Vonage to Fight Regulation > Grrrr

reply to gpancner

VoIP Industry needs to answer some questions

said by lestat99:

---

If VoIP is to ever take significant market share from traditional telecom, we must as an industry propose a solution to these problems to insure that VoIP doesn't go the way of Napster.

---

reply to lestat99
"First we can't dismiss the concept of Universal Service. Universal Service has been upheld by numerous courts over the years and is certainly not going to go away for VoIP. This issue is that those in remote rural areas have the same right at the same cost to telephone service as those in highly dense urban environments. Also who supplies phone service to those below the poverty line that obviously can't afford broadband??"

Well thats a good point there. Vonage and other VOIP providers can say simple oh wellllll. Thats what makes VOIP so differnt from a CLEC. Hell even the ILEC's ssy ohwell to the poverty, that live in east bubble *&*(. with broadband.

Plus we all know the USF has been a slush fund for the ILEC's for YEARS and it really needs to go. It will never happen but hell atleast I said it.

You know I was just looking through my Cell bill just to guess what would happen if say MN PUC wins its fight and reg's Vonage.

My cell bill has close to 40 dollars on it of nothing more than TAX!!!. Now lets take that and apply it to say vonages 40 dollars unlimited plan. Yup you did you math right its 80 bucks. At the price range Guess what. The ILEC's pricing is about 11.50 cheaper.

Really makes you wonder just how dirty the RBOC's are willing to play to kill the little guy, oh and at the same time begging for more relaxed reguation for themselves.

At some point this will all end up in court or god forbid congress and FCC. The two places that have the least forthsight on tech and for alot of them how to even turn on a computer much less have any clue what VOIP is. All they will here is that CHA CHING in their wasted minds and vote to reg VOIP. Its sad but if it gets that far I'm almost postive it will happen.

ym

reply to clecrupt9
But I think the mistake that Vonage and others are making is taking the stance of "hey where not a phone" leave us alone. Entering into discussions to resolve these and other issues is the only way to insure the long term survival of VoIP. There is always a middle ground.

While none of us like "surcharges" on our VoIP bill I am also sure that none of us would like to have 911 service go away especially that one time you may need it.

Universal Access is also something that has to be provided for the good of the society as a whole. This is not a technical issue but a financial issue.

IMHO, Vonage should add these fees to the bill and move on.
--
Info Network Security:»www.packetdefense.com

reply to youngmoore
I think that there is a middle ground here.

VoIP should be the impetus to point out the problems with the current system and how things are financed. Problem is that none of the VoIP providers are even recognizing these issues. The "we are not a phone" argument is doomed to loose. Have you read this:

»www.puc.state.mn.us/docs/briefin···0096.pdf

Vonage's argument is very weak to say the least.

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable fee for universal service and 911. I agree with you however that the current tax structure has a significant amount of waste built in and needs to be addressed.
--
Info Network Security:»www.packetdefense.com

reply to youngmoore

said by youngmoore:

---

My cell bill has close to 40 dollars on it of nothing more than TAX!!!. Now lets take that and apply it to say vonages 40 dollars unlimited plan. Yup you did you math right its 80 bucks. At the price range Guess what. The ILEC's pricing is about 11.50 cheaper.

---

Vonage + TAX          = ILEC + $11.50
       - TAX                          - TAX
             - $11.50        - $11.50
-------------------------------------------
Vonage       - $11.50 = ILEC          - TAX

think you might have miss understood me there.
I said I had about 40 in tax on my cell bill,

Where Vonage makes good is all the features that you get that are all bundled in for either 25.99 for local and 500 min LD or 40 for unlimited.

If you put all those features on a telco line plus LD it cost ALOT more money. Plus you have people that don't want to have anything to do with a ILEC, maybe from bad CS or over billing or pick one. Those people can simple "if they have cable HSI" add a phone line at a low cost.

ym

reply to lestat99
I agree the is a middle point. People are more concerned with there being "no going back" once any State or Federal agency steps in on VoIP. Perhaps there are problems with the act of regulation itself independent to VoIP. (I'm guessing some agreements will follow that one).

