Telecoms denounce American-style labels for internet providers

Canada’s telecoms do not want the CRTC to impose so-called broadband nutrition labels on their internet services. Two major companies and their umbrella organization presented their concerns to a commission panel on Wednesday, June 11. First up was Eric Smith, senior vice president of the Canadian Telecommunications Association (CTA). He posited that labels, such as those mandated by the Federal Communications Commission in the U.S., are unnecessary. “Current practices, driven by intense market competition, provide Canadians with clear, relevant and accurate information about internet services that make it easy to shop for and compare service offerings,” Smith testified. “Despite this, it’s been proposed that Canada adopt a standardized broadband consumer label like the one introduced by the FCC in the United States. We strongly urge the commission not to pursue this approach.” Resources that could be directed to improving broadband networks would be wasted compiling data for the labels, he added. There is no evidence that American consumers have been helped by the introduction of labels, he argued, which began being distributed in Spring 2024. The CRTC proceeding was initiated by the passage of Bill C-288 on internet pricing. Smith maintained that the bill did not require broadband product labels and that any information customers need is readily available from the internet service providers (ISPs). “Imposing a mandatory label format would require service providers to abandon effective, consumer-tested practices in favour of a rigid and unproven standardized format,” he concluded. Smith was followed in the witness chair by a large delegation from Telus Corp. The eight-member group also urged the commission not to adopt labels. David Peaker, associate general counsel at the western telecom, said the regulator should restrict itself to looking at median speed, maximum planned speed, latency, and technology type when assessing what consumers should be told about. One of his fellow panelists expanded on that idea. “These choices will advance the intent of the legislation which requires that information provided to the public be easily available, accessible, and simple to understand, whereas mandating the inclusion of other metrics in the label like pricing or oversubscription ratios frustrates the intent of the legislation,” Jessica Riopel, director of marketing, stated. Molly Samuelson, director of regulatory affairs, cautioned against adopting something like the FCC regulations. “The commission should refrain from copying and pasting another jurisdiction’s broadband disclosure framework onto Canada,” she argued. “The internet landscape in each jurisdiction is different, shaped by different rules, unique markets, and consumer needs.” BCE Inc. sent three executives to speak on its behalf. Assistant general counsel Philippe Gauvin also warned about taking up the FCC plan. “The United States is the only jurisdiction we know of that has implemented a broadband labeling regime, and we are not aware of any evidence that U.S. consumers have benefitted from the measure,” he said. “In fact, we heard from Cogeco yesterday, which offers services in 13 markets in the U.S., that less than 2 per cent of subscribers that access their website will review the label and that their customer department has dealt with complaints about the label and how difficult it is to understand.” Mark Graham, senior VP of legal and regulatory at Bell, continued the call to let telecoms handle this themselves. “Canadians are already well-informed and able to compare providers,” he asserted. “Regulatory constructs that prescribe detailed testing methodologies, new service quality metrics, or the precise format for how information is presented to consumers, are interesting objects of study but would be very costly to implement, confusing for customers, and have no demonstrated benefits. And most importantly, at least in the case of Bell, we are already delivering the services our customers expect.” Their colleague Melissa Dufour, director of devices and best network, challenged the notion that oversubscription numbers should be part of the labelling. “We have reviewed the commission's materials related to what are referred to as over-subscription ratios,” she testified. “While we understand that measure as one way of thinking about network usage and performance, it is not one that we find is a useful reflection of customer experience.” The day concluded with a joint presentation from OpenMedia and the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC). The two advocacy groups were highly supportive of changes to the current system. “The introduction of broadband nutrition labels for home internet plans is a welcome move towards greater transparency and fairness,” CIPPIC general counsel David Fewer said. “But we’re urging the commission to go further by extending these same standardized disclosure requirements to mobile services.” Many people use their phones as the primary gateway to the internet, he explained. Not including them in the labelling framework means consumers get left behind, he added. He urged the commission to adapt the FCC standards and improve upon them to reflect the Canadian marketplace. The hearing is to continue Thursday with appearances from Rogers Communications Inc. and the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association scheduled to appear. The proceedings are set to finish on Friday. ppark@thewirereport.ca

Telecoms denounce American-style labels for internet providers

Regulatory |
By Paul Park
| June 11, 2025

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Telecoms denounce American-style labels for internet providers

Regulatory | By Paul Park | June 11, 2025

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

ITPA says it’s in favour of broadband labels for larger players at CRTC hearing

Rogers expects to close MLSE acquisition in July

New internet service labels not needed, Cogeco tells CRTC panel

CRTC finds Global channels eligible for Independent Local News Fund

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Regulatory |
By Paul Park
| June 11, 2025