Maybe I am too much of a glass half full kind of guy. I disagree with the way some have spun the legal battle between Bell and Rogers over internet speed claims, which is hardly settled. [So far, we have just had a ruling on an interim injunction.]
I see the case as evidence that the state of competition in Canada’s communications industry is not the cosy, managed marketplace that some like to suggest.
While this $50M lawsuit is over competition for internet speeds, it is interesting that one of the precedents cited by the judge [in determining whether there is irreparable harm] was a 2006 case between TELUS and Rogers.
Competing on services, quality and features are attributes of a working competitive market. Pushing the envelop on competing claims sounds like more intense competition than some might have you believe. Truth in advertising is essential; regulatory intervention in a competitive market is not.