VoIP Legal Status Worldwide?

Cigarra writes "There was much public debate going on during the last several months here in Paraguay, regarding the 'liberation of Internet,' that is, the lifting of the restriction on ISPs to connect directly to international carriers. Up until this week, they were forced to hire wholesale service from the State run telco, Copaco. During the last month, when the new regulation was almost ready, the real reason supporting the monopoly made it to the headlines: Copaco would fight for the monopoly, fearing VoIP based telephony. Finally, the regulator Conatel resolved today to end the monopoly, but a ruling on VoIP legal status was postponed for 'further study.' I guess this kind of 'problem' arose almost everywhere else in the world, so I ask the international slashdotters crowd: what is VoIP's legal status in your country / state / region? How well did incumbent telcos adapt to it, and overall, just how disruptive was this technology to established operators?"

Comments

Legal vs Allowed

[Renraku]

VoIP is legal here in the United States.

But I don't know how much longer it'll be allowed to live by the ISPs.

We're kind of on a roller coaster ride debate as to whether or not ISPs should be able to decide what data goes over their lines. They want to be able to charge more for certain types of data (and you can bet your ass that data that competes with another wing of their business will be pretty damn expensive).

When Bush was in office, I wouldn't have even blinked in surprise if I were told suddenly the ISPs decided that all YouTube traffic is now set to 14.4k speeds unless you pay more for it, but now that Obama's in office, its actually a debate rather than a eventuality.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[MrNaz]

now that Obama's in office, its actually a debate rather than a eventuality

If you think the big lobby groups are any less powerful just because of a change in party or person in the president's chair then you're deluding yourself.

RIAA will continue to run around like a bull in a china shop, patent trolls will continue to destroy innovation by patent stockpiling and dragnetting, the armed forces will continue to rape and pillage those who are unable to defend themselves and our privacy and freedoms both online and in the real world will continue to be barraged from all sides.

The real enemies of society are the interests represented by the powerful lobby groups. Not some guy sitting in an oval office.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[californication]

Wow, fresh flame bait. Ok, I'll bite.

The Democratic Primary is not won by popular vote, but by delegates. Not surprisingly, Clinton's popular vote estimate only includes Clinton voters from Michigan, not Obama voters. Clinton lost because she a false sense of security that spawned from nepotism and entitlement. Maybe if she hadn't assumed from the very beginning that the cat was in the bag, she could have won.

Where were your in 2008, when Bush was still in office and the economy really went down the shitter? How many people lost their jobs in 2008, something like 2 million? Yeah, we were just rolling in dough when Bush was in office, he did a great job with the economy.

Ironic that you seem perfectly ok "paying a bit more for it" as long as it's a Republican in office. You bitch about the government picking your pocket, but you'll bend right over for a private company.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[californication]

It's against AT&T wireless' terms of service to use VoIP over a cellular data connection. Of course, just encrypt and connect to a proxy or just setup a VPN and viola, none of AT&T's business.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[palegray.net]

the armed forces will continue to rape and pillage those who are unable to defend themselves

I was with you right up to that point. Speaking as a person who has served in the Navy, with lots of friends in the Army and Marine Corps, I can say with a high degree of confidence that you are an idiot. How's that armchair of yours? Comfy?

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[TehDuffman]

the armed forces will continue to rape and pillage those who are unable to defend themselves

I would have modded you up except for this point. The Armed Forces of the US are like any group, you put a bunch (hundred of thousands) of 18 - 23 year olds in a area with extreme stress and extreme power mistakes happen but... rape and pillage I would say you have no idea what you are talking about and may want to learn/read instead of writing completely ignorant statements.

Also the military establishment before OIF was not pro-invasion, they did the best with the horrible leadership from the civilian leadership at the DOD and above. Had OIF planning been in control of the the military there likely would have actually been an occupation plan and no need for a surge because a higher amount of troops would have already been on deck.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, the old meat head argument.

"I was in the armed forces. Therefore, your criticism of the armed forces is incorrect."

They don't recruit you for the armed forces because of your shining intelligence, your stunning ability to construct insightful arguments, or your comprehensive grasp of foreign policy and political history.

As a civilian, I can say with a high degree of confidence that you are a meat head with a brush cut and lead poisoning. Fight for my freedoms? Fuck you. I'd sooner die at the hands of that mythical horde of terrorists than have you fuckers running amok all over the world tearing up villages in Vietnam, supporting dictators in South America and stealing resources from the middle east while claiming to be searching for WMDs.

Fuck you and the bradley you drove in on.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[Clovis42]

You think you have a democracy.

