C F I C G R O U P D U N C A N B C C A N A D A.
To: Consumers Association of Canada.
Duncan March 12/2019.
To whom it may concern,
We are a small group of Canadian citizens very concerned about the way we are being treated by the institution which regulates the television operators. After having written letters to the Minister involved, we have been referred to the Canadian Radio-Television Communications Commission. This Commission is refusing to give us answers to our questions and only tells us how the system works. But our concern is that the system is based on discrimination, theft, and corruption. The CRTC is an organization which is responsible for the interest of all Canadian citizens in all television aspects. But in the conversations we had with the CRTC, the interests of broadcasters are given more importance. That’s why we feel discriminated against because our interest as television viewing citizens should have priority. In a letter we have received from the CRTC we read: broadcasters sell air time to advertisers to earn extra income. But what broadcasters are actually selling is the use of OUR private TV units as a tool for business purposes. Advertising businesses are using our belongings without permission. They are then paying these broadcasters a big amount of money. We, as TV subscribers, are then in charge of fulfilling these advertising orders given to the broadcaster by the advertiser. But that’s not all, we must pay the service providers who then force us to watch these never- ending advertisements which interrupt our pre-paid viewing time. No wonder it is a billion dollar industry, getting paid twice from advertisers and television viewers alike. Meanwhile, television subscribers are being exploited for their precious viewing time. We asked the CRTC the following questions: Are broadcasters legally allowed to rent out OUR private owned properties (TV units) to over 300 companies?. But after repeatedly asking this question, still no answer. Television viewers have become watching slaves in their own house forced to watch what big money wants us to watch. The excuse given by broadcasters is, without the income of advertising they are unable to provide programming. However, we don’t believe this is truthful. These companies taking in billions of dollars in profit per year. Is it legal to reach its profit margin by criminally exploiting their television public? We are paying $ 70,- dollars for poor TV programs of a handful of channels. We have Apple TV for zero dollars without commercials and can get Netflix for $ 10.- a month, on the other hand for $ 70.- a month why is it not possible for these Canadian broadcasters to provide programming without commercial messages? Why are we being charged to be forced to watch advertising material every five minutes interrupting our viewing time? Broadcasters are exploiting television viewers and are living off the avails of these subscribers and we want to see the end of it. We count on the Consumers Associations to bring this crime to an end. One of our group members recently bought a new TV unit. After installing it for use, he had to answer a few questions. One of the questions was: Do you agree that this unit can be used for commercial advertising? Why this question IF advertising is LEGAL? Because it isn’t. We are hoping to hear from the association soon.
SIGN UP FOR A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST BROADCASTERS. and enjoy watching TV again.
Step 1. Read first the articles about how broadcasters are using our TV devices and have turned it into a billion dollar industry for themselves.
Step 2. Sign up via e-mail to; firstname.lastname@example.org
Step 3. Calculate your part of the claim and e-mail it.
How to calculate your claim. (TV subscribers only).
How many years are you a subscriber, maximum 20 years.
How much are you paying for TV programs a month?
Claim 15% of your monthly payment, which is advertising.
EXAMPLE of a claim.
Name; J.P. Rodgers, amount of viewers; 4.
E-mail; JPR @ gmail.com
Duration; 6 years = 72 month.
Payment; $ 86 tax included.
Claim; 15% of 72 x 78 = $ 980.40.
The reference date is March 2019. When your claim becomes valid, automatically you claim will increase till that date.
To cover our court costs we ask you to donate ( but NOT required) $ 2 or more if you want but NOT at this time. We need first the required signatures.
What to e-mail to – email@example.com =
Claim $ 980.40.
Keep track on our activities by visiting our website; powercrimes.com. Please make sure we can reach you with a valid e-mail address. Changes via our website.
C F I C G R O U P D U N C A N B C C A N A D A.
To; Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission.
Re/ Combat unauthorized use of our properties. (TV Units).
Duncan February 25/2019.
