Slashdot Mirror
Fairpoint Pledges To Violate Net Neutrality
wytcld writes "Fairpoint Communications, which has taken over Verizon's landline business in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, has announced that on February 6, 'AOL, Yahoo! and MSN subscribers will continue to have access to content but will no longer be able to access their e-mail through the third-party Web site. Instead, Yahoo! and other third-party e-mail will be accessed directly at the MyFairPoint.net portal.' Since Verizon spun off its lines to Fairpoint in a maneuver that got debt off of Verizon's balance sheets by saddling Fairpoint with it, there was concern by the public service boards of the three states about how Fairpoint would deal with that debt. Fairpoint's profit plan: force all Webmail users through Fairpoint's portal, by blocking all direct access to Webmail portals other than its own. Will Fairpoint's own search engine portal be next? What can stop them?"
the first of many. and not comments. I mean Fairpoint communications. How soon until it no longer matters whether or not someone wants network neutrality and the ISP's just don't follow through anyways?
'Number-memorizing Chinese people.'-Anon
And as soon as there support lines are ringing non-stop, and they start losing some of thier bigger customers, that will stop pretty soon.
and do not sign up with them. It sucks because there are many areas of the united states that have only one choice of service provider. I feel sorry for those stuck with this one.
Step 1.) Irritate your customers by reducing their connectivity, censoring the internet and trying to change their habits
Step 2.) ????
Step 3.) Profit
watching their customers dropping like flies...
What can stop them?
Competition, one would hope.
Which is why I'm not looking for a new provider right now.
if it did, I'd be looking up new plans in my area. Thats just rediculous. They are altering and restricting service, with no added benefits anywhere?
The competitors should be advertising that they arent fairpoint as their best marketing campaign ever.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
If you don't like it, feel free to start your own massive broadband ISP.
Fairpoint contact addresses:
Northern New England
521 E. Morehead Street,
Suite 240 Box #29,
Charlotte, NC 28202
Email: information@fairpoint.com
Corporate
521 E. Morehead Street,
Suite 250 Box F,
Charlotte, NC 28202
Email: information@fairpoint.com
Also tell everyone you know about, Streisand effect, tor, ssh tunnels, and other anti censorship tools.
I think that ultimately this is good for the case for Net Neutrality. It is a blatant move that blocks access rather than slowing it which will provoke an outcry even from the computer illiterate. This gives a real world example of what can happen without Net Neutrality to hit back against tiered internet supporters who claim that there will be no real downsides if we allow companies to boost their bottom lines at the expense of consumers.
Vermont's motto is "Freedom and unity". I don't think they have a snowball's chance in hell of doing this.
Did anyone read the article???
Verizon provided a service to IT'S customers where they can read webmail of another provider on their web page. Fairpoint is saying that after x date that if you still want that kind of service you have to go through THEIR web page. You can still go to Yahoo, Gmail, AOL, and Hotmail, and read your mail from those pages directly.
This is NOT a net neutrality issue. It is an added feature provided by the provider.
I for instance have NEVER used any of my ISP features, as I have separate email provider. Nothing Changes.
Shenanigans!
Happy New Year
i smell a law suit brewing against Fairpoint...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
...why didn't I see Gmail on their list?
Step 1.) Irritate your customers by censoring the internet, reducing their connectivity and forcing them new habits
Step 2.) ?????
Step 3.) Profit!
This chipping away at net neutrality is dangerous. Let's hope legislators in Maine, NH and VT see that compromising net neutrality is extending to large corporations the same preferences they enjoy offline, and granting their wealth the same citizen-crushing weight that enables travesties like the RIAA's greedy rape of innocents.
Net neutrality is more important than most know. It is *worth fighting for*. Educate others!
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
.. and aren't monopolies bad enough offline when a corporation gets too much power?
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
All it would prove to Joe Schmuck is that net neutrality is bad. We're relying on public awareness of net neutrality, and what better way to do it than to piss off a whole group of subscribers?
I'll reserve my judgment until I see this reported in a better source. This article is written so poorly I suspect the author has no idea what his misstatement implies. If FairPoint is planning to block major webmail sites, the Rutland Herald missed out on a huge story. They seem to be the only news source with this information.
