guppy_fishPremium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| True costs of the service The Bells shoulder all the true costs here. They have the copper, the C/O's the 100K employees to maintain the network and because its been around for 100 years, every taxing authority gets there little piece of the pie
Along comes VOIP, which by the way, when you add Vonage to your ISP bill, really isn't that much less when you exclude taxes, your just breaking up the service into two vendors.
VOIP is violating existing patents to interface with the PSTN network. Which, without it, is just Skype.
We all want lower prices, hence we DSL folks like VOIP, but guess what, its stolen technology, and a court and jury have ruled now , so this is fact.
If technology isn't protected, no one will invest the dollars to make it ...this is WHY the US has been such a power house of technology over the years, we have a patent system that protects the investment, without it, well do we want to me more like Mexico?
So, get over it, the party is over, time to pay for the network VOIP uses. The reason Vonage will be shutdown is with paying its fair share, its a money losing operation forever. |
|
IanR
join:2001-03-22
Madison, NJ
2 edits | Nobody is saying that the copper owners shouldn't get compensated for the part of their networks used. The question appears to be what's a fair price? I think the Judge fell off the fairness train when he equated Verizon's loss of customers to the supposed patent breaking.Even with an increase in charges to VG Verizon would still be losing customers. And it isn't the job of the Judge to hit VG with monthly charges high enough to make VG competitive again. The Judges job was to help Rule of the supposed patent infringement and a fair repatriation. He's not there to ensure Verizon rules telephony. Thus the Judges Words makes a huge hole for a VG appeal in that the Judge plainly exceeded his authority. All IMHO.
You also cannot make the broad statement that "VOIP is infringing existing patents to interface with the PSTN network". That's a massively broad statement and your interpretation only. Who says ALL VOIP is infringing patents? |
|
| reply to guppy_fish
The Bells only own the copper because for around a century they were a legalized monopoly and nobody else was allowed to build a competing infrastructure. The Bells decided they had little or no reason to innovate or otherwise compete. The biggest problem with the AT&T breakup was that there was no incentive given to the new competitors to build an infrastructure of their own rather than piggy back on the one built by the Bells. |
|
|
|
| reply to guppy_fish
On the other hand, why not move Vonage-like companies offshore?
How else will us lowly broadband users use our high speed connections when media pirating dies off?
Why continue to maintain circuit switched networks when DSL is working fine?
Seems like media is subsidizing DSL/Cable Broadband deployment....
said by guppy_fish:If technology isn't protected, no one will invest the dollars to make it ...this is WHY the US has been such a power house of technology over the years, we have a patent system that protects the investment, without it, well do we want to me more like Mexico? So, get over it, the party is over, time to pay for the network VOIP uses. The reason Vonage will be shutdown is with paying its fair share, its a money losing operation forever. |
|
 batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to dentman42
said by dentman42: The Bells decided they had little or no reason to innovate or otherwise compete I could spend my entire life correcting the erroneous statements made on this board. People believe Teletruth's B.S. and parrot it without knowing the facts.
I have a question for you, how many patents was Bell Labs granted and name some of the most important ones? |
|
 Bink63Tweet THISPremium
join:2002-10-06
Everywhere
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by dentman42: The Bells decided they had little or no reason to innovate or otherwise compete I could spend my entire life correcting the erroneous statements made on this board. People believe Teletruth's B.S. and parrot it without knowing the facts.
I have a question for you, how many patents was Bell Labs granted and name some of the most important ones?
Oh cool, a quiz!
The transistor comes to mind.
Dual Tone, Multiple Frequency is another.
How about most of the OSI network layer model?
Hmmm. |
|
batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Bink63:said by dentman42: The Bells decided they had little or no reason to innovate or otherwise compete I could spend my entire life correcting the erroneous statements made on this board. People believe Teletruth's B.S. and parrot it without knowing the facts. I have a question for you, how many patents was Bell Labs granted and name some of the most important ones? Oh cool, a quiz!
The transistor comes to mind.
Dual Tone, Multiple Frequency is another.
How about most of the OSI network layer model?
Hmmm.
The laser, coax cable, the decibel, the first transistor computer, Unix are a few more. When Bell Labs acquired a patent they had to released it into the public domain as they were a regulated monopoly. Now if Verizon has a patent they can sue Vontage into oblivion. The deregulation sword cuts both ways. |
|
