Slashdot Mirror

A couple of weeks ago, I sat down and wrote my first and only letter to a federal rep. Here in Oakland county, Michigan that happens to be Thaddeus McCotter. I decided on a fax because I've read that letters are given greater consideration compared to phone calls and emails, and a fax is better (faster) than the postal service due to postal security concerns. While the letter addresses my concerns from the viewpoint of a VoIP company founder, net neturallity is of major concern to anyone who is starting (or thinking of starting) any Internet-based company.

Congressman McCotter:

I am not politically active and have never contacted a federal representative in my life. However, I am taking the time today to write you because I am very deeply concerned about pending legislation intended to counter recent actions by large telecommunication companies that will hugely detrimental effect on the American citizenry, your constituents, and myself personally.

As things currently stand, big phone companies and cable conglomerates have what is called "common carrier" status. Meaning that they are required to treat all phone calls, Internet traffic, etc. identically. In exchange for keeping their hands off, carriers are given special tax breaks and are normally exempt from being liable for the content they carry (Comcast can't be held criminally liable if someone downloads child porn using a Comcast cable modem, for example). This is how things have been since 1934. However, Congress is moving in the direction to give the big phone and cable companies the power to regulate the 'net as they see fit. They will be able to pick favorites and decide who's traffic they carry--or don't carry at all.

December of last year, I founded Bright Idea VoIP here in Novi, Michigan. We're an Internet-based telephone company that provides voice communication services to small-businesses. I frequently explain it as "Vonage for companies with 5 to 100 employees." This technology is known as "Voice-over-IP" (VoIP) is currently one of the fastest growing segments of the Internet. There are hundreds of companies like mine popping up all over the map. I am not rich by any sense of the word; I am simply a computer geek with a great idea who is trying to earn my piece of the American dream. And it's paying off... The company is growing very quickly. I (and my small, but also growing, group of coworkers) are working hard, but enjoying almost every minute of it. But for us to continue to thrive, or just to survive, we need a level playing field.

If AT&T, Verizon, or another large competitor of ours gains the ability to turn off or slow down areas of the Internet, our service will grind to a halt and I won't be able to do a thing about it. If they start to charge me a special "priority access fee", I'll have to pass that cost onto my subscribers. Suddenly the largest appeal of VoIP is reduced, making it less of a threat to the big telecom companies. The net effect is that I will be out of business within a year. And it's not just me... it's the thousands of other Internet innovators. We'll never know the next Google, eBay, or Amazon.com if the established 800 lb. gorillas get the power to decide who stays and who fails. That's not capitalism and that's not the American way.

With the lifeblood of manufacturing jobs in the metro Detroit area rapidly disappearing, your district desperately needs your help in promoting innovation and job growth in the technology sector. I ask that you please support Massachusetts congressman Ed Markey's "Network Neutrality Act of 2006", and that you see through the well-funded smoke screen of large telecom lobbyists.



I didn't even get a form letter back in return. Since he's up for relelection this

They aren't interested in Google, Yahoo, or Microsoft. This massive lobbying is the result of only one thing: VoIP. VoIP has freed people and businesses from being tied to the circuit-switched network that is the core source of revenue for many telcoms. AT&T, Verizon, and the other players desperately want to tilt the playing field back into their favor. VoIP startups have been popping out of the woodwork over the past two years. At the very least, Ma Bell wants to slow down the growth of these nimble companies by charging tarrifs, which get passed onto customers and lessen the biggest incentive to switch to VoIP: cost savings.

Cable companies now are simply jumping on the bandwagon. Which, if you notice, seems to coincide with the rollout of their own VoIP services.

Last December I founded a small-business VoIP company myself. So I've been following this issue very closely; it's the only time I've ever contacted a federal representative in my life. However, this is bigger than simply a slower Google or putting me out of business. It's about real jobs and real innovation being extinguished.

Please read a recent blog entry of mine to put a face with this imporant issue. Or, even better learn what you can do to help.

It's more than just phones that's going to prevent adoption. Sure, there's a good amount of tech savvy businesses out there who would be willing to use something like this. However, there are 100x times as many businesses who would be saving a ton on their phone services if they could spell VoIP. Small business phone service is ungodly expensive. In many cases, they're spending more on their telecom services per month than they do rent. I've been working with a subscriber with a small, six-person office, with five phone lines and who makes a decent chunk of long distance calls. Their phone bill is over $600/mo! And they dropped $4k the phone system hardware four years ago.

