Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List

Posted by timothy on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @08:30AM from the must-prevent-informed-customers dept.

An anonymous reader writes: "Verizon Wireless has silenced a tech-savvy user's web site for publishing the PRL content of Verizon phones. The PRL revealed that Verizon's popular and "expanding" America's Choice Plan has actually been shrinking in coverage in the latest few phone updates. Verizon of course, doesn't want this to tarnish their image, so they threaten legal action. Here is the usenet announcement. Can they hear us now?" PRL stands for Preferred Roaming List, and since roaming agreements can greatly influence the worth (and cost) of a particular calling plan, it's information I'd rather have available.

38 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

FP by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 08:35 · Score: 0

I claim this FP for the hot Ukrainian chick cutting peaches in the kitchen.
Cue the rim shot, baby! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 08:37 · Score: 0

When will these guys realize attempting to hide this stuff just doesn't get them very far?

When it ceases to work, of course!
What exactly is a PRL ? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 08:39 · Score: 0

How was this information useful ? Was it a way to figure out where your phone would go into roaming mode and when it would be in the "home" mode ?
Trade Secret? by PD · 2002-08-13 08:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

A trade secret is only secret if nobody knows about it. If Verizon failed to protect that secret it's their fault, and they can't do anything about it once it's revealed.

--
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
1. Re:Trade Secret? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 10:53 · Score: 0
  
  That depends on how it was revealed and by whom.
2. Re:Trade Secret? by L-Train8 · 2002-08-13 11:11 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Regardless of the legal merits of Verizon's claims, and they seem specious to me at best, just the threat of possible expensive legal action is enough to stop the the list. Even if Mr. Lurker fought and won his case, he would spend a lot of time and money doing so. And yes, there is a chance that he might have his money returned to him with a favorable ruling, but that is a gamble. Freedom of speech is a constitutional right, unless you're a regular person and the corporation that wants to shut you up has a lot of pricey lawyers.
  
  I posted this before, but I find it is relevant to so much that I see on /. Emmanuel Goldstein, writing in the summer 2001 issue of 2600 magazine, said:
  
  "The injustice takes on an even more serious tone when it no longer seems to matter whether or not you're found guilty. or innocent - whether you win or lose. If you're even brought into the game, you lose regardless of whether or not you win....
  Every time we find ourselves in a court of law, we seem to have lost by default, something even a victory can't seem to change. Not that we don't relish the idea of standing up to any of the bullies who put us through this hell. But every time we do, it costs us and not just financially. We have to devote tremendous resources into the act of simply defending who we are and what we've been doing for all these years."
  
  It's easy to see how someone who doesn't live to fight the good fight, someone who just wants to post some cool stuff he figured out, would give up rather than take on the hassle of proving the obvious - that he has every right to do his thing.
  
  --
  
  Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
3. Re:Trade Secret? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 18:46 · Score: 0
  
  Verizon could make the claim that the PRL is protected by copyright. Under that situation, you are free to inspect the PRL from your phone, but since it's copyrighted, you cannot post it on a public website. This would be similar to downloading the firmware/software from the phone and posting it on the web.
  
  BTW, I think it's lame that Verizon is making an issue of this.
4. Re:Trade Secret? by AyeRoxor! · 2002-08-16 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  So it's down to fighting for your rights.
  
  What else is new? Since the beginning of this legal system, it's always been a costly risky proposition to fight a large corporation, but I'll be damned if I would just turn over for them. Fuck that.
  
  Who the hell do they think they are, telling people "You can't do that. The gov't says you can, bur we say you can't, and our rules are more important because we have money."
  
  That churns my stomach, and I would be on the phone with a lawyer, if not the EFF, so fast, my phone would warp from the heat. Some people might say don't bother the EFF. They're busy enough. Granted they're busy. But this is the reason they exist, and the fact they're busy is a great indicator of a climate in which we should do *anything* but turn over.
  
  Who's next on the soapbox?
only one thing bugs me by medcalf · 2002-08-13 08:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

The only thing that really bugs me about this is that intellectual property rights are being asserted over a collection of information from multiple sources, all public. This would indicate, if it stands and sets a precedent, that public information is only public in its original format. If I make every third cell of a table of radio frequency assignments bold to highlight an interesting trend, am I now guilty of infringing the intellectual property "rights" of the users of the associated spectra?

--
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
1. Re:only one thing bugs me by peeping_Thomist · 2002-08-13 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  This would indicate, if it stands and sets a precedent,
  
  Precedents are set when decisions are made in legal cases. This was just a corporation sending a threatening letter to an individual. There's no precedent being set.
  