Look at what other sites are reporting about this deal. "In Maine, regulators have alerted FairPoint that it will be scrutinized more closely than probably any other utility in the state's history." If true, the details will come to light quickly as this hits the major news outlets.
ridiculous
Fox news' slogal is "Fair and Balanced"
The second iraq war was called "Operation Iraqi Freedom"
Haven't you read 1984? This is how you control the populous: tell them that the only way to truly be free is by having no freedom.
I got their mailer and here what it says :
Yahoo!, AOL and MSN or Other Third-Party Portal Users
On Jan 31, 2009, you'll still have access to Yahoo!, AOL, and MSN content, but you'll no longer be able to access your email directly through the third-party portal. Instead, you'll now have access to the new MyFairPoint.net portal.
Beginning January 1, 2009, we'll start the migration of all Verizon-Yahoo! emails and settings to your new FairPoint WebMail account. You'll be able to access your FairPoint WebMail on this date, but your Verizon-Yahoo! messages may not be transferred until later in the month. Please check your new inbox periodically to find out when your messages are moved. The migration is expected to be complete by January 31, 2009.
"You mean I'm going to have to go to Fairpoint's home page to check "all" my e-mail accounts. This is terrible and it'll bring about the collapse of the western civilization. Washington will be in flames and New York City will be reduced to rubble. How can they force us all to view our e-mail through their home page! Write your Congressman! Blog! Tell a friend!" "What was that? It only counts if you link your e-mail through your Verizon home page and only in Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire? Oh........NEVER MIND!"
There is no way they can block it without having an ssl proxy filter. That would allow them plain text views of user information. ie. bank account passwords, medical records... I think the government would stop that really quick.
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.ultrareach.com/download_en.htm&sa=X&oi=smap&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&usg=AFQjCNE-DVlL7PRbTeO5epMPAh810jBVoA
But then with, all the privacy protection governments are doing these days I could be wrong.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
fairpoint really doesn't have any competition up here besides cable, which is way too expensive for anyone up here to afford.
Seriously. take a lesson from the tech-savvy teenagers who routinely circumvent this kind of nonsense and use a web-based proxy. Or, use POP and SMTP access to the web-mail services. Now move along . . . .
I can't recall how many times I have posted that ISP's don't have common carrier status. They don't need common carrier status for protection under the DMCA.
Whoever modded up the parent: YOU FAIL!
I must have missed your earlier posts - could you please explain why ISPs don't have common carrier status under the law? (in the US)
I wouldn't use their portal at all. Doing so would involve entering my e-mail password into a page potentially hosted by someone other than the e-mail provider. I don't do that. Period, end of discussion. Not with any password, ever. That kind of thing is exactly what the phishers try to get you to do, and I don't need my passwords leaking out.
And if they tried to force it by prohibiting direct access to those e-mail sites, I'd send them a little letter with an agreement to fill out. An agreement stating that they take full responsibility for any disclosure of my password, including responsibility for all costs of any sort directly or indirectly related to the disclosure. If they refuse, the whole exchange goes to the regulators attached to a complaint about them requiring me to disclose my passwords to them without them taking responsibility for them.
If they are an area monopoly, not market forces. Unfortunately it will take the government to step in.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Oh, did I mention they'll throw in a static IP on your residential DSL just for asking? I've been using MV for over a year now, they're the best ISP I've ever had.
I wouldn't even log in to the portal. I would think that it was a horrible phishing scam to steal my passwords.
I've been waiting for some access provider to have the balls to stand up and RUN their network, instead of letting it run them... Should be interesting to see how long they last.
Uh, I'm a Fairpoint DSL customer right now myself. They are WAY WAY cheaper (still around $50 a month for naked "high speed" DSL) than the amazing plethora of one other choice, the cable co, which is even more predatory (well, maybe not anymore) than the telco.
So, for the blessings of actually being able TO HAVE STINKING EMAIL I'll have to now pay what, about $80 a month? Lovely.
BTW, I've written everyone down thar 'n flatland, but I aren't holdin my breath... (still, I urge all to do the same).
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
Providing net neutrality means the ISP is giving up money it could have have made by using its monopoly power in one area to force new monopolies. That is already wrong even before it gets to the level where its illegal.
Fairpoint...hmmm how ironic
sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
I don't think throwing in a random +++ works anymore, but back in the day it was amusing... for me anyway.
