Big Three reiterate stance against mandated MVNO access in final submissions to CRTC - MobileSyrup | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Tech

Big Three reiterate stance against mandated MVNO access in final submissions to CRTC – MobileSyrup

Published

 on


Telus, Rogers and Bell have reiterated their arguments opposing mandated MVNO access and stated that it would have negative consequences on the industry.

Carriers have sent in their final submissions for the CRTC’s review of mobile wireless services, and provided their final comments regarding mandated MVNO access.

Mobile virtual network operators are providers that don’t have an established network, and instead rent access to existing networks.

The national carriers are arguing that the Canadian mobile wireless industry is already competitive and that there isn’t a need for mandated MVNO access. The carriers say that facilities-based competition is the right policy and has worked so far.

Telus argues in its submission that mandated MVNOs would not bridge the digital divide that exists in parts of Canada, and that it would widen the gap. The carrier says that since MVNOs do not build networks, it would not expand coverage or service in rural Canada.

“Reduced network investment by MNOs as a result of mandated MVNO access is likely to manifest first in reductions in rural investment where the higher costs of building and maintaining networks generate lower returns,” the carrier argues.

Further, Bell argues in its final submission that mandating access for MVNOs would not improve outcomes for consumers.

“Attempts by other parties to identify benefits from mandated access for MVNOs have been extremely limited, and have not been relevant to a market like Canada with four facilities-based carriers, including a more recent entrant that is continuing to gain market share,” the carrier argues.

Bell states that MVNOs do not plan to introduce wireless service innovations that could benefit consumers or drive down costs over time.

In its submission, Rogers argues that regional carriers are rapidly strengthening their competitive positions and challenging the national carriers and already providing consumers with more choice.

“Each year since 2015, as many as six million customers have switched providers, demonstrating the intense rivalry that exists in the market,” the carrier notes.

Rogers argues that Vidéotron and Freedom have dramatically increased their subscriber bases, taking a disproportionate share of net new customer additions as they expand their networks. Rogers states that there is “clearly no need to impose artificial competition” through mandated MVNO access.

Further, the carriers argue that COVID-19 has significantly impacted Canada’s wireless telecommunications industry and that the pandemic will have long-lasting effects.

They state that now would be the worst time to burden the industry with MVNO regulation that would slow investment and introduce uncertainty.

Shaw Communications argues in its submission that mandated MVNO access will not only “prohibit competitive investment in areas that lack alternatives to the Big Three, it will impede the consumer benefits that are emerging in those other markets where the Big Three already face the resilient competitive pressure of regional disruptors.”

The Competition Bureau argues in its submission that a facilities-based MVNO model will enhance competition and accelerate the disruption of market power. It notes that broadening the eligibility criteria of the facilities-focused MVNO model may reduce regional carrier investment.

Opposing arguments from smaller carriers

TekSavvy argues in its submission that the current landscape of the mobile wireless market in Canada does not meet the needs of consumers, and that it is premature to consider imposing restrictions on any MVNO model.

“Certain benefits of an MVNO would include increased choice in wireless provider, better service for those in rural areas, more affordable plans for vulnerable populations and market offerings that would meet the needs of consumers,” the carrier outlines.

The carrier argues that the CRTC must mandate wholesale access to relieve the mobile wireless marketplace from dominant market power of the Big Three. It states that the COVID-19 pandemic has brought additional urgency to the matter.

Distributel notes in its final comments to the CRTC that the long-standing focus on facilities-based competition will not produce the competitive pressures needed to solve the issues in the retail wireless market identified by the commission.

“Mandated access to MVNO services could be utilized by both the non-national wireless carriers and service-based wireless providers to achieve the level of competition, innovation, differentiation, and choice in the retail market sought by the Commission,” the carrier notes.

Distributel says that the CRTC should take “a dim view” of the claims that mandating access to wholesale MVNO services will result in harm to investments by wireless carriers.

It’s interesting to note that around 60 percent of Canadians support new regulations that would require the Big Three to share their infrastructure with smaller providers to promote wireless competition, according to a report released by the Canadian Internet Registration Authority in February.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Health

Here is how to prepare your online accounts for when you die

Published

 on

 

LONDON (AP) — Most people have accumulated a pile of data — selfies, emails, videos and more — on their social media and digital accounts over their lifetimes. What happens to it when we die?

It’s wise to draft a will spelling out who inherits your physical assets after you’re gone, but don’t forget to take care of your digital estate too. Friends and family might treasure files and posts you’ve left behind, but they could get lost in digital purgatory after you pass away unless you take some simple steps.

Here’s how you can prepare your digital life for your survivors:

Apple

The iPhone maker lets you nominate a “ legacy contact ” who can access your Apple account’s data after you die. The company says it’s a secure way to give trusted people access to photos, files and messages. To set it up you’ll need an Apple device with a fairly recent operating system — iPhones and iPads need iOS or iPadOS 15.2 and MacBooks needs macOS Monterey 12.1.

For iPhones, go to settings, tap Sign-in & Security and then Legacy Contact. You can name one or more people, and they don’t need an Apple ID or device.

You’ll have to share an access key with your contact. It can be a digital version sent electronically, or you can print a copy or save it as a screenshot or PDF.

Take note that there are some types of files you won’t be able to pass on — including digital rights-protected music, movies and passwords stored in Apple’s password manager. Legacy contacts can only access a deceased user’s account for three years before Apple deletes the account.

Google

Google takes a different approach with its Inactive Account Manager, which allows you to share your data with someone if it notices that you’ve stopped using your account.

When setting it up, you need to decide how long Google should wait — from three to 18 months — before considering your account inactive. Once that time is up, Google can notify up to 10 people.