  --
  Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
So that explains it..... by jweb · 2002-08-13 08:45 · Score: 3, Interesting

I got a phone/plan with Verizon for one simple reason: I could go 'anywhere' within a 6 state area and have my phone work. Verizon was the only plan that allowed local coverage both in Minnesota (where I live) and rural Iowa (where many of my friends/family live). The last 2 times I've driven back and forth, I've noticed about a 70-mile gap in Verizon coverage along my main route, which wasn't there when I originally got the plan almost a year ago. I called Verizon, but never got a straight answer. You know, if they would TELL customers about things like this, they just might be willing to accept it. As it is, I'm currently searching for a new phone plan.

--

Think For Yourself. Question Authority.
1. Re:So that explains it..... by EvilBudMan · 2002-08-15 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  --I called Verizon, but never got a straight answer.--
  
  If anyone has ever got a straight answer out of Verizon, please let me know?
so? by jeffy124 · 2002-08-13 08:45 · Score: 1

move the pages to a non-US server! Let's see Verizon try to pull it down now!

--
The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
Thank goodness for... by linuxwrangler · 2002-08-13 08:46 · Score: 2, Informative

Google's cache

--

~~~~~~~
"You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
1. Re:Thank goodness for... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 08:52 · Score: 0
  
  At least until Verizon contacts Google to have them flushed from the cache.
  
  Looks like a good reason to store a mirror off-shore.
  
  Sprint sucks anyway. Their coverage was no better than my PrimeCo analog phone, and we were using a dual-band.
  
  Once, just for kicks, we plugged in the Sprint and PrimeCo phones on the way to the Texas coast from Austin. We set the phones up in a way that would allow us to monitor their coverage. The PrimeCo phone had just as much coverage as the Sprint phone. Other times, one would have coverage where the other would not, and vice-versa.
  
  Plus, PrimeCo never fscked up our billing. Sprint consistantly had excess charges when we never used up the monthly minutes.
  
  If we get another cellphone, I'm going back to VoiceStream.
2. Re:Thank goodness for... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 09:11 · Score: 0
  
  The cache is out of date. The latest verizon prl 50047 actually deleted many of sid that were in the 50037 prl, so some users were unable to use their phone they were able to before the "update".
3. Re:Thank goodness for... by kevin+lyda · 2002-08-13 11:14 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  good point. see http://ie.suberic.net/justalurker.com/. verizon's lawyers can feel free to look me up - just look in your handy copy of the eircom phone book for the 07 and 09 area codes.
  
  --
  US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
THIS SOUNDS LIKE A JOB FOR!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 08:48 · Score: 0

The GoogleCache!!!
Re:"Intellectual Property" by ka9dgx · 2002-08-13 08:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Intellectual Property" is a propaganda term that groups things in an unnatural and unfair manner to the advantage of a few at the expense of the many.
Copyright is granted to the author of a work for the express purpose of enhancing the creation of work destined for the public domain.
Patents are a temporary monopoly issued to inventors for the express purpose of enhancing the creation of technology destined for the public domain.
If the use of the term "property" implies permanent ownership, it is a LIE, and should be treated as such. There is NO SUCH THING AS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
--Mike--
For Example: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 09:02 · Score: 1, Interesting

PRL 50037 - America's Choice (May 16th, 2002) Priority 1 04097 PCS RM Pacific Com Alaska 04500 PCS RM SprintPCS - Fairbanks Priority 2 02042 (A) RM ACS Wireless License Sub 316B Alaska 2 - Bethel 00251 (A) RM AT&T Wireless Services 187A Anchorage, AK Priority 1 00208 D/A FR Alltel Communications 092B Little Rock-North Little Rock, 327B Arkansas 4 - Clay 328B Arkansas 5 - Cross 329B Arkansas 6 - Cleburne 330B Arkansas 7 - Pope 333B Arkansas 10 - Garland 00342 D/A FR Alltel Communications 165B Fort Smith AR-OK 182B Fayetteville-Springdale, AR 324B Arkansas 1 - Madison 331B Arkansas 8 - Franklin 599B Oklahoma 4 - Nowata Priority 2 04144 PCS FR SprintPCS - Little Rock AR Priority 3 00478 (A) RM CenturyTel Wireless 291B Pine Bluff, AR 01038 (A) RM CenturyTel Wireless 325B Arkansas 2 - Marion 01058 (A) RM CenturyTel Wireless 335B Arkansas 12 - Ouachita Priority 1 00048 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 026B Phoenix, AZ 077B Tucson, AZ 321B Arizona 4 - Yuma 322B Arizona 5 - Gila 