For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News

 

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 May 2005 17:41:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 199

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    The Front Lines - May 5, 2005 (Jonathan Marashlian)
    Vonage Partners with Verizon to Boost 911 Services (Jack Decker)
    FCC Boss Proposes 911 for Internet Phones - Sources (Jack Decker)
    May 6th - 50th Anniversary of Disk Storage (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Forward Fax to Email (Marise A Klapka)
    Re: Forward Fax to Email (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Who Gets to See the E-mail of the Deceased? (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: U.S. Cities Set up Their Own Wireless Networks (Henry)
    Spam? Scam? What is This? "Make Extra Cash!!!" (netbuxfan@yahoo.com)

Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest.  

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

From: Jonathan Marashlian <jsm@thlglaw.com>
Subject: The Front Lines - May 5, 2005
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 13:08:49 -0400
Organization: The Helein Law Group


http://www.thefrontlines-hlg.com/ The FRONT LINES
http://www.thlglaw.com/

Advancing The Cause of Competition in the Telecommunications Industry 

AT&T FILES EMERGENCY FCC PETITION; SEEKS LEVEL PLAYING FIELD IN REGULATION
OF PREPAID CALLING CARD PROVIDERS

On May 3, 2005, AT&T filed an emergency petition for "immediate
interim relief" with the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"),
asking it to "level the playing field" in prepaid services no later
than May 17, 2005.  In its petition, AT&T stated that the FCC's
February 23, 2005, decision ordering AT&T to pay $160 million in
Universal Service Fund ("USF") charges and subjecting the company to
intrastate access fees for its "enhanced" calling card services and
the FCC's concurrent issuance of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
("NPRM") on other enhanced prepaid services, skewed the regulatory
environment and "created uncertainty and asymmetries."

In order to create regulatory neutrality now, AT&T said that the FCC
should immediately adopt interim rules that all prepaid service
providers pay USF (Universal Service Fund) and interstate access
charges on all their services. This interim measure would apply to
"any form of prepaid calling services that allow users to pay in
advance for a specified amount of billing, whether by card, virtual
card, or PIN-based, serial number-based, or some other account
identification mechanism." AT&T wants this to apply regardless of the
technology that is used to provide service.

According to AT&T's petition, the FCC has authority to remove the
Enhanced Services Provider ("ESP") exemption for prepaid service
providers and direct that USF be paid on all prepaid card services,
regardless of whether they are ultimately determined to be information
services or telecommunications services.  To make sure that all
prepaid service providers are subject to the same access charges, the
FCC could just simply remove the intrastate exemption and treat all
access charges as interstate, according to AT&T.  AT&T says if the FCC
does not want to preempt state regulations, it could instead rule that
prepaid service providers will be subject to interstate or intrastate
access charges.

AT&T said that, as an alternative, the FCC could require that all
prepaid calling service providers pay intrastate access charges on all
calls within a state, and interstate access charges and USF on other
calls. If this alternative is adopted, AT&T said the interim rules
should include "stringent reporting and certification mechanisms."

According to AT&T's petition, there is the risk that if the FCC does
not institute AT&T's proposed measures immediately, in addition to
creating an unfair competitive environment, the Commission is risking
the collection of USF from prepaid service providers.

At this time, the FCC has not taken any action on AT&T's Petition.  

FCC CIRCULATING ORDER TO REQUIRE VoIP PROVIDERS TO OFFER 911 SERVICES

Recent reports indicate that FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has proposed
requiring Internet-based telephone service provider ("VoIP") to offer
911 emergency services to customers by as early as the end of
September.

After a few incidents where customers failed to reach emergency
officials when they dialed 911, federal regulators are increasing
pressure on companies to ensure those calls get routed and answered
properly with location information.

The proposal would require VoIP providers to route 911 calls directly
to primary emergency lines within four months of the order being
issued.

Martin has circulated the proposal to his fellow Commissioners which
means it could be voted on as early as the FCC's May 19th open
meeting.

FCC UPHOLDS COMPETITIVE ACCESS TO ILEC DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE

On April 29, 2005, the FCC released an Order upholding and clarifying
its rules governing the duty of local exchange carriers to grant
competing carriers access to directory assistance information.

The FCC denied a petition filed by BellSouth and SBC seeking
reconsideration of rules that bar them from imposing restrictions on
the use by competitors of directory assistance information competitors
obtain from the LECs under the Communications Act.  Section 251(b)(3)
of the Act requires that LECs provide nondiscriminatory access to
directory assistance, and the FCC has determined that this permits
competitors to have the same access to directory assistance
information that the LECs provide to themselves.

The order clarifies however, that a LEC must not provide access to
numbers that are unlisted at the customer's request. And while
competing directory assistance providers may be entitled to
nondiscriminatory access to directory assistance information, they
still must adhere to the privacy requests made by LEC customers.

Finally, the FCC rejected SBC and BellSouth's argument that LECs
should not be required to provide access to local listings that were
obtained from third parties. Even though the FCC has declined to
require LECs to provide nondiscriminatory access to nonlocal directory
assistance data, it has consistently required nondiscriminatory access
to all of their local directory assistance database listings.
  _____  

The Front Lines is a free publication of The Helein Law Group, LLP,
providing clients and interested parties with valuable information,
news, and updates regarding regulatory and legal developments
primarily impacting companies engaged in the competitive
telecommunications industry.

The Front Lines does not purport to offer legal advice nor does it
establish a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. If you have
questions about a particular article, general concerns, or wish to
seek legal counsel regarding a specific regulatory or legal matter
affecting your company, please contact our firm at 703-714-1313 or
visit our website:

 <http://www.thlglaw.com/> www.THLGlaw.com

The Helein Law Group, LLP
8180 Greensboro Drive, Suite 700
McLean, Virginia 22102
  _____  


THLG Affiliations:
 
http://www.voicelog.com/ 
http://www.voicelog.com/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:51:10 -0400
Subject: Vonage Partners with Verizon to Boost 911 Services


http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812846,00.asp

By Libe Goad

Some voice over IP customers in select parts of the country could,
within 6 months, have improved access to 911 emergency services,
thanks to a new alliance forged between broadband phone service
provider Vonage Holdings Corp. and Verizon.

"Verizon is a responsible steward of the E911 [Enhanced 911] public
trust," Vonage CEO Jeffrey Citron said, "through their foresight,
Vonage is able to implement an E911 solution that will serve all
customers."

After the rollout takes place, customers will be relieved from having
to tell emergency operators their whereabouts because, for the first
time, the service will let operators know the caller's location and
callback number.

Since the broadband service allows customers to use area codes from
other parts of the country, routing these calls to a localized
emergency service has taken some serious maneuvering.

"We've historically offered the wireline service, a select kind of
solution that's restrictive because it can only use local telephone
numbers," Vonage spokesperson Brooke Schulz said.

"We need to architect a solution that works for all of our customers,
especially since 40 percent or more use non-local phone numbers."

Full story at:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1812846,00.asp

How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html

If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/

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

From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld_on_request>
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:48:49 -0400
Subject: FCC Boss Proposes 911 for Internet Phones - Sources


http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=MUOJOYJHQOOL4CRBAELCFFA?type=technologyNews&storyID=8397206

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Federal Communications Commission Chairman
Kevin Martin has proposed requiring Internet-based telephone services
to offer 911 emergency services to customers by as early as the end of
September, people familiar with the plan said on Wednesday.

After a few incidents where customers failed to reach emergency
officials when they dialed 911, federal regulators are increasing
pressure on companies to ensure those calls get routed and answered
properly with location information.

The proposal would require companies like Vonage Holdings Corp. to
route 911 calls directly to primary emergency lines within four months
of the order being issued, the sources said, declining to be
identified because the proposal is not a public record.

Martin has circulated the proposal so it could be voted at the
agency's open meeting on May 19, the sources said. He would have to
win the votes of two of the other three FCC commissioners for approval
or work out a compromise with them.

An FCC spokesman had no immediate comment.

Full story at:
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=MUOJOYJHQOOL4CRBAELCFFA?type=technologyNews&storyID=8397206

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: May 6th -- 50th Anniversary of Disk Storage
Date: 5 May 2005 10:56:56 -0700


On May 6, 1955, IBM publicly demonstrated its new invention, disk
storage.  The disk drive would hold far more data at lower cost than
the existing magnetic drum.

The disk drive allowed for information to accessed immediately since
the disk arm went directly to the location of the data.  With magnetic
tape, the tape file must be sequentially read record by record to find
the desired data.

The initial disk drive was huge and contained 5 million characters.
Improvements got that up to 50 million.

