[asterisk-biz] Information discovered by MTS Allstream - 911 Patent Application?

[Bob's Leaky News Service]

Firstly, Bell Canada representatives to ESWG, past and present, appear
to have acted with a lack of good faith in the process and procedures
leading up to ESRE0041 (6-month Report) and ESRE0042 (12-month
Report).  In specific, Hakem M. Habib, Bernard Brabant, and Guy Caron,
amongst other Bell Canada employees, did file United States patent
applications  on 12 November 2004 related to the delivery method of
emergency call handling in a voice-over-packet environment and
proceeded, without disclosure of their own material and intellectual
property interests or that of their employer, BCE Inc., to cause
wording and conclusions to be reached in each Report favourable to
their commercial interests.

MTS Allstream Inc. (MTS Allstream) submits that as evidenced by the
filing of patent applications by employees of Bell Canada and the
subsequent participation by some of these individuals in the process
and procedures leading up to ESRE0041 (6-month Report) and ESRE0042
(12-month Report) there is significant doubt as to whether the
contributions and comments of Bell Canada were made in good faith or
were subject to their undisclosed interests.

Rather than call for a retraction of the Reports for reconsideration
of the contents and conclusions reached, and recognizing that the
Commission has already made decisions associated with these Reports,
MTS Allstream requests that the ESWG continue its development of a
report pursuant to CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee – Consensus
report on E9-1-1 services provided to nomadic and fixed/non-native
VoIP subscribers, Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-60 (Decision 2006-60) due
by 21 March 2007 and that members treat any and all contributions and
comments made by Bell Canada suspect as to intent.

Additionally, as Decision 2006-60 continues to seek a resolution to
issues of the 6-month Report as directed in CRTC Interconnection
Steering Committee – Consensus item: Consensus report on 9-1-1/E9-1-1
services provided to fixed/non-native VoIP subscribers, Telecom
Decision CRTC 2005-73 (Decision 2005-73) MTS Allstream likewise
requests that members treat any and all contributions and comments  to
the 6-month Report made by Bell Canada suspect as to intent.

Secondly, Bell Canada representatives to ESWG, past and present,
appear to have acted with a lack of good faith in the process and
procedures leading up to their submission of a proposal of a
functional architecture for the implementation of NENA i2 in Canada.
In specific, Guy Caron, amongst other Bell Canada employees, did file
a United States patent application  on 12 June 2006 related to
emergency call handling in a voice-over-packet environment and
continued, without disclosure of their own material and intellectual
property interests or that of their employer, BCE Inc., to propose for
consideration at ESWG a solution that is manifestly proprietary to
Bell Canada.

MTS Allstream submits that as evidenced by the filing of a patent
application by employees of Bell Canada including Guy Caron and the
subsequent authorship by Guy Caron of the proposal made by Bell
Canada, TCC, SaskTel and Bell Aliant (Bell Canada et al) there is
little doubt as to whether the proposed functional architecture is
subject to the undisclosed interests of Bell Canada and therefore
likely constitutes a proprietary implementation of the NENA i2
standard as outlined in the patent application.

MTS Allstream requests that the ESWG continue its development of a
report pursuant to CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee – Consensus
report on E9-1-1 services provided to nomadic and fixed/non-native
VoIP subscribers, Telecom Decision CRTC 2006-60 (Decision 2006-60) due
by 21 March 2007 and that members treat the proposal made by Bell
Canada et al as a de facto proprietary implementation of the NENA i2
standard as modified by Bell Canada in US patent application
20060229059.