Back in 2001, the Government of Canada—then led by Prime Minister Jean Chrétien—. In the sixteen years since, gallons of ink and plenty of bytes have been used to call for a domestic strategy to address the country’s . The release of the Government of Canada’s , which included and the , has changed the debate in the country, replacing recurring calls for action (for example, see , , , , , , , , , and ) with cautious optimism—.

It was against this backdrop of a renewed innovation impetus that Canada’s Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, , gave the opening keynote for the in Toronto. Minister Bains used this forum to advocate for . In his speech, he commented that connecting Canadians through access to telecommunications services is necessary because:

In his speech, Minister Bains referred to enabling connectivity and bridging the “digital divide” between Canadians; however, doing so will require more than simply connecting Canadians through telecommunications services and digital technologies. Public and corporate policies must be updated to capitalize on the strengths and mitigate the negative ramifications of innovation-based economic activity. , Co-Director of the at the , described how at the same time that Israel has become a key supplier of new technologies, it has also experienced pronounced economic inequality. Canada’s Innovation Agenda, then, must look to address the many facets of our digitally-connected lives and work to promote inclusiveness and opportunity for all Canadians.

The segment that the IPilogue’s Content and Social Media Editor writes about describes how Canada’s telecommunications industry players are – and are not – preparing for the increasing adoption of digital and interconnected devices. Cerilli notes the vital role that telecom service providers play in providing the backbone of digital connectivity, and how consumers aYonida may become more, assertive about receiving higher standards of services.

Similarly, Yonida Kouiko’s piece, , focuses on another key aspect of interconnected Internet of Things (IoT) devices: users expectations of and their need for privacy. She notes how the European Union (EU) is working to update privacy laws to instill Privacy by Design (PbD)—an engineering approach that seeks to make users communications and data secure at the earliest stages. However, as Kouiko demonstrates, PbD requires investment and expenditure by technology producers and telecommunications providers—and she wonders whether consumers will be willing to pay increased prices for more secure means of communication.

Questions surrounding affordability arise again in IPilogue Editor As Shukla notes, concerns surrounding the affordability of telecom services in Canada and questions about the level of competition in the country’s telecommunications industry have been recurring issues for successive federal governments. Given the ISED Minister’s remarks, exploring new service delivery mechanisms and a continued focus on affordability for Canadians look to be prominent points of debate.

Yet, as , the Executive Director of reminded me , attaining inclusive innovation will also require digital skills and education. Organizations such as CFSC help provide the digital tools and skills necessary to increase the talent-level of Canadians in innovative sectors. While the federal government’s includes measures to address the faced by tech firms in Canada, developing domestic expertise and experience remain essential.

At the CTS17 , the Vice-President, Research at the , touched on one such area of expertise, noting that Canada currently suffers from problems with commercializing the ideas and knowledge generated by Canadian researchers and entrepreneurs. Part of this problem, Schwanen noted, is due to Canada’s poor track-record of utilizing intellectual property (IP) law to keep Canadian inventions in the hands of Canadian companies. Familiarity with IP law and commercialization strategies are important for attaining access to capital (through investment and licencing opportunities) and access to customers (through branding and the ability to prevent others from appropriating one’s technologies, goods, and services).

Enabling and are crucial to improving commercialization prospects and assisting with the growth of the country’s innovation ecosystem. IP Osgoode’s own – and a small number of other Clinics across the country (such as at the and the ) – help address gaps in Canada’s entrepreneurial support system by providing pro bono IP information and assistance to early-stage and under-funded inventors and companies.

The vast array of policy and commercial issues at stake in the development of Canada’s innovation agenda and national IP strategy are daunting but imperative. As the country is increasingly recognized for having its , the time is right for an inclusive Innovation Agenda that provides benefits for Canadian companies, consumers, citizens, and society at large. Positioning the country as an will require a strategy that lays the groundwork for that help Canada’s cutting-edge ideas become economically and socially beneficial products and processes.

Joseph F. Turcotte is a Senior Editor with the IPilogue and the Coordinator. He��holds a PhD from the Joint Graduate Program in Communication & Culture (Politics & Policy) at 91��ɫ and Ryerson University (Toronto, Canada) and can be reached .

��***

��The brings together the leadership of Canada’s telecom, broadcast, and IT industries. For its 16th year, the CTS focussed on and featured keynote presentations and panel discussions on the range of issues facing industry and public policy makers in Canada. IP Osgoode and the IPilogue team members thank the CTS’ organizers ( and ) and for their generous support to allow us to attend.

