselves, when someone should have known better (and we already told them so).  This week: the freight-train wreck that is the CRTC and wireless companies' efforts to stamp out "SIM-swap fraud" in cellphone number porting.  Why not just hold a public hearing where real consumers could help make sure the process of changing from one cellphone to another is easy and quick, but also that fraudsters cannot pretend to be you, take over your phone account, and steal your money? Why take the very people - consumers - out of the debate over the security of their most important device, their cellphone? C'mon CRTC - hold a public hearing - it's not just PIAC but also a Parliamentary Committee that wants one.

Consumer protection news, advocacy and information in Canada from the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC).