[VOIPSEC] VOIP for free??

[Brian Rosen]

Oh, I think it's a safe bet that the feds will preempt the states on any
regulation of VoIP itself (they can't preempt things like fair disclosure,
the basis of the Texas lawsuit against Vonage).  They have said they will,
they have done so repeatedly, and the courts have upheld them repeatedly.

Only about half of the costs of the 9-1-1 system are paid by the surcharges.
General revenue covers the rest.  Its usually explained as the surcharges
cover the equipment and the general revenue covers the operating expense,
but it's not any where near that simple.  Agree that broadband won't get a
free ride for long.

Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: Voipsec-bounces at voipsa.org [mailto:Voipsec-bounces at voipsa.org] On
Behalf Of Geoff Devine
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 7:26 AM
To: Voipsec at voipsa.org
Subject: RE: [VOIPSEC] VOIP for free??

Brian Rosen writes:

>While I expect that we will see some very "light touch" regulations on U.S.
VoIP service providers, I don't think that we can count on that to get the
kind of service we want.  
 
I don't think this is clear yet.  Historically, 911 services have been
provided by state and local government.  911 tandems and public service
answering positions are typically paid for by adding a monthly tax to
subscriber phone bills.  One could argue that it's very poor public policy
to allow rich people who can afford broadband access to opt out of paying
the telecom taxes that subsidize things like 911 and universal access.  A
number of states have started moves to regulate VoIP 911 conformance.  This
will all end up in the courts and I don't think anyone can predict the
outcome.
 
Geoff