
Cogeco, Eastlink seek to appeal CRTC decision on wholesale rules
In a legal challenge filed at the Federal Court of Appeal on Friday, Cogeco Inc. and Halifax-based Eastlink said the regulator's June decision should be quashed.
They alleged that the CRTC rendered an 'effectively arbitrary decision' that ignored key arguments and evidence, while also erring in law and jurisdiction.
'Based on the incorrect conclusion that the Big Three are 'new' service providers, the CRTC allowed the Big Three to co-opt a regulatory framework ... to instead compete against each other and against these truly new, regional, and smaller providers,' the court filing states.
Last month, the CRTC ruled that Rogers Communications Inc., BCE Inc. and Telus Corp. can provide internet service to customers using networks built by one another — as long as they are doing so outside their core serving regions.
Telus has defended that policy as a way to boost competition in regions where it doesn't have its own network infrastructure, which then improves affordability for customers. Bell and Rogers oppose it, saying the rules discourage the major providers from investing in their own infrastructure.
Many regional and independent carriers have raised concerns that it could make it more difficult for them to compete against larger players. They point out the Big Three are able to offer bundled internet, cellphone and TV packages for a discount, while some standalone internet providers cannot.
'The CRTC is stubbornly maintaining a broken ... resale regime that has completely failed to meet its original objective to help new entrants get into the market,' Cogeco president and CEO Frédéric Perron said earlier this week on his company's latest earnings call.
'The CRTC is misusing its power and is favouring telecom giants at the expense of regional players such as Cogeco. It's like forcing regional airlines to let national airlines use their planes. It just doesn't make any sense.'
The CRTC said its rules effectively balance the need for both competition and investment, while only having a 'modest' near-term effect on the market share of regional carriers.
It said it plans to continue evaluating the effect on the industry, noting there have been 'early indicators of improved competitive intensity' but that the extent to which the new rules 'will ultimately be successful is still unknown.'
But Cogeco and Eastlink say the CRTC erred in law 'in a way that irremediably tainted the rest of its analysis.'
It said the regulator's decision 'treats the country's largest and most powerful telecommunications service providers as 'new' and reduces barriers to competition for the largest players in the telecommunications market, while increasing these barriers — with potentially fatal effect — for everyone else.'
The carriers argued that the commission should 'not have concluded that the Big Three are 'new' service providers, given that they are the largest providers of telecommunications services across Canada.'
Cogeco and Eastlink also characterized the CRTC's reasoning for its decision as 'so insufficient that the CRTC breached procedural fairness and effectively rendered an arbitrary decision by wholly failing to acknowledge or address the long-term effects of bundling ... or the incoherence of the policy with the broader regulatory regime.'
The framework initially kicked in May 2024 on a limited basis, when the regulator began requiring Bell and Telus to give competitors — including both big and small companies — access to their networks, in exchange for a fee.
Those rules initially applied only in Ontario and Quebec, as the CRTC cited a significant competitive decline in those provinces. It noted independent internet providers had been serving 47 per cent fewer customers than two years earlier as many were bought out by larger internet providers.
The CRTC announced in August 2024 the rules would be extended to networks owned by telephone companies countrywide.
But the federal government then asked the commission to reconsider whether the Big Three providers should be able to act as wholesalers under the rules, citing concern about the viability of smaller internet providers to act as alternatives.
The CRTC opened a consultation into the matter and issued a temporary decision this past February that upheld the rules, followed by its final determination in June.
The federal cabinet has until Aug. 13 to decide whether to overrule that decision.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 18, 2025.
Companies in this story: (TSX:CGO, TSX:BCE, TSX:T, TSX:RCI.B)
Note to readers:This is a clarified story. A previous version said the appeal only covered wholesale fibre rules. In fact, it applies to all types of telecom networks.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
7 hours ago
- CNBC
Delta Air assures US lawmakers it will not personalize fares using AI
Delta Air Lines said on Friday it will not use artificial intelligence to set personalized ticket prices for passengers after facing sharp criticism from U.S. lawmakers and broad public concern. Last week, Democratic Senators Ruben Gallego, Mark Warner and Richard Blumenthal said they believed the Atlanta-based airline would use AI to set individual prices, which would "likely mean fare price increases up to each individual consumer's personal 'pain point.'" Delta said it has not used AI to set personalized prices but previously said it plans to deploy AI-based revenue management technology across 20% of its domestic network by the end of 2025 in partnership with Fetcherr, an AI pricing company. "There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data," Delta told the senators in a letter on Friday, seen by Reuters. "Our ticket pricing never takes into account personal data." Senators praised Delta's commitment not to use AI for personal pricing but expressed many questions and want more details about what data Delta is collecting to set prices. "Delta is telling their investors one thing, and then turning around and telling the public another," Gallego said. "If Delta is in fact using aggregated instead of individualized data, that is welcome news." Delta declined comment on Gallego's statement. The senators cited a comment in December by Delta President Glen Hauenstein that the carrier's AI price-setting technology is capable of setting fares based on a prediction of "the amount people are willing to pay for the premium products related to the base fares." Last week, American Airlines CEO Robert Isom said using AI to set ticket prices could hurt consumer trust. "This is not about bait and switch. This is not about tricking," Isom said on an earnings call, adding "talk about using AI in that way, I don't think it's appropriate. And certainly from American, it's not something we will do." Democratic lawmakers Greg Casar and Rashida Tlaib last week introduced legislation to bar companies from using AI to set prices or wages based on Americans' personal data and would specifically ban airlines raising individual prices after seeing a search for a family obituary. They cited a Federal Trade Commission staff report in January that found "retailers frequently use people's personal information to set targeted, tailored prices for goods and services -- from a person's location and demographics, down to their mouse movements on a webpage." The FTC cited a hypothetical example of a consumer profiled as a new parent who could intentionally be shown higher-priced baby thermometers and collect behavioral details to forecast a customer's state of mind. Delta said airlines have used dynamic pricing for more than three decades, in which pricing fluctuates based on a variety of factors like overall customer demand, fuel prices and competition, but not a specific consumer's personal information. "Given the tens of millions of fares and hundreds of thousands of routes for sale at any given time, the use of new technology like AI promises to streamline the process by which we analyze existing data and the speed and scale at which we can respond to changing market dynamics," Delta's letter said.


