TELUS and the Ontario College of Art and Design have announced a Handset Project, intended to “teach students how to design handsets for wireless phones that will meet the future needs of Canadian mobile users.”

The project announcement says that the most innovative and functional design will be considered by TELUS for further development and possible commercialization. Also key will be the identification of behavioural and usage trends.

Perhaps the device to emerge in 2009 will provide a way for the carriers to differentiate in an otherwise “me-too” handset market. How about comments to help include your favourite capabilities? Can we get it to include a remote starter for a car? Maybe a TV remote control?

Earlier this year, TELUS developed a phone in conjunction with Chinese manufacturer ZTE, so this would not be the carrier’s first foray into the customer handset business. OCAD has been creatively collaborating on projects that one might not normally associate with the school, including getting involved in process engineering for hospital patient flow in conjunction with the Rotman School of Business at University of Toronto.

I have an opinion piece in today’s National Post entitled “The truth on wireless” which is a collection of thoughts on a common theme that many of you have seen in my writing on this blog.

---

Update [September 28, 10:00 am]
You can access a pdf version of the OpEd here.

Earlier in the week, I wrote about a complaint by Barrett Xplore about being denied due process in an early decision emerging from CRTC’s deferral account proceeding.

Now, MTS Allstream has expressed procedural concerns about being able to cross-examine the author of a report commissioned by the CRTC in the essential services proceeding.

In a letter to interested parties, the CRTC transmitted a preliminary copy of the substantial 137 page report but said that the final version and its French language translation would be available before the beginning of October. The Commission warned that the author would not be made available for cross-examination during the hearings:

The Commission commissioned the report as input for the review of its policies for wholesale services. This is an independent report, and neither Mr. Osborne nor his firm is involved in this proceeding.

The Commission does not intend to make Mr. Osborne available for cross-examination at the hearing, but parties will be able to use the report as they see fit (such as in cross-examination of other parties’ witnesses and in the argument phase of this proceeding).

MTS Allstream has now written to the CRTC to say that it wishes to cross examine the author:

MTS Allstream is concerned that the ability to reference the report in the cross-examination of other parties’ witnesses without the ability to first test the opinions and conclusions in the report itself, could easily lead to misunderstandings and mischaracterizations of the report and, ultimately, to a lack of procedural fairness in this proceeding.

Among the items in the report that might be worth challenging is a statement in the report at paragraph 63:

the refusal to deal provision could be characterized as an essential facilities provision of a sort, as could the misuse of intellectual property provision. The remedies for misuse of intellectual property are not relevant to telecom facilities; thus I do not address them.

Would Vonage, Sprint and Verizon agree with this statement? I can think of a few other cases of IP as an essential service in telecom. Anyone else?

Fundamentally, is procedural fairness becoming a more frequent complaint to the CRTC?

---

Update [October 1, 3:00 pm]
The CRTC has now officially released the Osborne Report, available here.

Verizon Wireless, one of the world’s leading CDMA-based carriers, has thrown its support behind LTE – Long Term Evolution – for its next generation technology upgrade. LTE is part of the GSM evolution path, as contrasted with UMB – Ultra Mobile Broadband – also known as EVDO Rev C, on the CDMA path.

RCR Wireless reported on Vodafone CEO, Arun Sarin, and Verizon chairman and CEO Ivan Seidenberg, speaking about their technology choice at the Goldman Sachs Communacopia conference last week. Vodafone and Verizon control Verizon Wireless through a joint venture.

Given cross-border roaming relationships, can we begin to anticipate the implications for wireless carriers in Canada?

Once again, a bold capital investment decision from Verizon.

It seems especially fitting that this item came to my attention as privacy commissioners from around the world converge in Montreal this week for the 29th International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners, hosted by Canada’s Privacy Commissioner, Jennifer Stoddard.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, it appears that Virgin Mobile in Australia is being sued by the parents of an American teen who claim that the phone company used an image taken from Flickr, superimposed its slogans and plastered the photo on billboards and web ads.

The picture was taken by the teen’s youth counsellor, who posted it that day on his Flickr page, according to the teen’s brother. The counsellor chose a Creative Commons sharing licence that allows others to reuse the photo, if appropriate credit is given. A link to the counsellor’s Flickr site appeared at the bottom of the ad.

The case should serve as a reminder of the impact that can occur with the voluntary sharing of valuable, yet private, personal information and photos shared by individuals and their so-called friends within various social networking applications.

Technorati Tags:
privacy, Virgin Mobile, Flickr