![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes | |
|
|
||||
|
|
#1 |
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 55
|
Well the CRTC decision on the dispute resolution request is out, but I'm not sure if it really says anything... The final result seems to be "go back to the negotiation table" but please keep in mind the CRTC's feelings on vertical integration...
After reading the bureaucratic gobbledygook it looks to me like a back to square one situation. Wonder if we'll ever see Bell's newer specialty channels on some BDUs. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2012/2012-208.htm |
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |||
Advertisement | |||
|
|
#2 |
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Woodstock, Ontario
Posts: 1,058
|
Bell arguing before the Supreme Court ......lets withhold our services unless we get our price. This occurs regularity in the US and as a matter of fact currently underway with Peachtree TV HD and one of the large cable companies because no agreement reached over fees for carriage. At least one of the Supreme Court Justices watches television with her favourite programs on CTV now owned by the Big Bad Bell. A point or two in favour of the court with some members at least admitting they watched television unlike the kind folks that dominate the CRTC.
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|