how-to block ads
|
|
view: topics flat text |
|
Comments on news posted 2003-08-19 18:27:36: As VoIP technology continues to evolve and gain popularity, the sector begins to bump into law enforcement agencies and eager state regulators. ..
|
  technickPremium
join:2000-12-16
Wheat Ridge, CO
kudos:1
| Reminds Me Of... quote:
Meanwhile, in what could become a common battle in every state, Vonage has been accused of operating without proper certification as a phone company by the Minnesota PUC. Since Vonage is not a phone company, regulators have no authority. As predicted by Jeff Pulver some time ago, you can expect these state regulatory battles to multiply exponentially....
This reminds me of a bunch of snarling pack wolfs trying to get the last piece of meat...
So my final opinion is they are crap =)
[text was edited by author 2003-08-19 19:24:08] | |
|  oliphant5Got Identity?Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA | State regulators State regulators...worthless whores only interested in stealing more money from the taxpayers. There is NO END to the greed of government. | |
| | | | Re: State regulators Just like the old saying "baseball is for kids, grownups only screw it up" now we can add VOIP is for anyone with a BB connection and the regulators are tossing monkey wrenches around.
--
Click here to visit Tri-City Broadband | |
| |  jhudson2Copyright Martyr
join:2000-11-07
San Marcos, CA | My goodness.
Is there really NO END at all? None? Will the whores get our souls too? | |
| | | oliphant5Got Identity?Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA | Re: My goodness. If they can get it past 2/3 of the legislature, sure. | |
|
hroo772Darkness Fears MePremium
join:2002-04-05
Mclean, VA | horrible They should stop crying over spilt milk this is a load a BS and they should stop winning about voip that is so much better then outdated PTSN.
--
For custom gaming computers head to www.asylumpc.com check us out! | |
| yabos
join:2003-02-16
London, ON | Not the problem Do they really think that people who were up to no good would use an unencrypted VOIP connection that goes through a central server where it could be recorded?
Anyone who would want to use VOIP would have a direct p2p link between the 2 ends and encrypt the hell out of it. | |
| | | | Re: Not the problem Then you would put the local phone company out of business, we need a land line phone if you got VOIP. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon Broadban..
| grr At this point VOIP is still in the baby stage of life. Having all the reg's imposed on these new company's will kill off any interest in further deploymnet. But then again with the FCC being totaly bought out via the ILEC's this really doesn't suprise me.
ym | |
| | |  if we can:
| |
| rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | Regulation Free VOIP Although it's futile, I do hope that VOIP remains free of regulation. What troubles me is that they are hinging their "not a phone company" status on the fact that one's voice is digitized into "data packets" and that they simply act as a router of these packets between two end points.
Don't the digital cellular networks do the same thing? Don't all of our voices at one point get digitized over the PSTN?
After reading Vonage's troubles in MN, I do have to agree that they don't operate any business in MN. They are simply a reseller of competitive local exchange carrier endpoints to the PSTN. They don't operate a switch in any state, as far as I know.
It will be interesting if the ILECs offer VOIP and seek regulatory freedom. Will we cry foul? | |
| | | | Re: Regulation Free VOIP said by rradina:
Don't the digital cellular networks do the same thing? Don't all of our voices at one point get digitized over the PSTN?
Yes they do.
I agree with you, what is getting Vonage is that they offer residential users dialtone and a PSTN number that a standard telephone uses. Its pure BS to say this isnt telecommunications service.
MN said they didnt care what the technology behind this was, you and the callee used a telephone so......its telecommunications. I see most people seeing this way. In addition in order to provide dialtone in most states you must be certified by the State, even if you dont own a switch. Because VoIP is information service, these rules dont apply.
Now I am all for VoIP, but they cant expect to always not have to play by certain rules. This will be the subject of lots of debate, not just for Vonage but for telephony as a whole. | |
| | | | | Re: Regulation Free VOIP said by clecrupt9:
said by rradina:
Don't the digital cellular networks do the same thing? Don't all of our voices at one point get digitized over the PSTN?
