OTTAWA – Despite assertions from Bell Media and Telus to the contrary, there is nothing “frivolous or vexatious” about its complaint over the tied selling of Bell’s CraveTV streaming service to existing TV subscription services, says the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and Consumers’ Association of Canada (CAC).
In a response to the CRTC dated February 17, PIAC-CAC asked the CRTC to both reject requests by Bell and Telus to dismiss its application, and to deny Bell’s alternative request for an extension of time to file an answer. The seven page document goes on to refute Bell’s allegation that the complaint has no reasonable prospect of success, and whether the Commission has the jurisdiction to rule on the matter. It also maintains that its application has clearly met the requirements of the Rules to file Part 1 applications, and denies Bell’s claim that the application is an abuse of process.
“If Bell and/or Telus succeed in convincing the Commission to quash PIAC-CAC’s Part I application without putting the respondents to the full task of responding, and without giving interested interveners the opportunity to provide the Commission with their evidence on this matter, there may be a chilling effect on public representation to the Commission”, reads PIAC-CAC's procedural letter.
“The practical result of such a decision would add an extra step into each Part I application in which the major incumbent service providers may be aligned: an administrative “preliminary hearing” at which under-resourced public participants “lose” simply on an allegation that the incumbents feel the applicants are wrong or their arguments, or facts are not expressed in a manner determined appropriate by incumbents. That would not be in the public interest.”
Submissions to PIAC's application are due March 12.
