[asterisk-biz] Vonage Vs. Verizon Update

[Steve Totaro]

Mark C wrote:
>
>
> Steve Totaro wrote:
>> A hardware provider and a service provider are two completely 
>> different animals.
>> It is legal (in Maryland anyways) to sell products such drug 
>> paraphernalia, it only becomes a problem when it is used.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Steve
>>
> This is not entirely true.  A product manufactured with the intent for 
> illegal use or specifically used to facility illegal activity is an 
> illegal item.  When it involves interstate commerce then its a federal 
> issue.  If you don't believe me then go ask Tommy Chong.  The only 
> exception to this are firearms which are protected in the US 
> Constitution.  I don't care to debate the points of state law as they 
> don't apply here.
>

Maybe it was not a great analogy but you get the point.
> What concerns me more is the curiously absence of Cisco Systems.   It 
> is my understanding that Vonage is largely a Cisco house (if not then 
> substitute appropriate vendor).  These patents involve using equipment 
> in their "Designed & Intended" use thus making the hardware 
> manufacturer liable on some points.  A company like Cisco has the 
> "Guns & Ammo" (Lawyers & Money)  to engage in a fight of this nature 
> without a major impact to their bottom line.  Vonage on the other hand 
> has to draw finance from other areas (e.g. marketing, system 
> development, etc.) for the duration thus slowing their growth unless 
> they can come up with additional capital for the fight. 
>

Probably so.  Who knows what is going on behind the scenes?  Verizon 
might be in bed with Cisco.  Maybe they are saving the fight for another 
day.  Not sure why it "concerns" you since it is totally logical that 
going after a high profile target that has become a household word but 
with small pockets (compared to Cisco) would be the way to go.  You get 
to cut the legs off of the largest and most successful residential VoIP 
provider and leave all of their customer's dangling and putting a bad 
taste in everyone's mouth about VoIP in general. 

Two simple questions to ask yourself. 
Go after Cisco, even if you win after all the expense, what does that do 
for the bottom line? 
Go after Vonage and win, what does that do for the bottom line?

Vonage must be spending hundreds of millions on advertising, they can 
divert funds for a bit.  Maybe then I won't have to hear "oooh ooooh 
ooooooooohh ooooooooh oooooh" at every commercial break.  A couple times 
a day would be sufficient. 

I see a greater threat to Comcast, XO, Global Crossing and any of the 
larger VoIP players.  Comcast is quickly catching up to Vonage in the 
household market and is a mortal enemy of Verizon.  

XO and Global Crossing are grabbing up business customers which equates 
to big money. 

What about this situation?  I have a T3 with Global Crossing's IP 
product, in this case they terminate with a TDM DS3 but at the core it 
is all IP right? 
> Maybe this will remind Vonage that they are more like the small 
> players then the "Big Telcos" and start "playing nice" with the 
> community that they grew from.
>

Kinda how Microsoft evolved from the primordial ooze?

I bet Vonage will come out victorious for the simple fact that anyone in 
this day and age would come up with the same concepts and applications.  
The patents include nothing ground breaking and only cover what is 
natural progression.  Sure they were were granted but will deemed to be 
unenforceable.
> Just my opinion, feel free to differ...
>
> Mark Coccimiglio
> IS Manager
> Payroll Services Hawaii, Inc.
> http://www.psh-inc.com
> FWD: 293625
>
>