You can write a message informing them you’ve stopped using the account, and, optionally, include a link to download your data. You can choose what types of data they can access — including emails, photos, calendar entries and YouTube videos.

There’s also an option to automatically delete your account after three months of inactivity, so your contacts will have to download any data before that deadline.

Facebook and Instagram

Some social media platforms can preserve accounts for people who have died so that friends and family can honor their memories.

When users of Facebook or Instagram die, parent company Meta says it can memorialize the account if it gets a “valid request” from a friend or family member. Requests can be submitted through an online form.

The social media company strongly recommends Facebook users add a legacy contact to look after their memorial accounts. Legacy contacts can do things like respond to new friend requests and update pinned posts, but they can’t read private messages or remove or alter previous posts. You can only choose one person, who also has to have a Facebook account.

You can also ask Facebook or Instagram to delete a deceased user’s account if you’re a close family member or an executor. You’ll need to send in documents like a death certificate.

TikTok

The video-sharing platform says that if a user has died, people can submit a request to memorialize the account through the settings menu. Go to the Report a Problem section, then Account and profile, then Manage account, where you can report a deceased user.

Once an account has been memorialized, it will be labeled “Remembering.” No one will be able to log into the account, which prevents anyone from editing the profile or using the account to post new content or send messages.

X

It’s not possible to nominate a legacy contact on Elon Musk’s social media site. But family members or an authorized person can submit a request to deactivate a deceased user’s account.

Passwords

Besides the major online services, you’ll probably have dozens if not hundreds of other digital accounts that your survivors might need to access. You could just write all your login credentials down in a notebook and put it somewhere safe. But making a physical copy presents its own vulnerabilities. What if you lose track of it? What if someone finds it?

Instead, consider a password manager that has an emergency access feature. Password managers are digital vaults that you can use to store all your credentials. Some, like Keeper,Bitwarden and NordPass, allow users to nominate one or more trusted contacts who can access their keys in case of an emergency such as a death.

But there are a few catches: Those contacts also need to use the same password manager and you might have to pay for the service.

___

Is there a tech challenge you need help figuring out? Write to us at onetechtip@ap.org with your questions.

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Google’s partnership with AI startup Anthropic faces a UK competition investigation

Published

 on

 

LONDON (AP) — Britain’s competition watchdog said Thursday it’s opening a formal investigation into Google’s partnership with artificial intelligence startup Anthropic.

The Competition and Markets Authority said it has “sufficient information” to launch an initial probe after it sought input earlier this year on whether the deal would stifle competition.

The CMA has until Dec. 19 to decide whether to approve the deal or escalate its investigation.

“Google is committed to building the most open and innovative AI ecosystem in the world,” the company said. “Anthropic is free to use multiple cloud providers and does, and we don’t demand exclusive tech rights.”

San Francisco-based Anthropic was founded in 2021 by siblings Dario and Daniela Amodei, who previously worked at ChatGPT maker OpenAI. The company has focused on increasing the safety and reliability of AI models. Google reportedly agreed last year to make a multibillion-dollar investment in Anthropic, which has a popular chatbot named Claude.

Anthropic said it’s cooperating with the regulator and will provide “the complete picture about Google’s investment and our commercial collaboration.”

“We are an independent company and none of our strategic partnerships or investor relationships diminish the independence of our corporate governance or our freedom to partner with others,” it said in a statement.

The U.K. regulator has been scrutinizing a raft of AI deals as investment money floods into the industry to capitalize on the artificial intelligence boom. Last month it cleared Anthropic’s $4 billion deal with Amazon and it has also signed off on Microsoft’s deals with two other AI startups, Inflection and Mistral.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Kuwait bans ‘Call of Duty: Black Ops 6’ video game, likely over it featuring Saddam Hussein in 1990s

Published

 on

 

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The tiny Mideast nation of Kuwait has banned the release of the video game “Call of Duty: Black Ops 6,” which features the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and is set in part in the 1990s Gulf War.

Kuwait has not publicly acknowledged banning the game, which is a tentpole product for the Microsoft-owned developer Activision and is set to be released on Friday worldwide. However, it comes as Kuwait still wrestles with the aftermath of the invasion and as video game makers more broadly deal with addressing historical and cultural issues in their work.

The video game, a first-person shooter, follows CIA operators fighting at times in the United States and also in the Middle East. Game-play trailers for the game show burning oilfields, a painful reminder for Kuwaitis who saw Iraqis set fire to the fields, causing vast ecological and economic damage. Iraqi troops damaged or set fire to over 700 wells.

There also are images of Saddam and Iraq’s old three-star flag in the footage released by developers ahead of the game’s launch. The game’s multiplayer section, a popular feature of the series, includes what appears to be a desert shootout in Kuwait called Scud after the Soviet missiles Saddam fired in the war. Another is called Babylon, after the ancient city in Iraq.

Activision acknowledged in a statement that the game “has not been approved for release in Kuwait,” but did not elaborate.

“All pre-orders in Kuwait will be cancelled and refunded to the original point of purchase,” the company said. “We remain hopeful that local authorities will reconsider, and allow players in Kuwait to enjoy this all-new experience in the Black Ops series.”

Kuwait’s Media Ministry did not respond to requests for comment from The Associated Press over the decision.

“Call of Duty,” which first began in 2003 as a first-person shooter set in World War II, has expanded into an empire worth billions of dollars now owned by Microsoft. But it also has been controversial as its gameplay entered the realm of geopolitics. China and Russia both banned chapters in the franchise. In 2009, an entry in the gaming franchise allowed players to take part in a militant attack at a Russian airport, killing civilians.

But there have been other games recently that won praise for their handling of the Mideast. Ubisoft’s “Assassin’s Creed: Mirage” published last year won praise for its portrayal of Baghdad during the Islamic Golden Age in the 9th century.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version