To whom it may concern,
We have received a letter from the Honorable Minister of Heritage in response to our letters sent to him. We are told by the Minister, the CRTC is responsible for the advertising policy. The CRTC has the mandate to protect the interests of the Canadian TV viewers but not de financial interests of elite businesses such as broadcasters. Yet, the CRTC has given these broadcasters privileges who are harmful to us, not only as viewers but as TV unit owners as well. We have bought our devices for entertainment purposes but not to be used as a tool for making money by others. The selling of our airtime by broadcasters to commercial companies for advertising is unacceptable for us. We have very grounded reasons for it, which you already hold in your possession. It’s time for action and we want it soon because it is very long overdue.
We D E M A N D immediately a ban on the sale of airtime to companies for TV advertising and a ban on putting commercial ads on OUR screens by broadcasters and service providers.
Description of product: The sale of the use of other people’s properties. Status; Illegal, a violating of Canadian Law.
Availability: None, this airtime has already been sold to TV subscribers. Taking it away from subscribers and sell it to advertisers is theft. Than broadcasters accept orders from advertisers to put it back on OUR screens. We, the subscriber is exactly doing what the advertiser want. We, the subscribers are doing exactly where the advertiser is paying for, but the money goes in the wrong direction. We, the watch slaves are getting nothing, we even have to pay these thieves for OUR effort resulting in double pay for the culprits. All possible with the support of the CRTC. What we want to point out to the commission is, If the ban is not put in place, the commission is co-responsible to the crimes committed by broadcasters and therefore become partners in this crime.
The ban has to be in effect by March 9/2019.
On March 9/2019, we are turning a black page over into history.
On March 9, we are no longer being forced to participate in the criminal activities of broadcasters/service providers and advertisers.
On March 9, we are again the sole owner of our house and TV sets.
Failing to protect the interest of TV owners will result in repaying of the funds by class action Lawsuit. These funds are obtained through the illegal use of people’s properties. We estimate the illegal sale of the use of our properties at 12.6 billion dollars. Our part will be used to fight poverty in Canada and eliminating food banks, a black spot in the image of the most beautiful country in the world. Our color should be pure gold but is overshadowed by greed and domination of elite companies like broadcasters. We will no longer be forced by broadcasters to work for them for free, or even have to pay them for our participation. We will now force them to find a way to do business the honest and right way by not using people’s houses, TV sets or themselves as a centerpiece of their advertising business. It is NOT our business. But when it comes to a confrontation, we want an explanation of why we are involved in their advertising business. We are outsiders but forced to be insiders. Abuse of power, a violation of the Antitrust Law.
Additional letter. Duncan February 26/2019.
To whom it may concern,
The CRTC has given broadcasters permission to sell airtime to advertisers. The CRTC is responsible for that decision. Advertisers are buying airtime for the following reasons, the temporary use of people’s TV units and the attention of people to see and listen to their message. Fact is, broadcasters are selling a product they cannot provide, we, the subscribers are providing that. They are receiving a huge amount of money for an article they don’t have. But that’s not all. After forcing subscribers to perform the order from advertisers, the subscribers are being forced to pay for their own performance, providing broadcasters with another extra income. Is the CRTC aware of their responsibility? We think is time for reconsideration. The CRTC has the obligation to treat everyone whom they represent in an equal manner. Placing an elite group of broadcasters in an advantaged (illegal) position of domination and business opportunities is a very serious form of discrimination where the CRTC will be held responsible. Commercial TV advertising is a deal between broadcasters/service providers and advertisers. The CRTC will have to provide a statement explaining why we have to accept the negative effects of that business agreement. (article of Canadian Law).
We have received a returning letter from the Minister of Heritage and we have responded with the following letter on February 28/2019.