No, apparenlty you do. We think we have a representative republic.

It's no different in the UK or Australia. We're all being frog boiled, and we're too stupid and have too short memories to see it.

Ya, but at least we are allowed access to guns. We can at least do some pew-pewing before we finally croak.

I agree that lobbyists (ie, big corporations) have way too much power, but it isn't all that bad. Take RIAA, for example. For all the power they have, they keep losing. They've given up on going after individuals now. You can see their grip slipping every day. If it somehow becomes impossible for me to access media via bittorrent one day I'll believe you, but I don't see this happening. For all their complacency, when enough people are affected by something you actually see some change. It is a slow process, but eventually the will of the voters is heard.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[bartwol]

I never served...a fact of which I am not proud.

I fully agree with your point, brief and unexplained though it may be.

The parent's sweeping [mis]characterization of military personnel reflects a kind of bigotry that is common and, in many circles, acceptable here in the U.S. (and elsewhere). And yet, his ugly slur is no more correct than one he might make about African Americans or any other broadly defined population. Alas, such broad sweeping bigotry lives in the hearts of most people, and is only mitigated by their learned sensitivity ("forgiveness") to particular sub-classes.

Anyway, thanks for saying it the way I felt about it.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[oodaloop]

I also served, 7+ years active duty Marine Corps, and I continue to hold the highest admiration of those who serve, in any of the services.

That being said, it is a sad fact that the US has a long history of using the military and the CIA to bully uncooperative countries, overthrow their leaders, establish US friendly dictatorships, and support their campaigns. As individuals, US service members are of the highest caliber and I wouldn't want to work with anyone else. As a group, we get associated with the worst our country does.

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes indeed! In fact, Google's now in the VoIP business!

How great is that? I mean, to have Google knowing all about your phone calls, on top of your web-browsing and the contents of your e-mail! I'm sure we'll all be getting some really great new advertising!

Now, if only Google had my DNA information, too! That would be perfect.

I mean, since they're all not evil and stuff, what could possibly go wrong?

Re:Legal vs Allowed

[Eternauta3k]

Ya, but at least we are allowed access to guns. We can at least do some pew-pewing before we finally croak

The second ammendment is the most cunning deceit ever made (probably not it's original intention). It keeps people thinking "hey, if things get too bad we can still revolt". Thus, the illusion of having a right takes precedence over actual rights that citizens in other countries have (healthcare or whatever).

Re:Past tense of "arise" is "arose"

[spire3661]

LOTS of women. I know being here on slashdot you might have forgotten the concept that women exist.

Re:In Australia its legal

[timmarhy]

our monopoly telco which was previously government owned, telstra, would LOVE to block VOIP. they aren't in the VOIP business yet, they are waiting for everyone to invest heavily in it then they will drop conventional landline calls to the same level, decimating the competition.

New ISPs = new technology

[Anonymous Coward]

I see a lot of these new internet based communication technologies, that are pretty much 're-inventions' of existing industries, having a hard time setting their foot on the market.

Mainly because the industry they are replacing is too big to struggle with. And the big guys control access to the most important requirement, that is the Internet.

As long as cable companies serve internet, IPTV or P2P TV systems will have a hard time competing. The cable company will simply throttle your IPTV service, or they will roll their own, or just force you to use their existing TV technology.

Your phone line/DSL based ISP will make sure that your VOIP service is unreliable just to promote their 'cheap long distance plan' that comes with their 'high speed internet'.

In order to defeat these kinds of business models, we need independent ISPs. That is ISPs who only provide internet access and nothing else. These ISPs will have to make sure that their job is to improve their internet infrastructure to cater to the ever increasing bandwidth demand.

I personally want to see new companies providing wide area wireless internet access.
Say goodbye to the old, evil, traffic shaping, expensive, non-upgrading, money hungry, power hungry ISPs.

Re:VoIP in Latin America

[johannesg]

I'm utterly amazed that in some countries you can apparently go to jail for using a certain type of telephone...

abuse of moderation

[drinkypoo]

Congratulations for abusing moderation in order to try to bury my opinion which is contrary to yours. A troll is when you say something you don't believe to try to elicit a particular response. This is not what is happening here.

Re:VoIP in Latin America

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm utterly amazed that in some countries you can apparently go to jail for using a certain type of telephone...

I know it sounds like I'm trolling, but is it not almost as absurd that in most countries you can be thrown in jail for burning one specific type of common plant?

Victimless crimes have always bothered me.

Re:VoIP in Latin America

[Anonymous Coward]

You're amazed that hurting the profits of large, powerful corporations leads to jail time?

Where have you been living the past couple of decades?