01030 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 00140 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 01026 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 319B Arizona 2 - Coconino 01034 D/A RM Valley Telecommunications 323B Arizona 6 - Graham Priority 2 01028 (A) -- Verizon Wireless Priority 3 04170 PCS FR SprintPCS - Phoenix AZ Priority 4 01024 (A) RM Mohave Cellular LP 318B Arizona 1 - Mohave Priority 1 00064 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 093B Las Vegas, NV 488B Minnesota 7 - Chippewa 547B Nevada 5 - White Pine 00002 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 002B Los Angeles-Long Beach/Anaheim 073B Oxnard-Simi Valley-Ventura, CA 00004 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 018B San Diego, CA 342B California 7 - Imperial 00040 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 007B San Francisco-Oakland, CA 027B San Jose, CA 111B Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa, CA 123B Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA 124B Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lomp 126B Salinas-Seaside-Monterey, CA 175B Santa Cruz, CA 339B California 4 - Madera 340B California 5 - San Luis Obispo 00162 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 074B Fresno, CA 150B Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA 339B California 4 - Madera 347B California 12 - Kings 00228 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 097B Bakersfield, CA 341B California 6 - Mono 00228 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00002 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00004 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00064 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00112 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 035B Sacramento, CA 254B Redding, CA 274B Yuba City, CA 345B California 10 - Sierra Priority 2 00498 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 171B Reno, NV 543B Nevada 1 - Humboldt 544B Nevada 2 - Lander 545B Nevada 3 - Storey 546B Nevada 4 - Mineral 547B Nevada 5 - White Pine 00498 PCS -- Verizon Wireless Priority 3 00224 (A) -- Verizon Wireless 107B Stockton, CA 142B Modesto, CA 338B California 3 - Alpine 00294 (A) -- Verizon Wireless 215B Chico, CA 254B Redding, CA 337B California 2 - Modoc Priority 4 04183 PCS FR SprintPCS - San Fransisco CA (including Eureka) Priority 5 24615 PCS RM Iusacel - Tujuana MX 01474 D/A RM CC Communications 543B Nevada 1 - Humboldt 01064 D/A RM Golden State Cellular 338B California 3 - Alpine Priority 6 01059 (A) RM United States Cellular 336A California 1 - Del Norte 01473 D/A RM Western Wireless 543A Nevada 1 - Humboldt 01080 (A) FR El Dorado Cellular 346B California 11 - El Dorado ....
Re:"Intellectual Property" by medcalf · 2002-08-13 09:07 · Score: 2

Although the parent was moderated as "flamebait" due to the tone of the post, ka9dgx does make a valid point: "intellectual property" is a societally-created fiction, just like a "corporate person" is.

--
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
Free speech by anthony_dipierro · 2002-08-13 09:21 · Score: 2

Just goes to show you how laws against trade secrets are obviously unconstitutional.
Re:"Intellectual Property" by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 09:55 · Score: 0

This an excellent point. We should not be baited into using this made-up term. If you use this term out of laziness or convienence, you are helping people who want to curb your freedoms spread a meme that thoughts and actions can be owned.
Thankfully, there's Google... by nick_danger · 2002-08-13 10:13 · Score: 0, Redundant

Google has most, if not all, of the content cached. Let's see Verizon's lawyer's shut that one down, too!
Re:look at how much they all make by newton34 · 2002-08-13 10:29 · Score: 0

Executive Company Total (in millions) Percent change
1. Lawrence T. Babbio Jr., vice chm., pres. Verizon Communications $24.27 42.0 %
2. Charles R. Lee, chm., co-CEO Verizon Communications 21.76 30.0
3. Martin G. McGuinn, chairman, CEO Mellon Financial 14.33 24.7
4. Ivan G. Seidenberg, president, co-CEO Verizon Communications 13.49 -14.3
5. Alain Belda, chairman, CEO Alcoa 12.84 -26.5
6. Michael T. Masin, vice chm., pres. Verizon Communications 12.43 27.7
7. Richard M. Wardrop Jr., chm., CEO AK Steel 8.68 27.1
8. Thomas J. Usher, chm., pres., CEO U.S. Steel 8.48 -4.4
9. Dennis F. Strigl, e.v.p. Verizon Communications 7.88 -13.6
10. James E. Rohr, chm., pres., CEO PNC Financial Services 7.52 -27.0
11. Frederick V. Salerno, vice chm., CFO Verizon Communications 7.01 -22.4
12. Paul M. Montrone, chm., CEO Fisher Scientific 6.90 352.7
13. Steven G. Elliott, sr. vice chm. Mellon Financial 6.88 1.8
14. David T. Della Penta, pres., COO Fisher Scientific 6.69 593.8
15. Walter E. Gregg Jr., vice chm. PNC Financial Services 6.66 32.4
16. David A. Daberko, chm., CEO National City 6.21 33.6