We have received your letter of February 5 /2019 and are delighted to read that the Canadian Government is a strong proponent of choices for Canadian customers. We have in our letters to you, clearly outlined what our choice is. We want to be liberated from an unreal and unjust circumstance in which we found ourselves. We are the victims of a business deal between broadcasters and advertising companies. In that deal, both parties have agreed that we, as completely outsiders are in charge to execute the contents of that agreement between these two parties. We, as executors of this illegal deal are receiving a “bonus” for our participation, we have to pay for the work we have done. A worse form of exploitation is hardly imaginable. We understand that the CRTC, who is responsible for this policy, is doing the groundwork for you but when it comes to decision making, you dear Minister is in charge. We believe that you are not following the path the Minister of Justice took, but support the interest of the citizens of this beautiful country called Canada
C F I C G R O U P D U N C A N B C C A N A D A.
To; Office of the President Rogers Communication.
Duncan February 18/2019.
To whom it may concern,
We thank you for the letter we received from Rogers, dated February 1/ 2019. However, first, we want to make a statement. Most companies in the world are following the business model of honesty, integrity, and respect, regarding the legal rights of sellers who want to sell the products they want, and for buyers to buy the products they want. But businesses like yours are having different rules, they handle with dominance, oppression, misinformation, and violation of the Law.
Regarding your letter, we have the following to say. Yes, we own the TV set. However, Rogers doesn’t own the signal. Rogers is using the signal to transport programs to customers. There are many broadcasters who are using that signal, as well as service providers. We, the owners of TV sets, are just ordinary buyers of a chosen program. We have nothing to do with regulations, these regulations are affecting only the businesses who are selling the programs. We as customers have the legal right to buy what we want. Nobody has the right to force people to buy only what the seller wishes to sell. Broadcasters are selling programs to us and selling advertising time to advertisers, not to us. Customers are being forced to watch advertising. Advertisers buy airtime from broadcasters. Advertisers then own that bought airtime. Then broadcasters get orders from those advertisers to put that advertising material on OUR screens. In fact, advertisers give broadcasters the order to digitally trespass into our house and make OUR TV set unusable for the purpose we bought it for. Broadcasters are guilty of trespassing and intentionally making our devices unusable for our own viewing pleasure because they occupy our viewing time with their commercial advertising to increase their own profits. Knowing that over 250 companies are buying airtime from broadcasters like Rogers, they must own a huge amount of that airtime. Wondering how they have obtained that huge amount of airtime and how it ends up on our screens. What we know for sure, we, the customers, have not sold any airtime to anyone. We also know that every hour of airtime we have purchased from a service provider is being inundated with commercial messages. Only advertisers have a financial interest in converting programming into commercial messages, but we, customers don’t have any monetary dealings with advertisers. We know the CRTC and broadcasters are allowing the theft of our viewing/airtime by putting that converted content on our screens.We didn’t buy it, we don’t want it. We, the customers/TV unit owners are expecting programming. We do not accept commercial content which only benefits the seller of that commercial content or the buyer of that content. Which television viewer in their right mind would pay for airtime on which limits reasonable viewing time to benefit corporations (broadcasters and advertisers) without compensation to said television viewer/owner? We are not employed by broadcasters nor advertisers, yet clearly we television viewers/owners are being exploited. There is no justice to be found why broadcasters or advertisers allow themselves to be placed in a favored position. You wrote; TV and radio broadcasters are permitted to sell airtime to advertisers to earn revenue. Does that mean we have to accept being inundated with commercial advertising every five to ten minutes? Must we buy so-called programming and added content? Does the Law say we are required to buy it? We want Rogers to proof with the article of Law that we have to accept commercial advertising on our screens. The real advertising time sold by Rogers to advertisers is ending up on our screens. Rogers is selling it a second time as programming to customers, who are actually executing the sale of that airtime. That’s a double dip! No wonder it is a billion dollar industry based in our view on theft. We, the TV viewers/customers are the executors, while Rogers and others are receiving the monetary profits. This is clearly a misuse of corporate power, and a violation of the Antitrust Law. Furthermore, you wrote, Rogers is not providing Cable TV in BC. Yet Rogers is advertising on our screens, taking away valuable watching time and refuse to compensate us as TV unit owners. Rogers is depriving us of watching what we want to watch and is violating our rights. Rogers is selling airtime to the likes of Ford, Nissan, and major banking institutions, but also buying airtime to put their message on our screens. In their correspondence letter, Rogers suggest reading the CRTC primer to understand how advertising works in Canada. But that is not relevant to us because we know exactly how it works. We are the victims of the entire scheme. Is not the television viewers viewing time being exploited? This is a clear indication there is something wrong. The reason is clear, it is content nobody wants to buy, but it is forced upon the TV viewing public. After so many years of wrongdoing, it’s time for real change. It will come. We are waiting, but not very long to receive from Rogers the proof, that we, as owners/ TV viewers have the legal obligations to accept their commercial messages on our screens as a requirement to obtain TV programming.