The drive was formally announced as a product in September, 1956.  The
disk was 350 and was part of the 305 system.  The 350 disk was later
enabled to attached to existing and upcoming IBM computers.

[I don't know what IBM considers the "official" anniversary date.]

For the first 30 years, disk drives remained expensive and limited to
critical information.  But soon the price dropped and capacity climbed
making them very cheap even for home use.

The Internet could not exist today without the disk drive which stores
everything we want to see.

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

Subject: Re: Forwad Fax to Email
From: Withheld on Request
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 11:41:00 -0500


* PAT - PLEASE REMOVE MY NAME AND E-MAIL ADDRESS.  THANKS.

Jeremy wrote:

> I  currently have  a fax  number that  is widely  used by  my clients.
> Problem is that I  get a ton of fax "spam" if  you will.  I am looking
> for the BEST  solution to have these faxes  forwarded to e-mail, while
> keeping my  existing fax number since  that is the  one everyone knows
> and uses.

You may want to look into a fax modem and check out Symantec's WinFax
Pro software.  I haven't tried it myself, but the description seems to
have what you're looking for.

-Marise

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

From: DevilsPGD <spamsucks@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Forward Fax to Email
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 12:23:03 -0600
Organization: Disorganized


In message <telecom24.197.12@telecom-digest.org> LB@notmine.com wrote:

> Jeremy wrote:

>> I  currently have  a fax  number that  is widely  used by  my clients.
>> Problem is that I  get a ton of fax "spam" if  you will.  I am looking
>> for the BEST  solution to have these faxes  forwarded to e-mail, while
>> keeping my  existing fax number since  that is the  one everyone knows
>> and uses.

> Snipped OP for brevity.

> Uh Pat ...

> "[TELECOM Digest  Editor's Note: Why don't you  consider forwarding all
> of it, _everything_, to email, "

> It would seem Jeremy is asking how to do just that.

> How does one forward everything from a fax number to an email address?

http://www.relayfax.com/ is an example of one product that will do the
trick.

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

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock)
Subject: Re: Who Gets to See the E-mail of the Deceased?
Date: 5 May 2005 12:48:49 -0700


Lisa Minter wrote:

> by Susan Llewelyn Leach Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

> It's an old story with a heart breaking twist. A young marine is
> killed in the line of duty in Iraq and his parents, in their sorrow,
> request all his belongings, including his correspondence -- in this
> case, his e-mail.

The e-mail should be treated no differently than any other personal
belongings and they revert to the next of kin or recipients specified
in a will.

This really should be a no-brainer, and the parents should not have
had to go court to get what was rightfully theirs.

There is nothing special about e-mail that make them any different
than any other very personal belongings, such as a diary or account
statements.  All of these pass on to an estate via the executor or
next of kim.

Some critics complained that email might contain embarassing
information.  That is not an excuse because (1) legal protection
against "embarassment" ceases when one dies and (2) diaries, bank
account statements, etc., might also contain just as much embarassing
information.

Just because e-mail is intangible is irrelevent.  Money is bank
accounts is intangible too--just bits on a computer--until the bank
releases it and converts it into cash.

In the event there is any legally confidential material in an email
account, the estate executor would be responsible to care for it just
as he would any confidential documents found within an estate.

Senders of sensitive information by email have often been told that
email is not private and to be cautious.

> The Internet company refuses to give out the marine's password, saying
> that would violate its privacy rules.

To do that the Internet company would have to have explicitly had a
contract clause stating it would destroy all stored email upon the
death of a subscriber in all cases.  However, I'm not sure such a
clause would be legal since it might interfere with estate law.
Someone's will may have to contain a directive "in the event of my
death destroy the following..." (as many wills do contain).

Quoting Christian Science Monitor report again:

> And how much access should relatives have to a record of the
> thoughts of a loved one who has passed away, especially ones that can
> be as extensive, intimate, -- and even embarrassing -- as in e-mail?

That is utterly irrelevent.  It's the same risk as paper.
Unfortunately, during wartime many loved ones did find out painfully
things that their family was doing that were very hurtful through the
discovery of letters.

> "We thought we had absolute privacy and now we have learned that
> after our death, a family member could possibly wrangle access to
> [our] personal space," one blogger lamented on drudge.com.

"Absolute privacy" doesn't exist in the on-line world unless someone
makes special arrangements for it to be there.

