Slashdot Mirror


Massive Canadian Class-Action Cellphone Suit Is Approved

BeanBunny writes "A Saskatchewan, Canada court has ruled that a $12 billion class-action suit can proceed. The suit alleges that 'system access fees' that the cellphone companies have charged ($7-9 per month) are unfair and constitute price gouging. 'It is described as the largest class-action in Canadian history, potentially affecting every cellphone user in the country. Currently, there are 7,500 complainants signed onto the suit.'"

11 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. Re:no-win by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My personal favorite absurd line-item in your phone bill has always been the small fee they charge you for the privelege of touch-tone dialing.

    You couldn't opt out of it if you wanted, and the phone hardware is designed to work with those tones. It's not like they've got those big mechanical things that used to physically move in response to the numbers you dialed.

    Really, what justification to charge for the ability to dial the phone with touchtones can there possibly still be? These little items are absolutely about gathering money by the bucket load.

    Cheers

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. Sask. Only? by Wolvie+MkM · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't suppose this is a Canada wide lawsuit? And if so how do I get in on it?

    I've been with Clearnet/Telus for nearly 10 years and apparently been handing free money to them... Good Times...

    --
    I Like Pie...
  3. Re:Just because I have to by tacokill · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Yep, and Canadian products will become more "expensive" to Americans (therefore, less goods are sold). Additionally, US products will become cheaper for Canadians (therefore, more of our goods get sold to you)....

    It doesn't matter. The point is: currency values mean very little unless you trade them or are measuring inflation. Any more analysis is a discussion of macro-economic theory and world money supply. A topic best left to the economists.

  4. Re:no-win by kidcharles · · Score: 3, Interesting

    SMS is a different protocol which requires a different infrastructure. The prices are high, but it's not just as easy as normal data transfer. I've heard about this, but in my opinion, bandwidth is bandwidth. If a wireless provider is sending two signals, one of which has a throughput that is thousands of times the data rate of the other signal, yet the signal with the smaller amount of data costs them thousands of times more than the larger signal to send, they are doing something really wrong. Of course the thing that is really wrong about text messaging is not the technical implementation but the pricing, for which there is simply no excuse. It's price gouging, pure and simple, and the US providers are collectively guilty of it.
    --
    Ceci n'est pas une sig.
  5. Re:no-win by athakur999 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That is BS. In GSM/UMTS networks at least, SMS messages are sent through the network via the MAP protocol and between the switch and mobile via DTAP. DTAP is required for any kind of mobile interaction and a provider must already have a MAP infrastructure in place to be able to handle practically any type of call.

    The only additional piece of equipment required to handle SMS in a network is a SMS service center. All this is a database to receive SMS messages from an originating mobile and then send them back out to terminating mobile.

    Using up bearer channels in their network for voice or data calls costs providers (both in dollars and in availability) far more than the simple signalling that SMS uses. There is no financial reason why a provider can provide unlimited voice calls but must charge $0.15 for an SMS message.

    --
    "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
  6. What is happening? by WwWonka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seriously? This country and corporations(as well as you Canadians up 'der") have found fit to nickel and dime the lazy into millions and billions of extra dollars in hidden fees, surcharges, and taxes.

    It's interesting to see this in almost EVERY major bill of everyday American usage. Phone, cable, electric, gas. It truly is out of control and it's a pleasant surprise to see the Canadians take charge. Now if us Americans would understand that the phone companies here are doing the same PLUS charging us for for fractions of extra minutes based on getting their own operator telling us "if you would like to leave a message press one, if you would like to page this person, press 2. If not please leave your message after the tone." 15 seconds of extra money for them after every phone call not answered. I bet that adds up to a few extra "crack" millions a year.

  7. Re:Classic Bait & Switch by Jason1729 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why should I have to do that? I want to view the content as intended. And if the intended way annoys me, I'll take my business elsewhere.

  8. GOOD by hurfy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Assuming the lawsuit is successful, they'll just roll the $7 fee into the base price for ALL of their plans. So my $20/mo plan will become a $26.95/mo plan. Big whoop."

    That is the idea yes.

    Did you get the plan on price? You would not know your $20 plan costs more than my $25 plan until you sign on for a year or two!

    I am trying to compare phone companies for work. It is impossible to know how much it will cost without signing up. Land or cell :(

    Is $25.00 per month and $.07 per minute better or worse than $15.00 per month and $.08 per minute? No matter how much math you throw at it you can't tell because they tack on too many fake fees mixed in the real taxes. XO adds a minimum of 10% on the the bottom of the bill up to 24% if your a little guy :/ The other company seems to charge more in sales tax than i can find taxable plus several questionable 'fees'. Repeat for multiple techniques for each company :(

    PS: so far XO is the worst on under-the-line fees plus they flat-out lied to me when asked about one.

  9. Re:Wrong! by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At that time, it was. The point of the suit is that it isn't anymore, and yet the companies are still saying it is, and using that lie to justify charging it.

    --
    Stasis is death. Embrace change.
  10. Re:Just because I have to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There's American stuff? Pretty much everything comes from China these days.

    True story: my wife was looking for a new sewing machine a couple years back. We shopped around and eventually settled on a specific Singer model. Then on impulse my wife decided to get a white plastic case to store the machine away when not in use. Upon getting everything home I noticed the sewing machine - a complex piece of machinery with lots of value-add in the manufacturing - was made in China ... the cheap white plastic case - with a grand total of two moving parts in the form of metal latches - was manufactured in the United States. I called my wife over and said "here you go honey ... a perfect metaphor for the decline in American manufacturing."

    So, good luck with that plastic-sewing-machine-based economy.

  11. Re:Too bad it's Tony Merchant running it... by Trillan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm sure I'll never see a penny, but I signed up anyway just because I hope it will exert some pressure on the companies to be more honest. This isn't something they stopped doing years ago -- it's something they still do today.