> On Dec 10, 2015, at 17:49 , Jean-Francois Mezei <jfmezei_na...@vaxination.ca> > wrote: > > On 2015-12-10 13:07, William Kenny wrote: > >> "Verizon is reportedly set to begin testing a sponsored data program that >> would let companies pay Verizon to deliver online services without using up >> customers' data plans. > > In Canada, the Telecom Act 27(2) states: > > Unjust discrimination > > (2) No Canadian carrier shall, in relation to the provision of a > telecommunications service or the charging of a rate for it, unjustly > discriminate or give an undue or unreasonable preference toward any > person, including itself, or subject any person to an undue or > unreasonable disadvantage. > > > > So if this Verizon scheme were to happen in Canada, one could challenge > this if the rates charged to Netflix for 1GB of data are different from > the rates charged to anyone else, including residential customers as > this would be an undue preference.
What if the rate charged is the same? Wouldn’t it still be problematic if: I pay VZ $15/Gigabyte for all data I use except Netflix which gets billed automatically to Netflix instead of me? > Bell Canada's wireless service lost such a challenge earlier this year > because it ended up giving 10 hours of its own TV service for $4.00 > while the same 10 hours on competing services would end up costing > something like $40 in normal usage charges. (Bell Canada is current at > Federal Court seeking the CRTC's decision be invalidated, stating its TV > service is "broadcasting" and not subject to the Telecommunications Act > despite being delivered over a telecommunications service using IP > technology. Telephone companies… Any belief that they are communications companies is purely coincidental to their business model. In fact, they are law firms. Owen
