Slashdot Mirror


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?"

8 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Legal vs Allowed by Renraku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:Legal vs Allowed by MrNaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --
      I hate printers.
    2. Re:Legal vs Allowed by palegray.net · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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?

    3. Re:Legal vs Allowed by TehDuffman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:Legal vs Allowed by bartwol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

  2. Re:Past tense of "arise" is "arose" by spire3661 · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    --
    Good-bye
  3. Re:In Australia its legal by timmarhy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  4. Re:VoIP in Latin America by johannesg · · Score: 4, Insightful

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