Yes they do.
I agree with you, what is getting Vonage is that they offer residential users dialtone and a PSTN number that a standard telephone uses. Its pure BS to say this isnt telecommunications service.
MN said they didnt care what the technology behind this was, you and the callee used a telephone so......its telecommunications. I see most people seeing this way. In addition in order to provide dialtone in most states you must be certified by the State, even if you dont own a switch. Because VoIP is information service, these rules dont apply.
Now I am all for VoIP, but they cant expect to always not have to play by certain rules. This will be the subject of lots of debate, not just for Vonage but for telephony as a whole.
Bull$hit -
So next time I make an MPG message for my mommy and send it VIA email it should be regulated?
What of video-teleconfrencing?
Murdok610 | |
| | | |
| Re: Regulation Free VOIP said by murdok6100:
said by clecrupt9:
Bull$hit -
So next time I make an MPG message for my mommy and send it VIA email it should be regulated?
What of video-teleconfrencing?
Murdok610
Email, teleconferencing, video conferencing, arent provided as replacement of your landline. You can't lump all voip into one category, neither can the regulators.
The problem is that hybrid IP providers are 50% at least just like the telephone company. You use a standard telephone, you get standard dialtone, get a standard 164 address(phone number), and your calls route to and through the PSTN, unless its CPE to CPE.
People arent stupid, what I have described is telecommunications, be it an advanced version or not.
Also with email, messenger, ect you arent using a telephone or telephone numbers. The funny thing is that the only reason Vonage and the others use telephone numbers is that we are all so used to them, most people wouldnt use a devise for talking unless it has a key pad. SIP(the protocol of choice) will allow you to dial by something similar to an email address. If you dialed by an address it would be even harder to regulate that, as it looks less like telecommunications.
Weather these companies that provide that are to be certified as competitive exchanges, I dont know. But what broadband phone is and Free world dialup, or Net2phone calling card are, is three different things. I dont think pure VoIP will get regulated, but hybrid might. Even if it does become regulated, it doesnt mean the end of the low costs calling world.
[text was edited by author 2003-08-21 10:15:58] | |
|
| | Does no one else have a problem with this? said by Article:
...the FBI has already been working closely with hardware manufacturers to make their products "surveillance friendly". Companies like MetaSwitch have been working with the FBI...
Translation: Hacker friendly.
What a great idea, lets punch a hole in router security to allow anyone to listen in. Carnivore isn't enough?
I have a REAL problem with this. I rely on Cisco and other router manufacturers to act in MY best interest, to have the number one goal of protection MY data. Not to appease the idiots at the FBI who are not willing ot sort through the complete packet captures Carnavore gives them just to hear the local drug dealer's call to his mom.
--
AMD XP2500+ @2520mhz/ Asus A7N8X Deluxe rev 1.04/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC3500/ WD 800JB 80Gb on serial/ Gainward GF4 4600/ Enermax 465P-VE/Custom water cooler | |
| | | | Re: Does no one else have a problem with this? You know, I was thinking "so what if FBI wants an ability to listen in on calls that they legally got a soupena for (however you spell that)."
Then you bring this up...
very very good point...
Case in point, the Bells are very 'loose' on people using the phone system illegally. Freakers, as those who hack the phone system, call themselves use multiple means.
My parents were recently a part of a tiny scam. They recieved a call from their phone company (MCI, yah... I know they are already under investigation), asking if they would accept the charges for an "Adriana". Well it was close enough to a name within the family, and being as my parents were half awake, they accepted, and the phone hung up.
They had just been a victem of 3rd party charging. A retarded insecure POS allowed by the phone company.
To make the story better...
Same call, next night. Parents more alert, asked the operator, where is it comming from they ask. First response "I cant tell you that", er what? My parents say, the hell you cant, we are paying for it. So they say "Phone booth in..." a town they live next to...
Ok, wheres it going to "I cant tell you that"... ER WHAT? Again my parents stated the fact they are paying for it and they are calling the police after this. So the phone company says some where in California. Not specific at all.
Then my parents state, I want to speak to a supervisor, then click...
o_O Im really wanting the # they called... because, well I wont go into what Im going to do.
Anyways, I guess, regardless of what they do, there is always a way.
--
guycad: It may take you days and large clumps of hair to get it to work,CyberSchnook:I am so screwed--I haven't had large clumps of hair for years.  | |
| | |  DakineA Happy CamperPremium
join:2000-03-26
Honolulu, HI | Re: Does no one else have a problem with this? If the phone company wants to legally collect from your parents they must list the number of the party that requested your parents to accept the charges. You may then legally pursue this now known party in SMALL claims court, unless it is over a specified dollar amount. If it is a Interstate call then you may also submit a request to the FCC or state PUC office to investigate further for you since your parents pay the PUC fees to the State and Federal government monthly. I would pursue this just to get the FCC, FTC, and State regulatory agencies off their hands or was that rectums, either way use these agencies. They have about 20 or 30 fraud teams of investigators at each level. If you do not use it expect the scam to continue. Once the phone company has to go to court for these third party scams they will remove this and like type services to eliminate the cost of having to maintain a large legal staff IMHO.
--
Surfs Up!!!! GBA | |
|
| Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
| I'm less concerned that the FBI wants to "able" to tap in. Its not like they would know what to do with the data anyway. However my big fear here is when states see this as the next BIG cash cow which by the look of it MN is already there. Its going to drive the cost up to the point where we are with the ILEC's. We all know that the ILEC's don't want VOIP around and I don't really think that Vonage and P8 really have that many lines even compared to even a small phone company but I think what their most scared of is if VOIP really takes off then they are going to need to replace their current PSTN setup. That will cost a massive amount of money and lost ROI. Then again the good side of them having to replace that side of their network is it would create more jobs, actually it would create a ton of jobs.
So we have the Gov and states wanting to cash in. And you have the bells wanting not to "change" like thats anything new.
If MN wins then I think we can pretty much bet that the cost of VOIP will go sky high, and the compianes that have built VOIP networks will end up in the red.
Note to goverment - VOIP is to young for you to cash in. Give it 5 or so years.
ym | |
|
| | Cable & Phone Companies want to sue VOIP providers I have said this over and over.
If you can get VOIP classified as a phone company and subject to phone company or broadband regulations.. then you can sue them.
What will probably happen is the VOIP companies will link with the Broadband companies so that they can get a "safe Haven".
This is step one in a very major plan to control VOIP by the "Big fellas"
I wouldn't buy VOIP stock.. least it be subject to the same game that @Home was.. got ran out by the cable companies.
--
I'm a Cable girl.. In a Cable World.....RedStepChild@dslr.net | |
| | | | Re: Cable & Phone Companies want to sue VOIP providers We know you have said this over and over - you've been "the voice of doom and gloom" in the VoIP forum on several occasions. The problem is that you always think about the worst possible outcome and then jump to the conclusion that this is what WILL happen. I'm not sure what your agenda is, or if you even have one, but please remember that none of this has yet gone to the courts, which I think might be just a tad reluctant to stifle an emerging technology for any of the reasons discussed so far.
Remember, VoIP WILL continue to exist as long as the Internet does. The only question is what form it will take. | |
|
 PoopsmithThat's Mr. Smith To You.
join:2003-03-12
Boulder, CO | Long live Voip Something about having something in common with terrorists excites me | |
| | | It's about choice Vonage is another choice for the consumer. They are not forcing themselves on the customer. I have decided not to use Vonage's service at this time; my neighbor has Vonage and seems perfectly satisfied.
LEAVE VOIP ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
|
| |
|