17. Robert F. Slagle, e.v.p. Alcoa 6.06 -22.1
18. T. Michael Glenn, e.v.p. Federal Express 5.49 96.4
19. L. Patrick Hassey, e.v.p. Alcoa 5.25 -14.7
20. Robert B. Knutson, chm., CEO Education Management 5.17 490.5
Totals $283.77 million Average $5.68 million

--
look my sig changes!!! nrrt mf oci jdabi.o!!! z..a ir kot gh-ntbk{{{
Re:"Intellectual Property" by Prior+Restraint · 2002-08-13 10:42 · Score: 3, Insightful

For the sake of completeness, I should point out that there are a couple of other concepts within the rubric of IP: trademarks and trade secrets.

Trademarks, IIRC, are valid so long as you make a reasonable attempt to enforce them. "Reasonable" is vague, which is why things like this happen. They aren't evil; they're just worried their trademark will be ruled abandoned.

Trade secrets (such as in this case) are valid so long as they remain a secret. You can use contracts to allow some people to access them on the condition everything stays mum, but once a third party gains access to the data, you're up a creek.
this coul be by www.sorehands.com · 2002-08-13 11:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

This could be a violation of the consumer protection acts.

I would say Verizion should be burried, but Verizion is also going after a Ralksy, a big time spammer.

--
Fight Spammers!
Re:"Intellectual Property" by Prior+Restraint · 2002-08-13 11:20 · Score: 2

Trademarks, IIRC, are valid so long as you make a reasonable attempt to enforce them. "Reasonable" is vague, which is why things like this happen. They aren't evil; they're just worried their trademark will be ruled abandoned.

Replying to oneself is gauche, but I made a mistake and no one has called me on it. The *zilla case isn't about abandonment, but about generics. You can't trademark a generic term, so they're worried that if enough people start calling things Foozilla, then Godzilla becomes generic, and loses its value as a trademark.
It's in the Google Cache for the curious by Frumious · 2002-08-13 12:32 · Score: 1

It's cached by Google, if you're curious.
Re:look at how much they all make by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-13 13:23 · Score: 0

Er... I get $194 million total, and $9.7 million average, FWIW.
Information unavailable by m_evanchik · 2002-08-13 14:01 · Score: 2

For all you amateur lawyers stating Verizon has no case in blocking the site from deseminating its information, might I point out that the sight has taken the info offline.

Verizon's lawyers' letter had the desired effect, even if just temporarily.

Big companies can successfully bully you into shutting up, just like any mafia thug.

--
evanchik.net
1. Re:Information unavailable by Ironica · 2002-08-15 04:05 · Score: 1
  
  The fact that they won doesn't mean they have a case, however. It's still useful to make the distinction between valid claims and bullying tactics.
  
  They don't have a case. Fact is, though, they don't seem to need one... but if someone with more acquired power decides to take up the banner, they may find the situation somewhat changed.
  
  --
  Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
So, the evidence is....? by rf600r · 2002-08-13 14:55 · Score: 1

Can somebody point out an example of a delta from one month to another?
Won't work by Bastian · 2002-08-13 15:10 · Score: 2

That won't work any better than being outside the US has helped foreign companies from dodging the DMCA in the past. . .
Re:"Intellectual Property" by martyn+s · 2002-08-14 11:09 · Score: 1

I totally agree with everything you an he are saying; in fact, I don't think there is anyone who agrees with you more about it. But the problem with "intellectual property" is not so simple as calling it a "societally-created fiction". After all, personal property is "societally-created". Just the mere fact that it is created by society does not make it wrong or bad. The point is that "intellectual property" is not just a "societally-created fiction," it's a societally-created fiction that does not accomplish what it was designed to do, and does more harm than good. Personal property, on the other hand, as a societally-created fiction, is a good thing, and is uaually a good thing.
Re:look at how much they all make by Anonymous Coward · 2002-08-15 02:37 · Score: 0

Fuck off, leave seidenberg alone. You dont know him - I do. And furthermore...this is outdated.
US talkplans by burts_here · 2002-08-17 00:24 · Score: 1

no offense but your cell phone tarrifs suck, do you still pay for incomming calls as well? And can you not manually select which network to use when your roaming? doesent it come up on the screen with the network name? On UK phones you can manually select which network to use when you are in a diffrent county roaming, plus it shows which network you are using on the main screen of your phone. Damit i can even use a french network from the uk if the weathers good!

--
Burt "Out of my mind back in 5 minutes"