> "If the soldier had wanted his family to read his e-mail, then he
> would have CC'd or BCC'd them," another wrote.

It doesn't work that well.  Your personal effects automatically
revert to your family or estate unless you explicitly give
instructions otherwise.  This is the way it always worked.

The executor of an estate is duty bound to ascertain all assets and
personal property of a deceased and distribute per the will.
Accordingly, the executor needs access to anything and everything
belonging to the deceased.  If no executor was appointed, that would
to next of kin with the same rights of access.

> The legal solution, Professor Perritt says, is to write a will and
> bequeath the e-mail to a trustee who is instructed to destroy
> it. "That would leave no doubt in the service provider's mind about
> what's supposed to happen," he says, "and it would keep it away from
> your family."

That is correct and the only way to do it.  And that not only applies
to email but other personal effects as well.  If you have letters from
an old (or current) lover you want kept secret, or a collection of
certain magazines you're embarassed about, you must make advance
arrangements for their prompt destruction in the case of your death or
severe disability.

The lesson here is (1) have a will which covers your personal
papers and (2) never put anything in an email you don't want
the entire world to know about.  There's far too much risk
of release.

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

From: henry999@eircom.net (Henry)
Subject: Re: U.S. Cities Set up Their Own Wireless Networks
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 22:51:54 +0300
Organization: Elisa Internet customer


Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com> wrote (discussing the
wireless network set up in various towns):

> What about where you live?

Lahti is a city of 100,000 people in south-central Finland.

http://www.yle.fi/news/id11139.html

cheers,

Henry

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

From: netbuxfan@yahoo.com
Subject: Spam? Scam? What is This? "Make Extra Cash!!!"
Date: 5 May 2005 12:18:09 -0700


Looking to earn extra cash for an absolute minimal amount of work?
Well, this is it! NETBUX is the answer.

Go to this link:

http://netbux.org/?r=127820

Register yourself with Netbux and earn money for just browsing your
favourite subjects on the web!  Get paid $0.02 for each search, which
is then deposited to your Paypal account. And better yet you receive an
an additional $0.02 for every search made by your friends, family and
virtually anyone you tell about Netbux.  And of course they make money
when they tell other people.

Don't be sceptical.  This does work!  I've made lots in the last few
days as a registered member.  Just for turning people on to this
opportunity and searching a few subjects.

YOU'VE GOT NOTHING TO LOSE AND EVERYTHING TO GAIN!!!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So, first of all, that ?r=127820 at the
top as part of the URL tells us _you_ will get your two cents worth.
I went over to netbux and looked at their FAQ, their 'policies' and
their registration form. The company went into business just a month
ago it appears. For one thing, you have to do all your searhes from
_their_ search box, and you are limited to 40 searches per day, or
80 cents. But, like any good pyramid scheme, you also get paid for the
guys you can lure into joining you there. A question on their FAQ was
'how do you (meaning the netbux people, I assume) get the money you
pay to us?'  They say they make their money by the advertisements 
that people view (and I presume click on) when on the netbux page. On
their search box, although there are many search engines to pick
through, the default search engine appears to be Google, and I would
suppose not many of the inquirers bother to change the default, but
you can if you wish. 

If this is just a pyramid scheme then all I can say is I am glad I am
a Google publisher and not an advertiser. But, the netbux people say
it is all on the up-and-up and if they 'catch you cheating' you will
not only be suspended from their program, but probably all your
downline will come under much suspicion also.  Netbux says they will
pay you for your searches done once per month via PayPal at the rate
of .02 per search X up to 40 per day [80 cents] X 30 days in a month X
.02 per each person you bring into the 'program' _and their searches_
with payout on the 15th of each month when you have at least fifty
dollars accrued. Both the FAQ and the 'program policies' pages are
quite lengthy and detailed. 

If anyone wants to investigate this and write a summary on exactly
what the deal is then look at http://netbux.org but don't use the
 ?r=127820 part on the end unless _you_ decide it is a worthwhile
thing; in which case login again and use it so the dude will get his
two cents for your body and two cents for each of your searches. In
any event, do write and tell me what I am missing.  I am curious. PAT]

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


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

Email <==> FTP:  telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org 

      Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
      a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
      for archives files. You can get desired files in email.

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

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

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V24 #199
******************************

Return to Archives**Older Issues