[Asterisk-biz] FW: 911 Legislation

[Me]

I think the 911 issues are so way overblown by the media it's crazy.

I am pretty sure most of the people claiming they didn't know are just full 
of it..

I signed up for Vonage many moons ago when it was very new and even then 
they made it very clear.

It's a B**ch when your house burns down and it makes it a little easier to 
take if you can blame someone else for it or better yet, sue someone for it. 
People are just looking for someone to blame in general for just about 
everything. Once again it comes down to a bunch of ****** that refuse to 
take personal responsibility for their own actions or lack there of.

Sorry, I will get off my soap box now. I am not sure if I can be of any help 
but, I am in Texas and would be happy to do what I can to keep this 911 
stuff from getting out of hand.

They didn't do this to the cell phone operators when they were coming up..

If 911 service is required by all VOIP providers this will probably squash 
all the mom and pop voip operators and leave it to only the biggest of 
players. This would really stink and would REALLY slow the progression of 
VOIP technologies like Asterisk for example.

Todd Routhier

Lightwave Technologies, LLC.

The Colony, TX (Dallas)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jltaylor" <jltaylor at metrotel.net>
To: "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion" 
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 12:28 PM
Subject: [Asterisk-biz] FW: 911 Legislation


>
> I'm working with Texas State Rep Frost's office on wording for this bill.
> Some type of language will make it through this session.
>
> The language below will make it almost impossible for customers to signup 
> on
> the web and provision their own service.
>
> It appears that this legislation favors the LEC's.
>
> Cellular is not required to give notice about how 911 may not work 
> properly.
> I live so far out that when the electricity goes off, my phone service 
> will
> fail in about two hours and the LEC is not required to have me sign off on 
> a
> document that warns me of not having 911 after a storm.
> The argument that VOIP service is Interstate is a good one.
>
> However, some type of acceptable legislation would afford us some kind of
> protection from the standpoint of "we are complying with the law"
>
> Your comments are appreciated.
>
> James Taylor
> MetroTel
> 3505 Summerhill Road
> Suite 11
> Texarkana, Tx  75503
> 903-793-1956
>
> =========================================================
>
> 79R5881 CBH-D
>
> By:  Frost                                                        H.B. No.
> 2592
>
>
> A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
>
>
> AN ACT
>
>
> relating to a requirement that certain broadband network operators
> provide notice of inability to access emergency services.
> BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
> SECTION 1.  Subchapter A, Chapter 64, Utilities Code, is
> amended by adding Section 64.005 to read as follows:
> Sec. 64.005.  NOTICE OF INABILITY TO ACCESS EMERGENCY
> SERVICES.  (a)  This section applies to an entity that uses a
> broadband network to provide a service that would be classified as a
> local exchange telephone service if the service were provided by a
> telecommunications utility and the service provided by the entity
> does not provide access to 911 service or dual party relay service.
> (b)  An entity to which this section applies may not enter
> into a contract to provide a service described by Subsection (a)
> unless the entity first provides to the customer a notice that the
> service does not provide access to 911 service or to dual party
> relay service, as appropriate. The notice must:
> (1)  be a separate document;
> (2)  include a requirement that the customer sign and
> date the document; and
> (3)  conspicuously state that, by signing and dating
> the document, the customer acknowledges that the customer will not
> be able to use the service to access 911 service or dual party relay
> service, as appropriate.
> (c)  At least annually, an entity to which this section
> applies shall send to each customer to whom the entity provides a
> service described by Subsection (a) a notice that the service does
> not provide access to 911 service or dual party relay service, as
> appropriate.  The entity shall include the notice as a separate
> document in the customer's bill.
> (d)  Except as preempted by federal law, the commission has
> all jurisdiction necessary to enforce this section.
> SECTION 2.  This Act applies to a contract entered into or
> renewed on or after the effective date of this Act.  A contract
> entered into or renewed before that date is governed by the law in
> effect on the date the contract was entered into or renewed, and
> that law is continued in effect for that purpose.
> SECTION 3.  This Act takes effect September 1, 2005.
>
>
> James Taylor
> MetroTel
> 3505 Summerhill Road
> Suite 11
> Texarkana, Tx  75503
> 903-793-1956
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Biz mailing list
> Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>