The only way 95% of small businesses out there will ever adopt VoIP is if they are handheld through the process. Even if they know they'll save a ton of dough, working phones are just too critical to companies for them to throw caution to the wind. At the risk of giving away trade secrets ;-) that's the angle the VoIP company I work for is taking. We seek out partnerships with independant computer techies, VARs, and consultants who have small businesses as clients. These are the people that have the ear of business owners when it comes to making technology decisions. In return, we pay the partner a monthly stipend/retainer to support the subscriber. Businesses are *much* more likley to adopt something like this if they know they have a local expert that they contact in case of problems.

While Skype is cool and can save them ton a cash what's even more important to businesses is a level of trust. I don't know a business owner in their right mind who would put their phone service in eBay's (the owner of Skype) hands. Their level of customer service is worse than Verizon.

Wow. Strange timing. Might I shamelessly suggest a company that I'm part of: Bright Idea VoIP? :-) We focus exclusively on small business VoIP (between five and forty extensions). We also offer a unique reseller/partner program for IT support people if they're willing to provide first level support to subscribers.

/end plug

1) Patents are a constitutionally protected property right.

2) Inventors are heavy users of VOIP

3) VOIP exists today because inventors accepted the bargain to disclose their inventions in exchange of a limited property right.

4) Until the Eolas decision Microsoft thought they were invincible. Most young wildly successful companies like Google repeat the same mistake Microsoft made. It is only a matter of time before Google is held accountable for their scorched earth approach to the issue of taking other's property.

5) It has been reported that Rates Technology has hundreds of licensees. This means that their patents have stood the test of challenges and that Rates Technology has a huge war chest.

6) this sort of statement does not bode well for XorNand of http://www.brightideavoip.com/ who has apparently acknowledged that they are using patented technology and that they are dismissive of such. If they come under fire this public statement may well lead to treble damages.

XorNand, if it is ok for you or others to take another person's inventions for your own profit then why shouldn't it be ok for people to take your property? How about that? It amazes me how people can rationalize theft. The bigger the company the more likely they are to operate in this way.

What choice do inventors have when people steal from them in broad daylight except to seek legal redress? Do you think that any inventor wants to be embroiled in litigation for decades? Do you think that blatant theft discourages most inventors?

Has it occurred to you that when inventors do not receive fair compensation that society loses jobs and tax base because many if not most inventors leave the business after they have been bankrupted by patent pirates? What is at stake here is America's ability to compete in a global marketplace. We must be the leading innovators if we are to survive for we cannot compete based on wages.

Perhaps now that you understand that your taking of others inventions for YOUR personal profit is theft you will contact Rates Technology and seek a license. Most inventors are reasonable when they are dealt with reasonably. Conversely you can continue to rationalize your conduct on public forums leaving a nice paper trail, and when it comes time to pay the piper you can whine about your fate.

Ronald J Riley, President
Professional Inventors Alliance
www.PIAUSA.org
RJR"at"PIAUSA.org
Change "at" to @"
RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595

1) Patents are a constitutionally protected property right.

2) Inventors are heavy users of VOIP

3) VOIP exists today because inventors accepted the bargain to disclose their inventions in exchange of a limited property right.

4) Until the Eolas decision Microsoft thought they were invincible. Most young wildly successful companies like Google repeat the same mistake Microsoft made. It is only a matter of time before Google is held accountable for their scorched earth approach to the issue of taking other's property.

5) It has been reported that Rates Technology has hundreds of licensees. This means that their patents have stood the test of challenges and that Rates Technology has a huge war chest.

6) this sort of statement does not bode well for XorNand of http://www.brightideavoip.com/ who has apparently acknowledged that they are using patented technology and that they are dismissive of such. If they come under fire this public statement may well lead to treble damages.

XorNand, if it is ok for you or others to take another person's inventions for your own profit then why shouldn't it be ok for people to take your property? How about that? It amazes me how people can rationalize theft. The bigger the company the more likely they are to operate in this way.

What choice do inventors have when people steal from them in broad daylight except to seek legal redress? Do you think that any inventor wants to be embroiled in litigation for decades? Do you think that blatant theft discourages most inventors?

Has it occurred to you that when inventors do not receive fair compensation that society loses jobs and tax base because many if not most inventors leave the business after they have been bankrupted by patent pirates? What is at stake here is America's ability to compete in a global marketplace. We must be the leading innovators if we are to survive for we cannot compete based on wages.

Perhaps now that you understand that your taking of others inventions for YOUR personal profit is theft you will contact Rates Technology and seek a license. Most inventors are reasonable when they are dealt with reasonably. Conversely you can continue to rationalize your conduct on public forums leaving a nice paper trail, and when it comes time to pay the piper you can whine about your fate.

Ronald J Riley, President
Professional Inventors Alliance
www.PIAUSA.org
RJR"at"PIAUSA.org
Change "at" to @"
RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595