The post Connecting Canadians, Empowering Inclusive Innovation appeared first on IPOsgoode.

The Minister’s comments echo Canadian and international research regarding the costs of wireless services across the country. For example, a 2016 (Nordicity is a consulting firm that produces an annual telecommunications services price comparison study), prepared for the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) found that Canada ranks the highest out of 8 selected Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) jurisdictions in Level 1 service basket pricing of Mobile Wireless Telephony (the lowest usage basket) and second highest in Service Basket 3, 4, 5 and 6 (denoting higher usage). The OECD, , stated that to bring down the cost of mobile subscription, Canada needed more competition in the telecom sector by removing foreign ownership restrictions.

, Rogers Senior Vice President of Regulatory, argued that such reports and claims are flawed, because they only factor in the premium players and do not account for flanker brands like Freedom, Chatr, Fido and Koodo.

This claim is not entirely true; although the flanker brands were not used to calculate the national aggregate, they were analyzed in a to demonstrate the price difference between incumbent brands (TELUS, Rogers and Bell), the flanker brands, and new entrants such as Videotron (which recently ). Overall, these flanker brands were 14% cheaper than incumbents and the new entrants’ prices were a further 20% lower than those of the flanker brands. Thus, the new entrants were almost always cheaper than the incumbents. In certain price brackets (such as Level 4, that includes unlimited calling, 2GB data and 300 SMS), they would cost over 60% less than the incumbents. Consequently, competition from new entrants is good for consumers, as was re-iterated by , Executive Director and General Counsel, Public Interest Advocacy Centre, who bemoaned the lack of a fourth national carrier that could effectively compete against the incumbents.

Minister Bains also announced that the government has that route phone calls, texts and data through WiFi networks. Earlier this year, the CRTC ruled against WiFi-based providers, . These Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MVNOs) have had a fair deal of success south of the border; for example, Republic Wireless, which operates off the Sprint network, has had .

However, , the Senior Vice President of Federal Government & Regulatory Affairs at TELUS, argued that this approach works because Sprint is the weakest network in the US and has an excess network capacity. He argued that ninety-nine percent () of Canadians have access to LTE networks because Canadian telecom companies have been successful on the fronts of coverage, quality, and investment. He went ahead to offer cautionary advice against the WiFi first approach saying, “Don’t mess with success because that is actually what has got us here.” , Chief Legal & Regulatory Officer for TekSavvy Solutions, countered that MVNOs like Republic Wireless have at least been successful in stirring competition, bringing the prices down .

To end the panel, the participants were asked to place themselves in the shoes of the federal government , Chief Legal & Regulatory Officer and Executive Vice President for Corporate Development at Bell Canada, argued that Over-the-Top (OTT) services like Netflix should be treated the same as other broadcasters. For the , he argued that since there is a significant amount of facilities based competition, there should be less regulation. He was also in favour of keeping that stipulates carriers to charge a just and reasonable rate for their services.

Interestingly, Bibic was in favour of keeping , which provides the CRTC with powers to enforce net neutrality (the ). While Abramson batted for more transparency in the process, Woodhead was of the view that not much needs to be done in the Telecommunications Act. Woodhead also argued that , which deals with the objectives of Canadian Telecommunications Policy, needs to be looked at as it is conflicting and gives the CRTC broad powers and having a regulatory answer for everything is a bad macroeconomic policy.

Finally, Watt aptly summed up these conflicting opinions saying, “I think we can all see why the rewrite will probably take five years. I wish us all well.”

and the lack of competition from a fourth national player. It will be interesting to see how the CRTC responds to the call for review of its decision against Wi-Fi based MVNOs. Till then, .

Prasang Shukla is an IPilogue Editor and an International Business Law LL.M. candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

***

The brings together the leadership of Canada’s telecom, broadcast, and IT industries. For its 16th year, the CTS focussed on and featured keynote presentations and panel discussions on the range of issues facing industry and public policy makers in Canada. IP Osgoode and the IPilogue team members thank the CTS’ organizers ( and ) and for their generous support to allow us to attend.

The post Money Talk(s) and Competition Conflict: The CTS17 Regulatory Blockbuster appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Included in these discussions were a keynote address by Sanjay Mewada (Chief Strategy Officer of Netcracker) on the shift to digital services and impact of tech giants expanding their territory on the competition telecom players will increasingly face. Companies like provide business support and operation support systems, software-defined networking, and network functions virtualization to help communication service providers meet the expectations of their customers.