NBC News
9 hours ago
- NBC News
Delta Air Lines assures U.S. lawmakers it will not personalize fares using AI
WASHINGTON - Delta Air Lines said on Friday it will not use artificial intelligence to set personalized ticket prices for passengers after facing sharp criticism from U.S. lawmakers and broad public concern. Last week, Democratic Senators Ruben Gallego, Mark Warner and Richard Blumenthal said they believed the Atlanta-based airline would use AI to set individual prices, which would 'likely mean fare price increases up to each individual consumer's personal 'pain point.'' Delta said it has not used AI to set personalized prices but previously said it plans to deploy AI-based revenue management technology across 20% of its domestic network by the end of 2025 in partnership with Fetcherr, an AI pricing company. 'There is no fare product Delta has ever used, is testing or plans to use that targets customers with individualized prices based on personal data,' Delta told the senators in a letter on Friday, seen by Reuters. 'Our ticket pricing never takes into account personal data.' Senators praised Delta's commitment not to use AI for personal pricing but expressed many questions and want more details about what data Delta is collecting to set prices. 'Delta is telling their investors one thing, and then turning around and telling the public another,' Gallego said. 'If Delta is in fact using aggregated instead of individualized data, that is welcome news.' Delta declined comment on Gallego's statement. The senators cited a comment in December by Delta President Glen Hauenstein that the carrier's AI price-setting technology is capable of setting fares based on a prediction of 'the amount people are willing to pay for the premium products related to the base fares.' Last week, American Airlines CEO Robert Isom said using AI to set ticket prices could hurt consumer trust. 'This is not about bait and switch. This is not about tricking,' Isom said on an earnings call, adding 'talk about using AI in that way, I don't think it's appropriate. And certainly from American, it's not something we will do.' Democratic lawmakers Greg Casar and Rashida Tlaib last week introduced legislation to bar companies from using AI to set prices or wages based on Americans' personal data and would specifically ban airlines raising individual prices after seeing a search for a family obituary. They cited a Federal Trade Commission staff report in January that found 'retailers frequently use people's personal information to set targeted, tailored prices for goods and services -- from a person's location and demographics, down to their mouse movements on a webpage.' The FTC cited a hypothetical example of a consumer profiled as a new parent who could intentionally be shown higher-priced baby thermometers and collect behavioral details to forecast a customer's state of mind. Delta said airlines have used dynamic pricing for more than three decades, in which pricing fluctuates based on a variety of factors like overall customer demand, fuel prices and competition, but not a specific consumer's personal information. 'Given the tens of millions of fares and hundreds of thousands of routes for sale at any given time, the use of new technology like AI promises to streamline the process by which we analyze existing data and the speed and scale at which we can respond to changing market dynamics,' Delta's letter said.


Business Upturn
11 hours ago
- Business Upturn
RECKITT (RBGLY) URGENT DEADLINE ALERT: Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Announces that a Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against Reckitt Benckiser Group plc and Encourages Investors to Contact the Firm
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Litigation Attorney Brandon Walker Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In Reckitt (RBGLY) To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options If you purchased or acquired securities in Reckitt between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Bragar Eagel & Squire partner Brandon Walker or Marion Passmore directly at (212) 355-4648. NEW YORK, Aug. 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized stockholder rights law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Reckitt Benckiser Group plc ('Reckitt' or the 'Company') (OTC:RBGLY) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Reckitt securities between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024, both dates inclusive (the 'Class Period'). Investors have until August 4, 2025 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. Click here to participate in the action. Reckitt is a United Kingdom-based, global consumer goods company. To date, over 500 state and federal products liability lawsuits have been filed against Reckitt and its competitor, Abbott Laboratories ('Abbott'), claiming that they failed to adequately warn that premature infants consuming cow milk-based formulas, such as Reckitt's Enfamil and Abbott's Similac, have an increased risk of developing necrotizing enterocolitis ('NEC'), a life-threatening intestinal disease that affects premature or low birth weight infants. The Class Action alleges that, during the Class Period, Defendants made misleading statements and omissions regarding the Company's business, financial condition, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to warn investors and consumers: (1) that preterm infants were at an increased risk of developing NEC by consuming Reckitt's cow's milk-based formula, Enfamil; (2) of the attendant impact on Reckitt's sales of Enfamil and Reckitt's exposure to legal claims; and (3) as a result of the above, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Reckitt shares and suffered a loss, are a long-term stockholder, have information, would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Brandon Walker or Marion Passmore by email at [email protected], telephone at (212) 355-4648, or by filling out this contact form. There is no cost or obligation to you. About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.: Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal courts across the country. For more information about the firm, please visit . Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, X, and Facebook, and keep up with other news by following Brandon Walker, Esq. on LinkedIn and X. Contact Information: Bragar Eagel & Squire, Walker, Passmore, Esq.(212) 355-4648 [email protected]