[asterisk-biz] FCC: Telcos Must Interconnect VoIP

[Matthew Rubenstein]

	I hadn't heard of any details of their problems. All I know is from the
article, which doesn't say. But I expect they must have had *some*
problems, or the court would have refused to hear a case without
damages, even though TW would still have gained from the precedent.
Cablecos have now pulled it off: they have the access and carriage
rights of a "phone company", but not the tariff and other liabilities of
a "telecom service".


On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 19:22 -0500, Dean Collins wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> How were they not interconnecting in the past? What was happening when
> VoIP carriers tried to deliver calls to these numbers?
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dean Collins
> Cognation Pty Ltd
> dean at cognation.net
> +1-212-203-4357 Ph
> +1-917-207-3420 Mb
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-biz-
> > bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Matthew Rubenstein
> > Sent: Friday, 2 March 2007 6:07 PM
> > To: Asterisk-Biz
> > Subject: [asterisk-biz] FCC: Telcos Must Interconnect VoIP
> > 
> > 	The FCC ruled that TimeWarner's VoIP service must be freely
> > interconnected with POTS service by telcos, even though the FCC
> doesn't
> > classify VoIP as a "telecom *service*":
> > http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6420646.html?display=Breaking
> > +News .
> > 
> > 	Does this affect Asterisk operators (eg. competing with TW)? Any
> > previous restrictions now lifted? Continuing restrictions not avoided
> > because this decision is TW-specific? Or was TW facing restrictions
> that
> > Asterisk operators haven't faced?
> > --
> > 
> > (C) Matthew Rubenstein
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> > 
> > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> >    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
-- 

(C) Matthew Rubenstein