phrider
join:1999-12-17
Los Angeles, CA | reply to Darkflight
Re: Is the Sprint Biz DSL discontinuation legal?
Remember Rhythms? They were in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and were required to keep operating until the discontinuance process was complete.
It sure looks like Sprint violated Federal Regs by discontinuing service without filing.... |
|
Darkflight
3G Stitch626
join:2001-03-03
Rowland Heights, CA
| reply to phrider
Now if you go on a side tangent, some of you will also remember that WorldCon bankruptcy had people asking Mr. Powell about what the FCC could do to prevent the shutdown of UUnet. In one hand he says, yes we can stop them from shutdown, but on the other hand he said he could not...
Similiar situation folks.
[I know, old thread, but had to bring it up b4 i forgot]
--
Darkflight- Have you seen where my bandwidth went lately? |
|
phrider
join:1999-12-17
Los Angeles, CA | reply to tomas3168
It's a telecommunication service, long established. My line tag from PacBell says "Sprint Communications" on it.... they're the data CLEC plain and simple, just like Covad or Rhythms (was). This is not new news, but very old ground. |
|
tomas3168
join:2002-05-01
Denver, CO | reply to phrider
"Applicant explains that ION is an integrated service consisting of both common carrier local and long distance telecommunications services, as well as Internet access data service."
Its an internet access data service. |
|
phrider
join:1999-12-17
Los Angeles, CA | reply to tomas3168
It's a telecommunication service. Rhythms had to file before discontinuance. So did others.
"Seasoned FCC observers were surprised..." |
|
tomas3168
join:2002-05-01
Denver, CO
| reply to phrider
I was looking at the FCC site that contains the 214 filings, and noticed that you only file a 214 when discontinuing telecommunications services. On ion's 214 filed on Nov 16 of last year it states "Applicant explains that ION is an integrated service consisting of both common carrier local and long distance telecommunications services, as well
as Internet access data service."
ANAL, but would dsl discontinuance require a 214 since it is separate and distinct from "telecommunications"? Maybe we wont see a 214 filed? just my thoughts.
No voice service was included with Bizdsl, so they wouldnt have to file a 214. |
|
phrider
join:1999-12-17
Los Angeles, CA
|  Some seasoned observers of the FCC were very surprised by Sprint's failure to file a Section 214 application with the FCC to discontinue the Sprint Business DSL service in LA, Chicago, Austin, and elsewhere. After all, the Sprint Business DSL service is/ was primarily a straight CLEC service on Sprint DSLAMs and leased ILEC lines, with typical ISP services added ala carte. Sprint is the CLEC for this service -- and CLEC's must file Section 214 applications to discontinue service. Remember Rhythms, who had to keep going in spite of bankruptcy?
This has probably caused consternation at a number of levels in the FCC. And it should be cause for serious concern by all DSL users. If Sprint can appear to violate FCC rules by ignoring Section 214 rules, who's next? And on what issue?
We've been denied due process -- and an important forum to get public consideration of the problems that have caused the collapse of the DSL market. Now, in my PacBell area, no one offers full rate ADSL at the maximum spec rate of 8 Mb down / 1 Mb up. Why not? Why is a major player abandoning this market? They cited ILEC abuse when quitting ION, and hinted at it for Business DSL. Shouldn't the FCC be investigating these issues (especially before granting the ILECs further privileges)?
If you want to make your voice officially heard, see »www.fcc.gov/cgb/complaintfiling.html for the FCC complaint process. Failure to speak up may cost you your rights later as well as now.
If you have not been discontinued yet, but have been given the "not to FCC-standard" notice from Sprint, like the folks in Seattle, speak up FAST! |
|