The plan is to prove that every alternative (e.g. caps, content mangling) except charging content providers a fee won't work and then demand that they be allowed to do that.
meaning that third parties can implement their own interface to Yahoo! mail.
http://developer.yahoo.com/mail/
This may be what Fairpoint is doing to give users access through their branded portal. These same APIs mean that any user can implement their own non-Fairpoint approved access mechanism for their webmail.
It may not be a solution for all users, but at least yahoo's opened up enough that there are options available in the case of abusive network access providers.
This company depends on it's monopoly to get any customers at all. This is why, in many of it's areas, it can charge $45 per month for a 768kbit connection. I don't think it's going to care about losing customers, as if that were possible (in it's "higher-than-dialup" speed offerings). The only thing "Fairpoint" has to worry about is whether or not Obama and his cabinet etc can be talked into regulating internet access speeds and/or requiring reasonable service at reasonable prices.
Hey /.ers, how about some first hand experience here.. this is likely a non-issue. February is our designated cutover date, meaning any former verizon websites are turned off then, and are replaced with the new fairpoint equipment.
Well luckily Maine has some great isps's. I personally don't even known anyone who is using Fairpoint. The ones that are wont have a problem moving elsewhere. I'll be suggesting everyone move to www.gwi.net myself.
Usually, there are two parties to an agreement, and third parties are all others. But when an agreement between A and B is changed to an agreement between A and C, becase B sold its part to C, then there are suddenly three parties, until everyone forgets B ever was part of the deal.
To complicate matters even more, there are multiple agreements here, one between the user (A) and Verizon/Fairpoint (B/C), and another between the user and (say) Yahoo. With respect to the second deal, Verizon and Fairpoint are third parties. With respect to the first deal, Yahoo, MSN, etc are third parties.
NOW tell me what "third party web site" the users will no longer have access to, or will no longer access their emails through.
I guess the real meaning is that Verizon had a web portal in which Yahoo and some other webmail providers was integrated, so that users could have the impression that Verizon was doing an email service. Now Verizon is closing its site, and Fairpoint is taking over, providing a new portal with similar integrated access to yahoo etc.
There is no substitute for common sense. Especially, no body of rules will do.
If you go to the verizon high speed internet site, you will see that verizon offers customized portals:
"Kick-start your High Speed Internet experience with a Verizon version of one of the top Internet portals. During your Verizon High Speed Internet installation, choose Verizon Yahoo!, Verizon with AOL ®, or Verizon with Windows LiveTM along with a new Verizon email address."
These are not the original Yahoo, AOL, and Windows Live, but special Verizon versions. When you lose access to Verizon, you lose access to the special Verizon versions of Yahoo, AOL, and Windows Live.
I'm not seeing the problem, if I'm understanding this right. Verizon offered ISP services, and a service where you could access msn/yahoo/aol email through a Verizon page.
Now that Fairpoint is taking over, the customers need to use a Fairpoint page instead of a Verizon page.
Doesn't seem like an issue, just an ISP restructuring its service, not a web filtering scheme by the ISP to force their email program usage.
The article is kinda vague about this. Any other news articles about this? If not, its probably because this interpretation is right and its a non-issue.
The summary is inaccurate. Verizon offers MSN and Yahoo! "extras", which basically integrate MSN and Yahoo into their own portal. (I know this, as I am a customer.) All they're saying is that, instead of using Verizon's web portal, they'll be using Fairpoint's, since they're now being served by Fairpoint instead of Verizon.
There is no network neutrality violation here.
ttuttle is a rankmaniac
The quote and context are actually completely unclear as to whether the first party is verizon or the webmail provider.
You would think your email provider, say gmail, would be the first party in the context of email services, with the verizon access page being the third party.
Or you could consider verizon to be the first party, and the email providers to be the third party.
If the first is the case, then verizon should be very quick about issuing a clarification.
If the second is the case, then they better hand their lawyers entrenchment shovels because they'll have FCC filings and various lawsuits through other avenues bearing down on them like an armored division.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
What about the much BIGGER issues of outright IP address
blocking, domain blocking, or port blocking e.g. blocking ALL
incoming or outgoing port 25 (SMTP mail access) or port 53 (DNS query)
access?!
AFAICT many ISPs are guilty of the very very very non net-neutral practice of totally blocking some or all of those things which basically means that you CANNOT connect to / use certain sites WHATSOEVER.