CFIC Group Duncan BC.
To; The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez, Minister of Heritage Canada.
Duncan January 31/2019.
Dear Minister Rodriguez,
In our two previous letters, we have asked you, not to admit commercial advertising on our TV units anymore. To date, you have not met our request and we have not received a reason for rejection. Commercial advertisement is totally focused on obtaining financial benefits but is harmful to people who are being forced to watch them on their screens. Those who place these ads have no respect for the rights and desires of people upon whom they impose their will. We have very good reasons for the request we have made. Advertisers have only money in mind. It is inhumane that we as TV unit owners are deprived of our freedom of choice, while the robbers are awarded tax deduction for their misappropriation. We request that our rights be recognized and protected by our representatives. The reasons for our request are as follows;
1/ The starting process for advertising is illegal. 2/ Abuse of power in the process. 3/ Harassment and harmful. 4/ Violating our property rights. 5/ Abuse of the intended purpose. 6/ Discriminatory. 7/ living off the avails of others.
Explanation of the above # mentioned.
1/ The intention of the advertiser is to place the advertisement on the devices of TV unit owners. The advertiser ignores the TV unit owner, instead, he contacts a company that has the opportunity to place the advertisement on the TV owners units. That company requests payment for placing that material on the TV owners devices yet has not obtained permission from the owners of these devices. Which means, that company is illegally selling the use of the units of the owners, called in legal terms, misappropriation, what is according to the Law comparable to theft.
2/ Advertisers are fully aware of the fact that they do not own the devices they want to use for their advertisement. By ignoring the legal rights from other people’s possessions, they are showing to be above the law and are looking down on the people they exploit for their illegal business enterprise.
3/ TV unit owners have the legal right to use their possessions for the purpose they bought it for, and the legal right not to be deprived of that purpose. While using their devices TV unit owners are constantly interrupted by companies who have illegally bought time from other sources which are causing these interruptions. This is a serious form of harassment, the destruction of pleasure. A financial harmful effect is, TV viewers are paying for these ads since the cost of advertising is added into the final purchase price of the advertised articles.
4/ Nobody has the legal right to use, to rent out or to make available other people’s possessions without permission of the rightful owners.
5/ Advertisers and broadcasters are guilty of abuse of the intended purpose of people’s TV devices. Nobody in the entire world has bought a TV unit set with the intention to allow it to be used as a commercial tool by companies involved in the advertising business. The TV devices are being illegally requisitioned for that purpose.
6/ Only financial powerful companies are able to afford TV advertising ( if it was legal ). This harms small businesses who are unable to carry these costs. Small companies are unable to increase their prices to cover the advertising costs thus putting them in a disadvantageous position. We have to witness the battle between big companies who are trying to get other companies customers and we are forced to listen to the arguments to get them.
7/ Broadcasters, service providers and advertisers are all living off the avails of TV unit owners who have to bear the oppression and abuse of power played out by this sinister business model.
This all, dear Minister, for the love of money from a handful people who have already too much and yet seem to never have enough.
You, dear Minister, have the responsibility for an honest media policy, while commercial advertising, as we have explained to you is not honest. It is oppressing an entire nation, it is harassing an entire nation, and the entire nation wants you to get rid of it. It doesn’t belong in our house. For many people, TV is the only source of entertainment. Think about the lonely, the sick, the elderly to name a few, who must suffer every 5 /10 minutes from interruptions because big money wants more! If you, dear Minister have still any sense of justice in mind, you will grant our request and take action to stop it.