At the CTS17, Mewada emphasized the importance of moving away from traditional communication services and towards the adoption of digital models in order to thrive in the modern telecommunications industry. He highlighted that emerging features, like being able to proactively control bandwidth allocation to optimize and enable active monitoring of usage by customers, are setting new standards for internet service providers.

With Google’s (allowing consumers to choose which device on a Wi-Fi network receives the fastest connection) and already on the market, Mewada asked if consumers “would really want to go back to not having any control over the allocation of your bandwidth?” Indeed, once these features become “a matter of priority and focus” in the eyes of telecommunication corporations, more and more consumers will “know what is possible, [and] no longer like to stay with the bare minimum,” he said.

So, what is the outcome of tech giants like Google, Apple, and Hulu introducing new features into the telecom sector? “Why did Google have to come in to show a cable service provider how to be a digital service provider?,” he asked.

Mewada noted, “it is not about coming up with a brand-new thing, it is about providing the consumer with the right digital experience.” This shift to focussing on the client experience is key in ensuring the success of the telecommunication industry and not losing substantial market share to tech competitors.

Of course, with any adaptation also comes challenge. Mewada emphasized how the need to accelerate the delivery of new services to market remains hurdle for services providers. With the expectations of clients constantly changing and the avant-garde of the home-digital experience being increasingly bombarded with new innovations, according to Mewada there “needs to be a retooling of the processes” behind moving products from conception to implementation.

Mewada noted that the innovations provided by Google, Netflix, and other tech giants are actually blessings in disguise because they “open the market to expect new things” from service providers. In response, service providers merely “need to be there to provide that” to stay competitive, he said.

One approach involves adopting a “fast-fail” model. The fast-fail model seeks to optimize the movement of a digital service from conception to market through the use of small sample sizes as a preliminary testing ground. If it succeeds, then escalate – if it fails, then forget it and move on. While fairly new to telecommunications, this model has been adopted by Alphabet’s X research division, which to everything from driverless cars to augmented reality eyewear.

Furthermore, he noted that part of remaining successful in the contemporary market will involve anticipating future trends and shortening the turn-around time for providing clients with the same quality of services and products competitors offer. When applications like can rise to billion dollar valuations in the span of a couple years, having an interdisciplinary team that is ready to roll out high-quality services is of the utmost importance for preventing clients from switching to a more up-to-date provider.

In the end, keeping pace with the rapidly evolving tech sector is paramount to remaining competitive and maintaining and expanding a telecom business’s market share. Accordingly, clients will consistently expect to receive the latest and greatest in home entertainment and utility without feeling left behind tech giants, like Google and Apple, who are putting pressure on the telecommunication sector to offer a higher standard of service. ��In a dynamic and fast-paced field, perhaps Netcracker’s slogan of a business’s “most important step [they will take being] their next one” captures the pressure traditional telecommunications service providers will feel if they do not approach the industry proactively.

Dominic Cerilli is the IPilogue content editor and social media coordinator as well as a JD candidate at Osgoode Hall Law School.

***

��The brings together the leadership of Canada’s telecom, broadcast, and IT industries. For its 16th year, the CTS focussed on and featured keynote presentations and panel discussions on the range of issues facing industry and public policy makers in Canada. IP Osgoode and the IPilogue team members thank the CTS’ organizers ( and ) and for their generous support to allow us to attend.

The post Disruptive Innovation and Digital Integration appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Technology, though, is developing at such a pace that any proposed legislation, however foresightful, will soon be outdated. Thus, , the concept proposed by Dr. , Executive Director of the at (and former Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario), is an astute solution to privacy protection that does not rely exclusively on legislation. Dr. Cavoukian suggests that privacy be coded or embedded into the design of information technology, networked infrastructure, and business practices. This proactive and non-remedial approach is user-centered and promotes transparency, incorporating the objectives of legislative reform efforts.

PbD has already been adopted in foreign jurisdictions. For instance, the European Union (EU) is a pioneer in implementing an up-to-date privacy regime that takes the PbD concept into account. Article 25 of the 2016/679 (GDPR), effective May 25th, 2018 onwards, stipulates that data protection measures are designed into the development of business processes for products and services. Meanwhile, the State of California looks to be taking the lead in legislating on . In particular, will create a mandate under California law, pursuant to which all IoT devices will have built-in security features appropriate to the device, as well as the information collected.

Embedding security features into IoT devices also ensures protection from cyber attacks. Network-connected devices can . As panelist , Principal Security Technologist at , mentioned, the technology to allow carriers to stop these attacks exists; what remains is to understand how it works.