A while back a friend of mine using SBC (which sucks) was having problems emailing and getting DNS resolutions on a site I helped administer. It turned out that no outbound (initiated by the residential SBC client user) DNS UDP port 53 queries would go ANYWHERE to ANY third party DNS server on the internet -- ONLY access to SBC's DNS was not blocked. This clearly creates problems because their servers were not properly recursively serving DNS information for various 3rd party domains, as well as creating the non-net-neutrality and security problems of of FORCING someone to use a single source non-authoritative DNS server (which might be poisoned, hijacked, or maliciously used to facilitate MITM spoofing attacks) instead of a preferred / alternate DNS provider like say OpenDNS or whatever.
Port 25 blocking was also in effect for him thus wholly preventing inbound receipt of mail going to him as well as preventing him from initiating email to any other site. The only option was to use the SBC webmail or SMTP relays which again is problematic due to forcing someone to use a non preferred configuration / vendor (not neutral) as well as problematic since it opens up many security and reliability problems. If the person could connect directly to the destination site, they'd have the opportunity to use TLS/SSL/certificate based security to ensure the integrity, confidentiality, and authenticity of the transaction. If there's a problem delivering the message, the failure status could be instantly known in many cases. Being FORCED to use an insecure 3rd party 'proxy' server for SMTP (or DNS or HTTP or whatever) just invites snooping, loss of reliability, loss of security, unnecessary delays in transmission, and the lack of verifiability of whether there's a problem with the commuinication. Due to that these days when I email someone I never really know WHAT the status of the transmission was... did it even GET to the destination mail server / mailbox? Or was it accepted as "ALL OK" by some 3rd party proxy server which promptly lost / deleted the traffic without the recipient or sender ever seeing a message / bounce / error code?
WTF are people DOING to the internet anymore? It isn't the freaking real internet anymore, it's the "interweb" (forget about protocols other than HTTP, they're being increasingly blocked) with N layers of snooping, monitoring, filtering, and unreliability thrown in. The fiascos with Australian, Chinese, Fairpoint, Comcast, SBC. et. al. filtering / tampering / snooping just prove this.
It is not uncommon for institutional bad actors to even intentionally spoof DNS data and even forge CA certificates to promote their agendas of control and eavesdropping / tampering with the communications. Isn't it time to put a stop to all this and demand a PROTOCOL / SITE NEUTRAL internet again?
I just got the letter today, and my interpretation is if you get any MSN or Yahoo value added services or use a Verizon email address, you now access these services through a Fairpoint URL and Fairpoint email servers. You are no longer a Verizon DSL customer, you are now a Fairpoint DSL customer.
In other words, nothing has changed, you just type in a new URL from now on to access webmail and MSN/Yahoo Verizon^WFairpoint services, and you change the POP/SMTP settings in your email client.
At no point is Fairpoint blocking the real MSN and Yahoo websites nor blocking you from using MSN and Yahoo directly for your non-bundled-service services.
Slashdot jumped the gun.
Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || http://AdTerrasPerAspera.com
In my mind this is yet another attempt to extort you into paying for a service that by all accounts can be provided to you for free (or at least very close to free). I am so sick of this kind of crap. It's like buying a blackberry only to be forced to pay for internet service because your PHONE SERVICE PROVIDER assumes that because it utilizes some form of 2-way communication via a cellular tower YOU NEED TO PAY EXTRA FOR IT!!! Despite the fact that out of the box blackberrys are made to be net-devices that are also capable of phone calls, service providers turn them into a PHONE that can (for an additional overtly excessive fee) be used as a net-device.
After the infra-structure is put down, how many times over should a customer base be expected to repay the investment? How many times do you get directly charged to use an ordinary public road or sidewalk? How many times are you charged just for entering a store front? According to the current mind-set concerning internet access, the store owner has even more right to charge you, he has to pay for rent, insurance, restocking, shipping, accounting..etc. If the world you walk in were the same as the internet, you wouldn't be able to breathe without paying for it, and you would have to pay, because the 300 lb oaf on your chest won't let you breathe until you pay!!!
Costs are inefficiencies. In order to keep things rolling efficiently, you must eliminate all costs that you don't need. While the internet is a great road to build a shop on, it is not the shop. While the internet is a great place to find products, in itself, it IS NOT THE PRODUCT!
