VoIP Receives Warm Reception From UK Regulators

"In stark contrast to the U.S., where VoIP providers may be stifled by wiretap costs, the UK telecoms regulators seem to be welcoming the technology. The BBC is reporting that a block of phone numbers have been assigned to VoIP users -- and that Ofcom, the regulators, have said 'Our first task as regulator is to keep out of the way.'

Comments

See/Hear

[oneandoneis2]

It's interesting to note that when CCTV cameras in public places in the UK were mentioned on /. the other day, there was an immediate outcry from US people about "Invasion of privacy" and "Thank God the authorities here can't spy on me when I'm outside!"

And then when VoIP gets mentioned, it has to be pointed out that it's being stalled in the US by the authorities complaining that it'll make it harder to spy on people who are in their own homes.

Six of one and half a dozen of the other. . ?

Re:See/Hear

[two-tail]

there was an immediate outcry from US people about "Invasion of privacy" and "Thank God the authorities here can't spy on me when I'm outside!"

Of course, many in the US are not aware that there are a large number of cameras watching where they go. However, most of the cameras are direct-to-tape or otherwise go directly to recordings. There doesn't seem to be a system that takes all of these camera networks, linking them into a single system. At least, not yet...

Yes but...

[CountBrass]

Just wait until David "Hitler" Blunkett hears about it: there'll be new laws in parliament outlawing it or requiring any VOIP users to first prove, on pain of becoming Blunkett's new guide dog, that they are who they say they are. Edward PS: The fact that David Blunkett, a "Labour" (eg Socialist, left wing), is best mates with the editor of one the most right wing tabloids (the Daily Mail) has nothing to do with him behaving like a rabid dog: I think he must be trying to out right-wing Margaret Thatcher just to impress his editor friend.

Expect ISP rates to rise

[Dancin_Santa]

It seems like this is a good deal for everyone all around except that in the end VoIP is still another manifestation of the infinitely malleable POTS system. All those bits are travelling over the same wires as those expensive long distance calls are. The only difference is in who is paying for that bandwidth.

With normal long distance calling, the burden is borne by the person making the call or the receiver in the case of a collect call. In VoIP, the burden is already being paid for by the backbone ISPs who provide overseas network connections over their fat pipes.

Guess who owns those fat pipes. If you said the phone company, you would be correct.

Once revenues start dropping from standard phone charges as more and more people switch over to VoIP, the phone companies will start looking for ways to gain more revenue via their most active systems, i.e. the long distance channels upon which the ISP backbones are structured.

A general rise in prices charged to ISPs will find their way down to the end subscriber and all those pennies saved using VoIP vanish in a puff of logic. Add to this that once consumer groups figure out that the burden of *your* high VoIP usage is borne by *all* subscribers, they will start demanding tiered service and your delightfully cheap long distance calls will suddenly be just as expensive as they were on the old POTS program.

Be careful what you wish for.

Re:Expect ISP rates to rise

[doofusclam]

Maybe. But the fact is that, for the amount of data sent over their pipes for voice, it's more efficient (read: less bandwidth) to use VoIP. So it costs the link owner less too.

POTS is outdated anyway. Broadband is a utility these days, and if the government want to mandate anything they should impose QoS terms on providers (at the moment there is no contractual obligation for a UK Broadband ISP to actually keep the service going, whereas for POTS a days down time can cost BT money). Once we have QoS on our broadband, then POTS will slower die off.

Re:Expect ISP rates to rise

[jos3000]

I look at the current price advantages of VOIP as merely an insentive that will speed up uptake.

The real advantage, from my perspective, of VOIP is the flexable nature of the network and the new sorts of phone systems that can be set up. Systems that are functionally equivalent to todays office switchboards can be deployed over distributed locations and you can control all of the routing directly using your own server. There's no need to ask the phone company to add another extention. This is, of course, just one example.

Yes, prices will go up, but we will be able to get a more sophisticated service for the same cost.

So does this mean

[Lord Kano]

That I'll be able to get a London Telephone number, while I remain in the US?

I'll finally be able to call the telephone numbers that are in European magazines.

LK

But most people get broadband via their phone

[cardpuncher]

As most people in the UK who get broadband do so via their (regulated) phone line, regulating VoIP too would be overkill: most people will still have their emergency service via their regular phone and be able to make other calls in the same way.

When/if there is significant competition for the "last mile", I'm sure regulation will be revisited.

999 on the way out

[Cybertect]

Not that it makes much difference to what you're saying, but it's being replaced with the EU standard 112

Single European emergency call number 1-1-2

AFAIK, they're currently parallel running both numbers.