From a maufacturing perspective, IoTs can be designed to ensure both security and privacy. However, as ,��General Manager��of Network Security for ’ Enterprise Business Unit, observed, embedding these features into IoT devices will probably increase their cost. Therefore, in an industry where competitors often strive to have more affordable products, IoT manufacturers need to identify specific commercial benefits for being the most “secure” in the market. Eventually, the ultimate choice should be given to customers, who will decide whether they want to invest more in devices with embedded security, or in less expensive ones with add-on (albeit compromisable) security features.

Yet, PbD alone is insufficient to promote privacy, absent a stricter regime on how (online) service providers obtain users’ meaningful consent. Most online agreements to-date include terms of service (), which further permit service providers – along with the third parties they contract with – to keep, analyze and sell their users’ data. By incorporating click-to-agree clauses into ToS, users wishing to access the respective services are left with no choice but to agree to give away their privacy rights. The majority of users are not incentivized to they agree to, since they are not in a position to negotiate a new agreement. As Dr. Cavoukian posited, a drastic reform is required on this front: ToS should prevent service providers from using their customers’ personal data by default, unless opt-in consent has been obtained, also entailing specific conspicuous disclosures. For instance, provides that ‘consent’ of the data subject comprises any freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the former’s wishes, by which they, through a statement or a clear affirmative action, demonstrate that they agree to the processing of their personal data.

Dr. Cavoukian also pointed to other risks from privacy and security breaches, related to remote home health care, closed-circuit television camera (CCTC) or surveillance cameras in mass transit systems, smart meters and the smart grid, near field communications, radio-frequency identification (RFIDs) and sensor technologies, big data and data analytics, and internet protocol address location (IP Geolocation). Interestingly, the latter is expected to be addressed by the United States (US) Supreme Court in , notably vis-à-vis the .

Recent Canadian jurisprudence, on the other side, has attempted to strike a balance among privacy rights, and the investigative power of law enforcement, with particular regard to telecoms’ compliance with formal search warrants and production orders. In the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) interpreted the meaning of the word “intercept”, as defined under , in a broad fashion. It did so to protect individual privacy interests in communications. In specific, assessing whether a general warrant power can authorize the prospective production of future text messages from a service provider’s computer, . maintained that Canadians have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their voice communications; these must not be intercepted without compliance with the due process provisions of part VI of the��Criminal Code. Technical differences inherent in new technology should not determine the scope of protection afforded to private communications, which should be extended to traditional voice communications and text messaging alike.

Similarly, the Ontario Superior Court in examined, inter alia, if there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in the records to be produced�� in compliance with the police’s “tower dump” production orders to further an investigation into a string of jewelry store robberies; and if so, whether the telecoms have standing to assert it on behalf of their thousands of affected subscribers. While the Court both issues in the affirmative, it also formulated specific guidelines which respect the information needed to obtain production orders: a statement or explanation is required that demonstrates that the officer seeking the order is aware of the principles of incrementalism and minimal intrusion, and has tailored the requested order with that in mind; an explanation as to why all of the named locations or cell towers, and all requested dates and time parameters, are relevant to the investigation; an explanation as to why all types of records sought are relevant; any other details or parameters which might allow the target of the production order conduct a narrower search and produce fewer records; and a request for a report based on specified data instead of a request for the underlying data itself, are also required. The police should also include confirmation that the types and amounts of requested data can be meaningfully reviewed.

Ensuring privacy is more crucial than ever, especially in light of the coming from the United Kingdom’s current Prime Minister, Theresa May, that internet companies are providing a "safe space"��for extremism, and her proposal to "regulate cyberspace to��prevent the spread of ". However, neither regulating against extremism nor the familiar ‘’ argument are sufficient reasons to leave the door open for potential privacy breaches. Similarly, tech firms, privacy campaigners and academics point out that providing “” underestimates the entire purpose of privacy, while allowing both law enforcement agencies and outlaws to open and bypass these safeguards.

In Canada, ��the Anti-terrorism Act 2015��(former Bill C-51) was criticized for entailing numerous , as it provided several federal government agencies with almost to monitor and profile ordinary Canadians, with a view to identifying security threats. ��Notably, in a 2016 the Federal Court ruled that used by the ��Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s data-analytics program violates federal laws, namely the . Thus, on the 20th of June 2017 the Government introduced : An Act respecting national security matters, which attempts to clarify, among other Bill C-51-related : what type of activities the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) could employ in order to comply with the , and the information sharing process between federal institutions for national security purposes under the SCISA. Bill C-59 aims at: strengthening national security agencies’ accountability through the creation of a new, comprehensive national review body, the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA); enhancing oversight through the creation of an Intelligence Commissioner; and increasing transparency through a commitment to share national security information with Canadians.