I think today, if I had to I could get 911 solved without the center ever knowing you called from Vonage. Any VoIP provider including ones that dont touch the PSTN could use this. But if the Government forces these companies to offer 911 exactly like Bell does, they almost have to change the name and start a new company. Its that drastic of an action.

reply to lestat99

said by lestat99:

---

(snip)
First we can't dismiss the concept of Universal Service. Universal Service has been upheld by numerous courts over the years and is certainly not going to go away for VoIP. This issue is that those in remote rural areas have the same right at the same cost to telephone service as those in highly dense urban environments. Also who supplies phone service to those below the poverty line that obviously can't afford broadband??
(snip)

---

reply to youngmoore

said by youngmoore:

---

think you might have miss understood me there.
I said I had about 40 in tax on my cell bill,

Where Vonage makes good is all the features that you get that are all bundled in for either 25.99 for local and 500 min LD or 40 for unlimited.

If you put all those features on a telco line plus LD it cost ALOT more money. Plus you have people that don't want to have anything to do with a ILEC, maybe from bad CS or over billing or pick one. Those people can simple "if they have cable HSI" add a phone line at a low cost.

ym

---

•If Vonage is offering services competitive to regulated telco services, on what basis should it be exempt from the legal requirement to include the various charges attached by law to regulated telco services?
•If VoIP vendors are exempted from these charges, on what basis do we not exempt traditional ILECs?
•If Vonage does include these various charges, is it still a compelling alternative to traditional ILEC offerings?
•If VoIP vendors are exempted from the burdens of supporting 911 and other mandated services, how do we as a society ensure the viability of these systems?
•Given that viable telecommunications can literally be a matter of life or death at times, if Vonage and other VoIP vendors can only guarantee as much uptime as a particular ISP, will increased use of VoIP bring additional responsibility to ISPs to ensure 24x7x365 availability?

Ok here goes

1. Now what exists is a classification of information service. Email is information service therefore un regulated. Because one or more call legs is IP the case of information service is made. correct ot not, I make no judgment.

2.Ilecs are common carriers, state certified utilities and own a "plant" with "loop". VoIP is none of above.

3.In my mind, yes and very much so.

4. Innovation happens daily because of markets with VoIP, not government. I assure you that 911 will not only work with VoIP, someone will make it all the better.

5.I point out that the Ilec makes no such claim, nor holds any liability to 911. Read the Ilec 9-1-1 tariff in your state.

You should see this thread »The Battle for VoIP in the US

reply to pkust
This gives rise in my mind to several questions:

1)If Vonage is offering services competitive to regulated telco services, on what basis should it be exempt from the legal requirement to include the various charges attached by law to regulated telco services?
a)One factor is that the company and for that matter tech has only been "really" main stream for a year. Its been in the smaller Devlopmental stages until now. What would have happend if we did the same thing to ATT with no grants and slapped taxes on them and the taxpers? I can tell you that the ILEC's we see now wouldn't be around either at all or not as they are.

b)Vonage is a privetly held company

c)Since VOIP rides on data not copper thats another one.

2) If VoIP vendors are exempted from these charges, on what basis do we not exempt traditional ILECs?
a)Gov grants, right of ways, deployment grants USF slush funds FCC charge funds etc etc etc. All those go right back into the ILEC's pocket to use for whatever they wish. Humm bob think I will buy a new BMW today the I got last week just isn't doing it for me anymore <sarcasm>

3)If Vonage does include these various charges, is it still a compelling alternative to traditional ILEC offerings?
a)Only to those I would think that don't like the ILEC's, others can add there own reasons.

4)If VoIP vendors are exempted from the burdens of supporting 911 and other mandated services, how do we as a society ensure the viability of these systems?
a)The current pay they get via your cell and telo bill pays for it now.