( Broadcasters are making billions of dollars by using other people’s assets )
On November 26 / 2013 Rogers Communications and the N H L reached an agreement for a whopping 5.232 billion dollar deal for broadcasting all the NHL hockey games. This agreement was for the most part based on commercial advertising during these hockey games. In one season there are 2542 regular hockey games, approximately 150 preseason games and an additional 200 (more or less) playoff games. On every televised hockey game of 3 hours, viewers are facing between 70 to 80 commercial messages from different companies some more than once. Over an entire season, 200 thousand commercial ads are put on people’s TV screens. Companies who are buying TV time are paying thousands of dollars for their ads, which price depends on the length of the message. The amount of money Rogers is making surpasses many times the amount Rogers is paying the N H L. For Rogers, it is a real money maker! What the N H L is doing with the money is unclear, all the hockey teams have their own income and expenses and even pay for their compulsory membership to the N H L organization. In this deal the N H L is the seller, Rogers Communications is the buyer. The N H L as sellers know very well why Rogers wants this deal (advertising) and the asking price is based on it. When commercial advertising was not involved, the price was way lower maybe 10 million dollars or less. It is clear, commercial advertising is at the heart of the big deal. Now we come to the point why is this huge deal a hidden crime, made in secrecy.? AS a TV viewer, do you have any connection related to this Roger/N H L agreement? We are certain the answer is NO. Now we are going back to the bargaining tables, on one side the NHL on the other side the Rogers negotiators talking about the games and commercial messages putting on TV screens. After they have agreed on the selling price, the “product” is ready to put on screens. But now they are facing a big problem because they don’t have any screen to use. The screens they want them to put on are OUR screens. Selling hockey games and secretly add the other product to it is against the Law called tied selling. Making deals based on the use of other peoples properties without permission from the owners of these properties (TV units ) is against the Law and compared to theft. Broadcasters like Rogers, have to ask permission to use peoples properties for articles they don’t sell, but they don’t do that because not any TV viewer wants to buy commercial advertising or will give permission to put ads on their screens. They just put it on our screens telling people the big lie, we need it for programming, their program, big profits. ( huge bonuses ) We at CFIC Group are committed ending this misuse of people properties and will do everything it takes to succeed in our efforts.
Please scroll down and read the letters we wrote to the Government.
Comments (appreciated ) to; firstname.lastname@example.org
WHY ACTION CLEAN SCREEN.
And how we are making media criminals rich.
To get a better understanding about Action Clean Screen we like to share a real story with you. A landlord who wanted to maintain his rental house was looking for the service of a painter to paint it inside and out. When he made a deal with someone to do the job the house just became vacant. When the painter started the job, a few hours later someone was knocking on the door. When he opened the door there was a couple who want to rent the house because there was a little sign in the window saying; house for rent. The painter told them, come in and have look. It will be painted and ready in 2 months. After they saw the entire house they told the painter they are very interested and wanted to make agreements. The painter told them, the rent was $ 1000.- and $ 500.- damage deposit to be paid after signing the documents who were ready to sign the next day. The couple agreed to sign and pay the next day. To make the story short, in one week he was able to rent out the place 12 more times and took off with the money. Not long after that he was arrested for theft and jailed for a long time.
End of story.
If you have requested the service from a service provider like Telus, Bell, Shaw or Rogers, you have given them access to your home for the service you have ordered. But long before they have obtained access to your home, they have already made agreements with other customers ( business owners ) to rent out YOUR privately owned TV units for advertising purposes. They kept the money from that ( theft ) like the painter did. Renting out other peoples assets (property) even without money involved is a serious crime, a criminal act. This ongoing theft is recently reported to the Government but it looks like the Minister involved is protecting these criminals which seriously undermines the Rule of Law.