15 Quadrillion Dollars

February 12, 2013 6:28 PM

The comment period for the DRAFT Wireless code [PDF] to address some cellular provider abuses is expiring soon (February 15th). Comments can be made here. Highlights of the draft code include:

• A $50 (or less) monthly cap on incurred fees.
• A limitation of cancellation fees equal to the remaining amount of the prorated incentive amount
• Mandatory unlocking at no cost for non subsidy phones with no waiting period.
• Limits on deposits and non payment cancellations.
• No termination fee, 15 day cooling off period
• Mandatory listing of limits on "unlimited" plans.

If you have trouble commenting via the online process comments can be directed to the CRTC who will post them, anonymously to readers, to the comment forum.

Missing though is an oft requested ban on contracts over 24 months.

The 15 Quadrillion dollar bill wasn't Canada.

posted by Mitheral (17 comments total)

No uninstallable crapware on phone.
posted by benzenedream at 6:35 PM on February 12 [15 favorites]

And data-only plans!
posted by gusandrews at 6:37 PM on February 12 [5 favorites]

And international roaming to be capped at some reasonable multiple of actual cost to the carriers. Most especially data roaming.
posted by Devonian at 6:44 PM on February 12 [8 favorites]

another reason to gaze wistfully at my northern border...
posted by cubby at 6:54 PM on February 12 [2 favorites]

• No tapping without warrants.

posted by cjorgensen at 6:55 PM on February 12 [11 favorites]

And international roaming to be capped at some reasonable multiple of actual cost to the carriers. Most especially data roaming.

We could do that for national data costs, too.
posted by jeather at 7:13 PM on February 12 [1 favorite]

The ability to install the ROM you want with the features you want.

The ability to removing what the end user considers "crapware" and be able to store things on the SD card.
posted by rough ashlar at 7:29 PM on February 12 [2 favorites]

I wish incoming calls were free like in Bosnia or Croatia.
posted by Katjusa Roquette at 8:48 PM on February 12

Wait, aren't incoming calls free almost everywhere? That sounds crazy, what's the logic behind it, besides price gouging?
posted by kev23f at 12:20 AM on February 13 [1 favorite]

Wait, aren't incoming calls free almost everywhere? That sounds crazy, what's the logic behind it, besides price gouging?

That's true for most GSM systems. The problem in North America are the regional area codes that make no sense. A caller can't tell if the number she is calling is a mobile number (charged at a higher rate) or a land-line number (charged to the caller at a lower rate.) In order to keep the charges on the dialing party to that of a land-line number, the mobile subscriber pays the difference. It's a legacy of the numbering system and not so easy to eliminate.

Across Europe there are distinct "area" codes for the mobile networks. (In Sweden, e.g., any number with 070 or 073 is a mobile). The caller pays all the cost of the call (which is still higher for a mobile than a land-line) but she knows if the number is a mobile one before she calls it.

I know it makes some people just feel good to think they can get something for nothing - just pass a law and slash everyone's bills - but it never works like that.

I am dubious about fixed rate data plans and an open application policy - I mean right now the business user is still paying a premium for voice calls and data use - if you flatten that out across all users, it's the low-end subscriber that's gonna end up paying more (and businesses paying less.) Mobile operators are already squeezed for revenue growth and their total pie isn't going to get any smaller.

It would seem to make economic sense for most people to tolerate some minor inconveniences on their devices to keep businesses paying higher rates. Don't let the programming zealots make you pay more for their "freedom."
posted by three blind mice at 12:51 AM on February 13 [1 favorite]

Routing and billing USA calls is the fucking biggest pain in the ass. OCN/LATA, NPANXXY (Hey, how about 1.5 million routes per vendor? Awesome!), Inter/Intra, number portability, nonuniform rounding, and oh yeah let's not forget malformed ANIs. Whee.
posted by kmz at 1:30 AM on February 13

It's such a shame that the mobile operators couldn't get some kind of machine that could determine if a number was a mobile or land line, and then maybe make a recorded (or even digital) announcement to the caller like "The number you have dialled is a mobile number. This call will appear on your bill as an extra charge. You have x seconds to cancel this call for no charge." Then, a person could just do something like, maybe, hang-up their phone and not get charged, or, just keep going and pay for bothering someone on their mobile, who is probably at work or driving in traffic anyway.

Yea, it's really difficult. What kind of machine could do something like that? I suppose whatever would do that, a mobile phone company couldn't be expected to own such a fancy device. Probably science-fiction anyway. How could a mere machine tell the difference?
posted by Goofyy at 2:52 AM on February 13 [2 favorites]

Oh, I know why this won't work. Because they would mess up those folks in business of calling everyone to find out what brand of some unimportant product they use. Can't screw those folks up. Oh no!
posted by Goofyy at 2:54 AM on February 13

This is really interesting stuff, does anyone have more information ala Neal Stephenson?
posted by legospaceman at 2:56 AM on February 13

Also, in Pakistan and I'm sure in many other places where the 'caller pays for the call, callee pays nothing' system is in place, people use calls as signals and expect the other party not to pick up. This is termed 'giving a missed-call' as in 'Ok just give me a missed-call when you're 15 minutes away'. Or, 'why'd you pick up?! I was giving a missed-call.'

Easier than actually talking on the phone or texting.
posted by legospaceman at 2:59 AM on February 13 [1 favorite]

thanks, three blind mice. Seems like a deep and interesting topic, off to do some research!
posted by kev23f at 6:40 AM on February 13

The problem in North America are the regional area codes that make no sense. A caller can't tell if the number she is calling is a mobile number (charged at a higher rate) or a land-line number (charged to the caller at a lower rate.) In order to keep the charges on the dialing party to that of a land-line number, the mobile subscriber pays the difference. It's a legacy of the numbering system and not so easy to eliminate

And also it would be almost impossible to have people -- who generally pay on their landlines for unlimited phone calls (with not much more to unlimited throughout Canada and the US) -- to suddenly accept that it's unlimited except that these specific numbers cost extra. Even if we got people to agree to change area codes on mobile phones (not ever going to happen), the landline users will pitch a fit that their unlimited calling isn't.

I know it's complicated, but it's also pretty hard to argue that the fact that Canadian telecom companies have higher rates for less service than pretty much any other country, and that probably it's not because Canada is so very complex.
posted by jeather at 2:57 PM on February 13