Oi. They're talking about email addresses that were Verizon specific and provided via deals with AOL, Yahoo! and MSN. Remember those disks we /. users never touched? AOL for Broadband? That's what they're talking about having to access via the Fairpoint portal. This is because Verizon will no longer carry the information.
Emphasis changed by me:
Web-based e-mail users can continue to access their e-mail at the Verizon Web site until Feb. 6. After that date, Fastiggi said users will need to log on to www.MyFairPoint.net
This is NOT filtering. This is only for those who already access their email via the Verizon website. The /. interpretation of the article, and most (all?) the related comments are WRONG.
SIG: HUP
Farpoint is actually a life form!!
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"
When you look at it closely and monitor how people react to censorship, you notice that it is in every governments best interest to keep net neutrality alive and limit filtering to an absolute minimum.
We all know what business the governments of today are in (as they were since the beginning of time): Power. Retaining power and limiting the power of their subjects. This includes the ability to watch your subjects movements and discussions. Which is currently trivial, concerning the internet. Everyone has an IP address which can be traced to a real person, provided the provider agrees, which is again trivial with a search warrant (and often without). The data transmitted often appears in plaintext (HTML is hardly any kind of "encryption"), so even finding out what a certain user does on the internet is easy to determine.
This is all true and possible because of net neutrality and general apathy (and cluelessness) of the internet users. They can access their pr0n pages and TPB, along with the odd conspiracy page and other, maybe anti-government pages abroad, from their IP address, so why bother with onion routers and encryption?
If you start to filter, people will react. They will find out how to circumvent those filters, and tools to bypass them do exist. YouTube started to filter content for my country which shouldn't be used here (mostly music videos. I tried and found out I can still access all the content my country deems illegal for non-business reasons... shows who reacts quicker, business or government, but anyway). What was the logic result? Tor.
Now, pretty much everyone has a friend or some kind of information source (how about the internet for example?) that can show them how to bypass filtering by using proxies, encryption and the like. So he gets again what has been "outlawed" for him to see. With the only difference that now the government cannot even find out that he was trying to get this information. If you filter pages that deal with bomb building, you will not be able to see when people look at them.
And look they will. People don't like being filtered. They don't want this to happen so they will do whatever necessary to get rid of it and return to doing what they enjoyed doing. If that includes using proxies and encryption, they will do that. The net effect for a government, if they allow net neutrality to disappear, is that their whole effort to spy on their subjects becomes moot.
Note: I do support net neutrality and I'm very opposed to government snooping, but hey, if you want government's support, you have to show them what's in it for them. Saying "that's bad" won't do anything. Show them why it is in their interest to support your point of view. They want to spy on us. Now, I can't keep them from doing that, but I can give them a reason to support my case so they can do what they want to do.
For the things i don't want them to know, there's still proxies and encryption...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Killer drop in on the comma splice there, champ!
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
Do that and they will be breaking the law by invading people's privacy.. They probably just overlooked something.. I smell executive firings..
Just say no to license servers!!
Once we cut of people from free information.. propaganda can flourish, Truth can be rewritten just like in Orwell's 1984.
Heroes die once, cowards live longer.
Hello:
What is the source of the quote "Fairpoint's profit plan: force all Webmail users through Fairpoint's portal, by blocking all direct access to Webmail portals other than its own." This is flat out incorrect. No where in the communication did it state that FairPoint would block access to other portals. Rather the point was that FairPoint, unlike Verizon, is not going to ask a user to select a co-branded portal at the time they sign up. These co-branded portals included MSN, AOL, and Yahoo! A Verizon customer could always just select the Verizon Central portal. FairPoint, like more traditional ISPs, will have their own portal which provides access to their web mail client and other services such as account maintenance. A user is free to head to any and all other web sites they desire to visit, can POP their email, etc. So please check the facts before posting some half baked comment.
Verizon can't even provide me with reliable VOICE service. EvDO here is pretty worthless. In any case even if it worked fine your talking FAR less bandwidth and MUCH greater latency. There really is no comparison. Had satellite service for a while and that was a joke too.
Not saying nothing will ever come along, but at least up here in Vermont (and I'm in the most populated area of the state) there are 2 viable choices, Comcast, and Fairpoint.
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
I use the MSN Premium Browser Verizon supplied me here in NH. All my familys email is with MSN as well. Does this mean Fairpoint is dropping this MSN feature supplied by Verizon? I will loose all my Favorites with MSN? also loose my msn.com email?