Given that viable telecommunications can literally be a matter of life or death at times, if Vonage and other VoIP vendors can only guarantee as much uptime as a particular ISP, will increased use of VoIP bring additional responsibility to ISPs to ensure 24x7x365 availability?
a)One would hope but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
b) even a T1 or DS3 to a gov agency only has a SLA for 99.7% and your lucky if you see that.

c)Again VOIP is just now coming out to main stream. If the gov chooses to jump down their throats and tax them then I don't see any VOIP staying around long enough to really devlop and grow.
Think of it another way. What if you being the tax man walked up to the write bothers and said ok I'm going to tax you for every foot you fly and then I'm going to tax you for all the time you don't fly. Its kinda like that VOIP is a great "service" but its not anything close to what the ILEC's have.

d)Per the MN PUC they state that vonage has 40,000 lines active. Thats really not allot of lines if you think about it. Bellsouth alone in some tiny town here in Ga has that much.

e)Another example is VPN. When MS first started talking about it we were all like ya we need that etc etc
and then the ILEC's got well "upset" cause it would, to a point kill off their frame relay cash cow. The gov didn't reg VPN and now we have a great service that even the novice can setup and enjoy. We on the busniess side can cut costs by not having to just frame relay anymore etc. But what would have happend if the Gov did step per the ILEC's request and taxed it or tried to something in the way that hindered the devlopment of VPN at the time? We probley wouldn't have it.

I mean really this list can go on and on with different was of looking at it but at this point I think for MN PUC its all about the green they see with regualting VOIP in their state.

Ok so thats all i got can say I'm just to tired at this point. Other feel free to chim in with pro and cons

ym
Spell check SO not included

reply to pkust

said by pkust:

---

I understood you quite well.

My point is that a significant portion of the pricing advantage for Vonage over the typical ILEC are all the charges it does not have to include on the bill. That is an artificial phenomenon that is a consequence of the regulatory landscape and not due to any particular structural efficiency of VoIP.

---

reply to n2jtx

said by n2jtx:

---

The real solution is to eliminate this whole concept of "Universal Service" and let the market forces come into play. If you live in a rural area, you are going to pay more for service but what you save in urban property taxes and lower home prices as well as the quality of life (ie. crime, pollution, density) is the trade-off.

---

reply to youngmoore

said by youngmoore:

---

I said I had about 40 in tax on my cell bill

---

Taxes
Federal Tax 3.92
Cobb County Sales Tax - Services & Usage 1.20
Georgia State Sales Tax - Services & Usage 4.90
Georgia State Sales Tax - Non-Telecom 0.58
Cobb County Sales Tax - Non-Telecom 0.14
Cobb County Wireless 911 Surcharge 3.00
Surcharges & Fees
Federal Universal Service Fund 2.91
Federal E911 1.20
Federal Wireless Number Pooling And Portability 3.30
Taxes, and Surcharges & Fees 2.58
13.71
Total 37.44

reply to lestat99
"First we can't dismiss the concept of Universal Service. Universal Service has been upheld by numerous courts over the years and is certainly not going to go away for VoIP. This issue is that those in remote rural areas have the same right at the same cost to telephone service as those in highly dense urban environments. Also who supplies phone service to those below the poverty line that obviously can't afford broadband??"

All those ancient regulations should be eliminated, the sooner the better.

reply to n2jtx

said by n2jtx:

---

The real solution is to eliminate this whole concept of "Universal Service" and let the market forces come into play.

---

reply to lestat99
I looked at the briefing page, and I'm SHOCKED.

First, the Staff uses an "imaginary" conversation with Vonage (their own description of it!) to justify the action here. Heck, if that constitutes "evidence", I'll imagine a conversation with the Staff in which Staff says "since we really like the Qwest lobbyists and they give us hams & whiskey at Christmas, we're going to do their bidding here and shut Vonage down." It wouldn't be evidence, but I guess it passes the Staff test for validity.

Second, MCI, to its credit (and perhaps recalling its own early days) says that the "jurisdiction" issue should be handled in a fair and open hearing. Instead, the Staff said, and the Commission agreed, that they would just decide the most important issue in the case without evidence, without a full hearing, and without careful consideration.

Why did they make that decision? One can only conclude that the Staff and the Commission realized that on a complete hearing record, with a fair chance, Vonage might prevail--and that COULD NOT happen if Qwest was to be kept happy!

The Minnesota Commission used to have a reputation for fairness and forward thinking--to bad they've lost it.

Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

reply to youngmoore
What's the $13.71? You've identified each charge but that.

Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!