By way of conclusion, the imperative of increasing the privacy threshold both from a legislative and ��industry practice standpoint is highlighted from the vast number of compromisable interconnected devices that have��become an integral part of our everyday life. Additionally, storage of��private information obtained via these devices by big data companies for either commercial or surveillance uses, makes it obvious that a proactive approach is required. This can be best achieved by embedding privacy and security not only into the design of information technology, but also to every networked infrastructure and business practice. Failure to do so is not limited to merely jeopardizing business reputation and risks from class action liability; non-compliance with international standards may as well hinder commercial relations, similarly to the effect of the����, which has been found invalid by EU courts.

Yonida Koukio is an IP and Business Law LL.M. Candidate at Osgoode and an IPilogue editor.

***

��The brings together the leadership of Canada’s telecom, broadcast, and IT industries. For its 16th year, the CTS focussed on and featured keynote presentations and panel discussions on the range of issues facing industry and public policy makers in Canada. IP Osgoode and the IPilogue team members thank the CTS’ organizers ( and ) and for their generous support to allow us to attend.

The post Privacy by Default: A Privacy and Cyber-security imperative in the IoT and Big-Data Age appeared first on IPOsgoode.

Speaking to a room filled with representatives from the telecom, broadcast, and IT industries, the Minister thanked them for their ongoing investment in Canada’s technological networks, saying that because of these efforts “Canada has some of the most advanced and efficient telecom networks”. As well, Minister Bains highlighted the efforts of and to provide affordable Internet access to low income Canadians.

Calling Internet services “basic and essential tools for all Canadians,” Minister Bains stated that Canadians “need these services to do business, learn new skills, and more importantly, build communities”.

Minister Bains noted, however, that Canadians currently pay more for basic cellular phone services than consumers in the United States and United Kingdom. These price comparisons may be based off of a prepared for the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) by .

The Minister said he is encouraging service providers to . Minister Bains also announced that the Government will be directing the CRTC to reconsider its recent decision on .

Minister Bains hopes the CRTC will rethink the decision, which effectively prevents Wi-Fi-based service providers from accessing roaming services. The Minister believes that such services have the potential to allow companies to use these technologies to create lower-cost wireless services for Canadians and would like the CRTC to reconsider the Wi-Fi-based roaming model.

At the Canadian Telecom Summit, Minister Bains stated that “raising the prosperity of Canadians depends on their access to high quality, high-speed Internet”. His comments were framed in the context of the government’s most recent budget, which included its .

According to Minister Bains, it is through telecom networks that it will be possible to turn “consumers into producers, observers into participants, and users into innovators”.

In his keynote, the Minister stated access to affordable telecom services can be a significant barrier preventing low income Canadians from fully participating in the digital economy and the economy, in general. “There is no difference to the digital economy and the rest of the economy. The digital economy is the economy,” Minister Bains said.

In a , analysts and academics , , and (the ), express similar findings and concerns, arguing:

.

In many respects, there is a general agreement around the importance of bridging the geographic and economic digital divides in Canada but questions remain about how to solve these problems. Telecom consultant , co-founder of the Canadian Telecom Summit, has and the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) from the consumer rights and public interest perspectives.

With the Government of Canada reviewing both the and Acts, it will be important for Minister Bains and his Ministry of Heritage colleague to ensure that legislative reforms and forthcoming policies and allow all Canadians to benefit from the government’s Innovation Agenda.

Joseph F. Turcotte is a Senior Editor with the IPilogue and the Coordinator. He��holds a PhD from the Joint Graduate Program in Communication & Culture (Politics & Policy) at 91��ɫ and Ryerson University (Toronto, Canada), where he focused on the roles that knowledge, information, data, and intellectual property play in knowledge-based and digital economies. He can be reached .

[1] The brings together the leadership of Canada’s telecom, broadcast, and IT industries. For its 16^th year, the Canadian Telecom Summit is focussing on “Competition, Investment and Innovation: Driving Canada's Digital Future” and features keynote presentations and panel discussions on the range of issues facing industry and public policy makers in Canada.

The post Affordable Access and the Pursuit of Inclusive Innovation appeared first on IPOsgoode.