If so what can I do to keep and access my msn.com email address's,favorites and still use their browser?
Capt.
'nuff said.
Exactly which ports is UnfairPoint blocking? Are they also forcing a MITM web cache?
I can't believe the uproar caused by an article from the technology journalism superpower that is the Rutland Herald...
I live in NH - if you could all calm down for 2 minutes I will try to explain:
Verizon.net ISP provided a convenience site whereby Yahoo!, AOL and MSN users could read their email from a pretty, Verizon-branded portal. (Let's call this portal "Third Party Web Site".) or they could read their email directly from the sites of those webmail providers.
Starting soon, Fairpoint is taking over for Verizon in VT, NH, and ME (that's Maine, not "me"). Not suprisingly, "s/verizon/fairpoint/"
So the now *Fairpoint* customers can't keep using "Third Party Site" which is provied by Verizon.net (which still exists, just not in VT, NH, and ME)
In its place, customers can now use the new "Fairpoint Third Party Web Site" or they could use the sites of their direct webmail providers.
Now go back and RTFA again. Get it now? Not as scary?
I'm no Fairpoint fanboi by any means, but this is the worst case of Slashdot hysteria I've ever seen.
Sure, if you want to pay something like $800 a month for your internet access you can bypass Fairpoint by purchasing an entire T1. I suppose if you just want say 512k bandwidth you could get a fractional T and maybe pay oh only like $250 a month! What a deal!
Oh, and of course don't forget, now you'll need to purchase a nice expensive router/dsu/csu instead of going with the standard cheap consumer stuff.
I'm thrilled, that's a really amazing alternative, lol! Granted the service will be somewhat higher quality than DSL/cable, but I hardly think you can really consider commercial data services as an equivalent replacement for retail grade service.
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
exactly one encounter with Fairpoint customer dissservice
Well, that's what you always get when you try to reason with an omnipotent being.
"Thou art notified that that thy kind has infiltrated the Internet too far already. Thou art directed to return to thine own subnet immediately."
One can only hope Fairpoint turns into a giant jellyfish and buggers off into space.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Yeah a debt-dodging temporary offshoot of a major monopoly puts out a badly-worded update regarding their email service - huge shocker. As anyone with more of a clue then a slashdot editor realized, this simply meant that the branded email services were being transferred from the myverzion to "myverizon except skinned myfairpoint" portal.
Here's my guess as to what's going to happen. Verizon spins off "Fairpoint", saddles it with shitloads of debt. After a short term (under 3 years) Fairpoint cites "Market factors outside our control" and goes bankrupt, discharging the debt. Verizon provides DIP financing, which gives them priority access to their assets, Fairpoint fails 6 months later and Verizon gets it all back, minus the debt. Presto!
From what I was just told, this is not a Net Neutrality issue. Here is a clarification based on my conversation.
When people originally signed up for FIOS, they were encouraged to "pick a portal" to go through for their eMail and whatever customized portal content they wanted. This was done via agreements Verizon made with MSN, AOL, Yahoo, etc. Users that selected an AOL Portal got eMail accounts @aol.com instead of @verizon.net. Once Fairpoint makes the full break with Verizon, the agreements with these Third-Party Portals will be void and it is -this- access and no other that is in contention.
Fairpoint subscribers will still have unfettered access to the Internet. If they have _independent_ eMail accounts with these same third parties then these will continue to work normally. Nothing will block mail.yahoo.com - nothing will usurp your ability to read this eMail or force you to do anything else.
Now... with that said... we'll just have to see what Jan 31st brings and what "the truth" of the matter is.
http://snurl.com/9ae09 Define "internet" as only those things conforming to the IP standard.
I Didn't read all the comments, that I will admit, however there seems to be a misunderstanding about the identity of the third part website mentioned. I agree that it certaintly makes more logical sense that the website referred to is the verizon portal however it does not seem to be what was actually meant. I am a fairpoint customer in NH and from all of the paperwork in the mail I have been getting recently from fairpoint it does not seem that they mind mentioniong verizons name anywhere, and I recieved a letter on this topic and it made it clear that the webmail would be read from fairpoints portal. This doesn't really surprise me much though, with fairpoint being such a limited, low, and amateur company, How many times have they gone bankrupt in the past few years again was it?