Slashdot Mirror
FCC Fines Company for Blocking Access to VoIP
peg0cjs writes "According to PCPro, the FCC has handed out a $15,000 fine to Madison River Communications Corp for blocking access to VoIP calls. The action is seen as a warning to other telcos not to prevent the growth of VoIP over their networks. The complaint was made to the FCC by two companies Vonage Holdings and Nuvio, which specialise in VoIP services. It appears that Vonage CEO Jeffrey Citron was willing to act on his earlier tirade about VoIP blocking." From the article: "The action is seen as a warning to other telcos not to prevent the growth of VoIP over their networks. Many of these companies see VoIP as a threat to their landline revenues as calls made over the internet can be made to anywhere in the world for the price of a local call."
Is something like me getting a $10 parking ticket, annoying but hardly worth acting on beyond mailing the puppy in...though I suppose the command to change policy as such will have an effect...
...in bed
But I thought we hate the FCC! I just don't know what to believe anymore!
In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
So, can I use this precedence to have them unblock port 25 and 80 so I can run my mail and web server without any problems?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
12345
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Good to see the FCC actually doing something that gives consumers choice. Now only if we could get them to drop the stupid broadcast flag.
IANAL, but I assume the fine goes way up from there, right? If it cuts into the telco's bottom line so much $15,000 isn't a big price to pay to block it.
Thanks!
In my next postings I will include encoded voice messages as a series of ASCII tokens.
Better not mod them down, or you'll be fined for impeding competition...
(and yes, this is not meant seriously)
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
Just something I've been wondering. Where does all of this money from fines go to? Janet Jackson netted the FCC some pretty decent change, so what happened to it?
Why?
I am limited in my bandwidth from my provider. I can do whatever I want with that bandwidth, providing it's within the law and the agreement that I signed when I became a customer of my ISP.
If I want high quality lower compressed telephone calls, and I'm not breaking any agreements, then i should be able to do that.
I pay for this bandwidth, it's better that I make a call and use my bandwidth than become one of the many who are spending bandwidth trading kiddie porn.
I for one am sick of corps trying to preserve dieing business models by abusing existing power structures.
It will be interesting to see what will become of information infrastructure in this country in the next few years. IBM v Microsoft of the early 21st century is going to be Cable v. Telephone. Where it goes depends on the rules of the game. This decision firmly establishes that network transparency won't be sacrificed in the fray.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
The smart ones throttle back the quality of the connection. Thanks to the bursty nature of the internet, they can get away with making the quality total shit for 3rd party VoIP providers, while allcocating the necessary bandwidth and priority to their own VoIP services.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
It's a no brainer that voIP is where things are going to end up. The simple solution is for the telco's to jump on that poney and ride it to the bank. The R&D is already done, the equipment prices have come down. While I don't have any figured to work with, I'm sure the return on investment if they plan correctly can't be that bad.
It's like the US post office issue, e-mail is causing them to loose money. Simple solution. USPS internet kiosks where you pay for time to use their system to access your e-mail. Those that don't have laptops/handhelds but have $1 for 30min of time would jump on it. The market is there, just have to have the right bait to real them in. Problem is that telco's like the USPS have been doing things the same way for so long, change is a very painfull process. Welp, take a pain pill and get moving you corporate lackies.
Trying to be different, just like everyone else.
Sounds like a small fish in the pond. A 15K fine is definitely going to make them pay attention.
And it's going to make the big players sit up and take notice.
Think of this more as a "warning shot across the bow" than a slap on the wrist.
I don't agree. It's the intent that's important. They weren't helping anyone but themselves. You pay the telco to provide you with service.
If they were given the right to block it, you can just switch to another provider right? Well what happens when that provider blocks you out? Eventually you'd get locked out. After that they'd offer to open that port for you if you requested it, for a price....
$15,000 is hardly a significant threat to a telco, it's more like a "warning ticket" given to a speeder that the cop is good buddies with.
When I think of the fines imposed on Howard Stern, it convinces me that they're not all that serious about limiting challenges to VOIP.
Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
Robert X. Cringely
The result from that. Companies like Vonage and Packet8 are crippled and it's legal too.
Specks
Batteries not included
Commenting on the case the FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell said, `the industry must adhere to certain consumer protection norms if the Internet is to remain an open platform for innovation.` He also gave a warning that the FCC will not allow companies to stifle innovation saying that the Commission `acted swiftly to ensure that Internet voice service remains a viable option for consumers`. I think that line might be brought up in the future...can you say broadcast flag?
My girlfriend moved into a swanky building with broadband pre-installed.
One day, she can't send email anymore via an external server set up to allow relay after POP authentication. Verizon has blocked all outgoing SMTP because most of their users have become spam-spewing zombies. It was easier for them to do this rather than turn off individuals.
Seriously, can my girlfriend complain to the FCC about this? Or, because email isn't as easily monetized a service as VOIP, they simply won't care?
jh
But you, the consumer, are paying for that bandwidth. As a customer of Vonage, I can tell you that it's not even that much - 90kbps is the HIGHEST quality setting. If I'm paying the cable / telephone / ISP company for a certain amount of bandwidth, I should be able to use that bandwidth as I see fit, as long as it conforms with the customer agreement. As yet, I have not seen an agreement that says "I will not use VoIP services on this connection."
You work for a phone company, I bet. or maybe a cable company...
Then there's the issue with overseas service. The undersea cables are supported with revenue from phone calls, and bandwidth is limited. Financing cables with the "all you can eat" Internet model is going to be interesting.
I don't see any way this can be good for local telcos, and maybe not for overseas carriers either. It may be time to sell any shares you own.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
I think control of VoIP is outside the mandate of the FCC.
New companies that offer VoIP are not covered by the FCC. These are companyies are "common carriers" and protected by there laws.
You either have FCC regulation and the protection of the "common carriers" laws or your on your own. For example is you are VoIP company and not considered a "common carrier" then If someone uses VoIP for criminal reasons you could be considered part of the facilitator. Common Carrier status protects a carrier from legal liability for what it transports.
The legal liability of allowing someone who is 'legal liability' for what it transports to use your lines from which you are protected via the common carrier status has interesting consequences. For example: if a 3rd party VoIP provider (who is not regulated and is not Common Carrier) allows a kidnapper to make a ransom demand to through its VoIP line then over a common carrier lines then who is responsible?
Just becuase a company is protected by the Common Carrier status does not mean it should extend to the 3rd party VoIP provider who use there lines.
An very interesting legal point if the FCC is trying to make the Common Carriers accept 3rd party VoIP calls.
Allowing 3rd party VoIP providers to use Common Carrier lines puts unacceptable risk or damage upon the Common Carrier and hence they should be legally allowed refuse service to such parties.
My Sig indicates the end of the comment I posted.
I'm a vonage user, after logging into the website I'm greeted with this, coincidence?:
Service Announcements
Customers may be experiencing an issue with receiving inbound calls and placing outbound calls due to a network issue. This problem is also impacting availability of our web site.
Our engineers are aware of the issue and are working to resolve it as quickly as possible. We apologize for any inconvenience.
I have often regretted my speech, never my silence.
-Xenocrates
I work for a small cable provider. We also offer cablemodem service and phone service, all over the coax network. We make more money *per-customer* on the phone service than anything else.
Vonage isn't available in our area yet, but when it comes, our phone service is absolutely fucked. Vonage is what, $25/month for unlimited calls? We charge that much for 500 minutes of calls per month. And, of course, long distance is extra.
But you know what? I don't care. Vonage and it's ilk are GOOD THINGS. There's no reason that all communications systems shouldn't move to IP-based networks. Yeah, it's going to be the end of the "small" service providers, but so what? They're living on borrowed time anyway.
I'm just waiting for high-speed wireless internet to become ubiquitous. Once everyone can snag a couple of megabits out of the air no matter where they are, even the cell phone companies are going to be screwed. Unless, of course, they become wireless internet providers. Which is what they should do, of course.