Fierytemplar
join:2003-07-11
Warminster, PA | Catchy title here
VOIP should be regulated like any other telecommunications service, because that's what it is. |
|
JJV
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Seattle, WA
clubs: |  I agree! The FCC hasnt screwed voip up yet. They should get started right away! |
|
vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD
| reply to Fierytemplar
said by Fierytemplar  :
VOIP should be regulated like any other telecommunications service, because that's what it is.
Yes it should, but NOT like PTSN. They are calling for the same taxes and regulations that companies like verizon has to pay, that is rediculous IMO.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! |
|
oliphant5
Got Identity?
Premium
join:2003-05-24
Corona, CA | reply to Fierytemplar
It's not a telecommunications service, it's a CONTENT service. |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| reply to JJV
VoIP not a telecom service....
VoIP is not a telecom service. It's something that some people use instead of a telecom service, and it looks kinda like a telecom service, but so do two tin cans and a string.
In some circumstances, VoIP offerings can be at least partially a telecom service, as when they offer "universal termination" over the PSTN--there's definitely some telecom goin' on there. But a mere SIP connection between consenting adults? Not telecom.
Powell and the FCC are, frankly, too befuddled to pretend that they even understand what VoIP is or how it works. Be glad for small favors--otherwise, they'd already be screwing it up like PCS.
What are they really waiting for? Some good way to grab jurisdiction and control before VoIP kills their good friends and money sources, the telcos...
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL
| reply to Fierytemplar
My Two Cents (not including the USF)
I disagree. VoIP is an evolution in communications that already has competition, unlike the current ILEC model, and forces the local and long distance providers into an "infrastructure provider only" role. Furthermore, it will force these same providers to compete and evolve, something regulation has failed to accomplish.
Where current VoIP providers "dump" calls into a LATA there are access circuits and the access circuit providers are passing along all fees and associated taxes. So to say the VoIP providers don't participate in these legalized fiduciary theft programs is patently false. Further, the industry selling VoIP providers access into a given LATA have no business complaining because they are not forced to sell to the VoIP providers.
Lumping VoIP into the current telecommunications model is no different than saying IM, email, or even walkie-talkies are telecommunications services. It should be placed into a new category called "content communications" and regulated only to ensure interoperability. Everything else is a function of infrastructure and should be regulated there.
Regulating VoIP in the current telecommunications model is the wrong approach and will only hurt the US consumer. |
|
