Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC Fines Company for Blocking Access to VoIP

Posted by Zonk on from the strike-one dept.

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."

20 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. 15 grand to a telco company... by tekiegreg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:15 grand to a telco company... by Quasar1999 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True, it's peanuts... but no one said it would stay at that low a fine... do it again, and we'll up the fine... just like with a kid, slap the wrists, then the ass, then nail them over the head with a frying pan... As a side note, I'm not a parent, so take my example with a grain of salt

      --

      ---
      Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    2. Re:15 grand to a telco company... by southpolesammy · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not the size of the fine, but the precedent it sets that is important here.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    3. Re:15 grand to a telco company... by kidgenius · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I know that telco's are fairly large, but this seems to be a rather small telco. They deal only with rural customers. To them, $15,000 is quite a bit more than it would be to someone like Qwest, Verizon, Cox, Comcast, etc. But, it shows the big boys that the FCC will not tolerate these actions. You probably could expect a much larger fine to one of them, especially if it's more than 200 customers that get blocked.

    4. Re:15 grand to a telco company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      As a side note, I'm not a parent, so take my example with a grain of salt

      Obviously. Any parent knows you use the frying pan first.

  2. Wait wait wait by worst_name_ever · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
    1. Re:Wait wait wait by JudgeFurious · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't know how many times I have to go over this with you people but I'm going to make this sink in if it takes me the rest of my life. On FRIDAYS, after lunch (US, Central time) we like the FCC, if it's an even number day and a story critical of something Apple did earlier in the day is posted while at the same time there are no stories about SCO or the RIAA.

      I don't know if a RAMBUS story has any effect on whether or not we like the FCC, give me a few minutes to call somebody and double check the fine print of the Slashdot Manifesto.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
  3. Mail and Web Servers by varmittang · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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-----
    1. Re:Mail and Web Servers by over_exposed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not if you agreed to the TOS that you wouldn't run any servers while connected to their service...

      $20* says that is probably in your contract while restrictions on VOIP are nowhere to be found.

      The $20 mentioned is simply a euphamism for a congratulatory high-five.

      --
      "The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton
    2. Re:Mail and Web Servers by PepeGSay · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is a common misconception that the origianl issues with blocked VoIP calls originated at the ISP level. Let me repeat: "It did not occur at the ISP level.". It was blocked inside the phone network of the Telco, which is entirely different on many many levels. This precedence is unrelated to your ISP's regulation of your ports.

  4. FCC finally does right by kidgenius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  5. Fine Money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

  6. Re:Good by aesiamun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. Good! by TGK · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  8. Only fools block VoIP by Jailbrekr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  9. Telco's should get with the program by Calimus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  10. "Not" a big fine.... probably not true... by VE3ECM · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I don't know about you, but I've never heard of 'Madison River Communications Corp'...
    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.

  11. Let's all remember this line... by gothzilla · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

  12. Re:Hmm .dangerous precedent? by baudilus · · Score: 4, Insightful
    it's their bandwidth Vonage isn't paying for it

    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...
  13. Gonna cause a lot of upset, though by Engineer-Poet · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The price of LD service has been falling steadily for years, but the drop to zero (and the end of the telco's cut for handling it) is going to throw a lot of revenue models in the trash. So what could happen?
    • Revenue falls below the price of service, companies go out of business.
    • Per-line fees are increased to make company profitable, more customers jump ship to cell service for voice calls, more and more landline infrastructure goes unused, fees are increased... death spiral.
    • Companies try to offer new services but are stuck in regulatory limbo while competitors get to market first.

    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