[Asterisk-biz] FW: 911 Legislation

Wed Apr 20 21:15:18 MST 2005

Yea, legally it doesn't have to make sense. Especially when you have a
little girl crying because she tried and tried to call for help but no one
answered!

What about companies such as Intrado? Are they ridiculously expensive?
Feasible? Anyone have any experience with this or other such companies that
supposedly provide a solution?

-Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Alexander Lopez
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 8:22 PM
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: RE: [Asterisk-biz] FW: 911 Legislation

 If you have entered into a contract with your customer and have
disclosed the fact that you do not have, or in fact have untraditional
911 services then.................

------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------  

http://cobrands.business.findlaw.com/newcontent/flg/ch9/st2/st21/qa2.htm
l

Q : What if the contract became unenforceable because something made it
illegal after the people agreed to it? 

A : Generally speaking, the Constitution forbids lawmakers from passing
laws that would impair the rights people bargain for in contracts.
Therefore, a contract is usually considered by courts in light of the
law which applied at the time the contract was made -unless the change
in the law involves a compelling public policy. 

For example, a contract between a railroad and a property owner who
leased a right-of-way to the railroad provided that the railroad was not
responsible for any fire damage to the property caused by locomotives.
Later, the state legislature made it illegal to fail to keep certain
precautions against fire damaging an adjoining property. The court held
that, even if that law would have made the contract illegal (because it
didn't include the newly-required precautions), because it was passed
after the contract was made it did not affect the contract.

Typically, however, courts say that because of a change in public policy
as a result of the change in the law, they will not enforce the old
contract. Obviously, a contract to sell someone a slave could not be
enforced after slavery became illegal; neither could you enforce a
contract to purchase a banned assault rifle that was made before the ban
went into effect. This works both ways: a contract that was illegal when
made usually will not be enforced, even though it would be legal if
entered into today. One case involved a contract which violated wartime
price-controls, entered into when those controls were in effect, which
one of the parties wanted enforced after the war. The court ruled that a
contract that was so damaging to the public good when made (and when no
change in the law was anticipated) should never be enforced. To do so
would have been to provide an incentive to enter into illegal contracts
in the hope that they will someday be enforceable a bad prescription for
effective public policy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
I do not think that 'regulation' can be forced upon an unregulated
medium. I know that that is what happened in the Airline, Telco, Energy,
etc., etc., etc...... But politicians give there ear to the Lobbyist and
PACs. We (consumers, SMB, and others) do not get the 'eartime' the
others do.  There is much speculation about the future of unregulated
VoIP, I think the Telcos learned a big leason with the Internet Boom.
They may just offer a better product and win out that way.  

If you can put together an ITSP with a shoestring budget, what can a
multi-BILLION corporation do????

Public policy in this case is freedom to choose price vs. features, let
the consumers decide. Nothing gets the point across faster than the P/L
statement.

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Me
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 7:08 PM
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-biz] FW: 911 Legislation

What if I live in Texas and signup for service then move to Tokyo and
take my ATA with me :)

I am not sure the politicians get it..

I don't think there is anything wrong with all of us trying to alert
people of the fact that 911 may not work or exist. However, there is
talk of politicians wanting to put bills on the table that would REQUIRE
all voip providers to offer 911 service... This is BAD for the little
guys out trying to run their businesses unless their name is _____ Bell
and they have more money than God.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Welter" <mike at introspect.com>
To: "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion" 
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-biz] FW: 911 Legislation

> jltaylor wrote:
>> 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
>
> In my younger days :-) intra-state private line rates in California
were 
> exorbitant.  The net result was that most Pacific Tel. private lines
in 
> Northern California were routed through Reno and charged at the much
lower 
> inter-state rate.
>
> Which makes me wonder... if a Texas resident signs for a service
offered 
> out of, say, New Jersey, does Texas law apply?
>
> I reside in Colorado and use the NJ service.  If I travel to Dallas
and 
> use my NJ provider at the airport, does Texas law apply?
>
> Not knowing where the customer is physically located, will all ITSPs
have 
> to comply with Texas law just to insulate themselves from lawsuits?
>
> These politicians (lawyers all) are driving me nuts!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Biz mailing list
> Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> 

_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Biz mailing list
Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz

_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Biz mailing list
Asterisk-Biz at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz