From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Nov 26 20:27:40 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iAR1Rel27125; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:27:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:27:40 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200411270127.iAR1Rel27125@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #569 TELECOM Digest Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:26:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 569 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Actor Must Pay $309,600 in Film Piracy Case (Lisa Minter) Next: TV Meets IP (Monty Solomon) TV's Spectrum Showdown (Monty Solomon) Wireless Wish List (Monty Solomon) Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands (Paul Barnes) World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming (T. Tyagi) Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits (Robert Bonomi) Re: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report (Andrew) Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate (Scott Dorsey) Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? (Tony P.) Holidays Looking Merry for Web Retailers (Lisa Minter) Kazaa Offers Unlimited Free Internet Phone Calls (Lisa Minter) FCC Watching SBC Phone Charges to VOIP Carriers (Lisa Minter) 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: Lisa Minter Subject: Actor Must Pay $309,600 in Film Piracy Case Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:02:29 EST LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Warner Bros. has secured a $309,600 judgment against an actor for allegedly making promotional "screener" copies of "The Last Samurai" and "Mystic River" available for bootleg DVD copying and unauthorized Internet trading, the studio said Tuesday. Studio officials say Carmine Caridi, a former recurring actor on "NYPD Blue," has refused to respond to their civil suit for copyright infringement, forcing them to ask the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to enter a default judgment of $150,000 per film and $9,600 in attorney fees. Judge Stephen Wilson granted that request, adding that the defendant's conduct was "particularly egregious" because of the intentional and deliberate nature of the infringement. Caridi and co-defendant Russell Sprague were caught because the screeners were individually watermarked for each recipient. "Judge Wilson's award and comments clearly show that due to the viral nature of the Internet, even one illegally used copy of a film can cause significant financial damage," said Darcy Antonellis, senior vp worldwide anti-piracy operations at Warner Bros. Entertainment. "We hope that the court's award against Mr. Caridi as well as the criminal sentence to be handed down against Sprague, whose actions were equally destructive, will prove a deterrent against the stealing of intellectual property." Caridi could not be reached for comment Tuesday, and studio officials acknowledge that it may be difficult to collect the judgment against him. Caridi's credits include his role as Det. Vince Gotelli on ABC's "NYPD Blue." For his part, Sprague was charged with in federal court with violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act leading him to plead guilty March 23. His sentencing is pending, and a civil suit could follow. According to Warner Bros., Caridi, as a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, signed an agreement before he received the 2003 awards season screeners promising not to circulate them. It is believed that he immediately sent the VHS screeners to Sprague in Homewood, Ill., where they were copied onto DVD and converted to digital files that were posted on the Internet. The Academy's board of governors expelled Caridi on Feb. 3 for violating the agreement. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service/Hollywood Reporter.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:18:51 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Next: TV Meets IP SPECIAL REPORT: TV, TODAY AND TOMORROW Internet technologies promise to soon take couch potatoes to worlds far beyond TiVo. Even phone companies could benefit big-time Just a few years ago, the fine art of watching TV seemed unlikely to change much. You watched programs when the networks told you to watch them. Maybe you taped them on a videocassette recorder. Either way, your choices were limited. Then along came the TiVo (TIVO ) digital video recorder, which as its 2 million loyal customers will tell you, added more than a little convenience to the coach potato's world. Turns out, TiVo was just the start. A new wave of TV-related innovation called IP-TV is just starting to reach consumers. Just as the service known as voice over Internet protocol is poised to revolutionize the phone business by offering a low-cost Internet alternative to traditional phone service, IP-TV could bring Internet-style interactivity and flexibility to your TV set. It won't happen overnight, of course. But over the next decade, the long-hyped notion of "video-on-demand" could become commonplace, allowing consumers to watch what they want, when they want to. They'll be able to control their IP-TV service remotely through a PC or a cell phone. And they'll be able to personalize their content, whether they want to watch the local high school football game or home movies. http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2004/tc20041123_3012_tc184.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:20:24 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TV's Spectrum Showdown SPECIAL REPORT: TV, TODAY AND TOMORROW In a deal originally made in 1996, broadcasters may soon be forced to return airwaves now used to transmit analog signals For nearly a decade, the nation's 1,700 TV stations have been promising to broadcast crystal-clear digital signals to viewers across the country. But somehow, rushing toward that end never seemed to be entirely in their best interest. Those promises go back to a deal broadcasters made with the federal government under the 1996 Telecommunications Act and a follow-up congressional bill a year later. Broadcasters received free electronic airwaves -- which are technically owned by the public and controlled by the federal government -- for digital transmissions. In return, they had to give back the airwaves they now use for their old analog broadcasts, which had been doled out over several decades. But they didn't have to return it until 85% of U.S. households receive digital signals or the year 2006, whichever came later. Now patience is running out for the broadcasters to turn in that valuable piece of the sky. The year 2006 is just around the corner, and carriers are now sending digital signals that reach 85% of households in just about all of the nation's 210 TV markets (even though not all those households have digital-ready TVs). http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2004/tc20041123_3981_tc184.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:05:52 -0500 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wireless Wish List By BART ZIEGLER WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING to find the perfect gift for your favorite keyboard jockey, or just indulging in a little extracurricular shopping for yourself, the hottest gear this season is all about cutting the cord. The new wireless gadgets include keyboards and mice, printers and headphones - even wireless digital music machines that play songs stored on a PC through a home stereo. The first thing you'll need is a working knowledge of the two basic wireless technologies, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, so you can choose the right flavor of wirelessness, or build on what you already have in place. You can certainly mix these two technologies in the same house, but a Wi-Fi gadget can't talk to a Bluetooth one. A Wi-Fi setup is a true wireless network whose signal covers an entire house, inside and out. It enables users to wander from an upstairs bedroom to the downstairs kitchen to the outdoor patio with a Wi-Fi-equipped laptop, all the while enjoying high-speed Internet access transmitted via a radio signal. If you don't already have a Wi-Fi network at home, installation involves buying a wireless router from such companies as Netgear, Belkin or Linksys, then hooking it up to a DSL or cable modem. Each computer you want to connect to the network needs a Wi-Fi card or built-in Wi-Fi capability - many new laptops come already equipped. Routers go for $80 or more, and PC cards can be had for as little as $30, a perfect gift combo. Bluetooth, by contrast, is a shorter-range technology. It's aimed mostly at wirelessly linking one device directly to another, such as connecting a PDA or cell phone to a PC to synchronize address books and to-do lists. Bluetooth also can be used to link a wireless headset to a cell phone, or to connect a Palm or PocketPC to a printer. Generally speaking, the Bluetooth devices you're connecting must be within 30 feet of each other, though the signal does penetrate most walls. You can add Bluetooth to a laptop computer with a special card that fits into the PC card slot, such as 3Com's Wireless Bluetooth PC Card, which goes for about $100. Or you could use an even smaller, cheaper device that is tinier than a box of matches and that inserts into a computer's USB port. One to consider is Belkin's Bluetooth Adapter, which lists for $60. These should work with most any Windows-based computer. Another way to add Bluetooth to a Windows desktop computer is with what's called a Bluetooth hub. This small device plugs into the back of a PC, then serves as a central access point for various Bluetooth-equipped gadgets. For Apple users, you can convert a Macintosh to Bluetooth by buying D-Link's DBT-120 Bluetooth adapter ($40), which plugs into the USB port. Once you've got the basics in place, here are some great new wireless gadgets to enhance your cordless lifestyle. http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/report-200411.html ------------------------------ From: Paul Barnes Subject: Routing Problems To the Cayman Islands Date: 26 Nov 2004 05:45:31 -0800 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] Hi All: I work for Cable and Wireless in the Caribbean, and we have received several complaints that in the past 3-4 weeks, that persons in many parts of the world (including the US and Canada) who try to call cellphone NXX codes in the Cayman Islands have been experiencing difficulties. Some of the experiences received when placing the calls are dead air, fast busies, reorder tones, pretty much everything else besides a completed call. Note that the cellular infrastructure is back on its feet after the passage of Hurricane Ivan in September, RF problems are not contributing to this issue. We have arranged for test calls to be made to the Cayman cellphone NXX ranges from all of the major Tier 1 international carriers with whom C&W has agreements to bring traffic into the region: ATT, IDT, MCI, Sprint, BT, Teleglobe and CWC. All of these test calls were successful. We think that these problems may have resulted from some least-cost routing arrangement that a tier 2 or 3 carrier is engaged in. C&W has no direct relationships with any such carriers. I was hoping that someone in the group might be able to offer some advice on how we could proceed to get some help in fixing this routing problem. I have listed below some test Cayman cellular numbers, if any one in the group would be so good as to dial these numbers and let me know if they were successful in reach the party in Cayman, I would appreciate it. Cayman Islands NPA, 345 (part of the North American Numbering plan) Test numbers: 345 516 0810 345 525 0006 345 916 2850 345 914 0303 Thanks in advance for any feedback, advice, ideas, etc. Regards, Paul Barnes Manager, Technology & Operations Cable & Wireless Carrier Services Tel: 246-292-1297 Email: paul.r.barnes@cw.com ------------------------------ From: taruntyagiji@yahoo.com (Author Tarun Tyagi) Subject: World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming Date: 26 Nov 2004 09:13:19 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Hi! I am glad to introduce World's First Book on Professional Data Recovery Programming. Book also Includes a FREE CD, which contains complete Source Codes of all the software/Programs described within the book and may interesting tools You can see the contents of the book and order Online on following link: http://www.DataDoctor.biz/author.htm The Details of the Book are as follows: Title of the book: "Data Recovery with & without Programming" Author of the book: Tarun Tyagi Publishers of the book: BPB Publications, New Delhi, India Number of Pages: 540 Size: (9.5 x 7.5 x 1.0) Inches ISBN: 81-7656-922-4 Price: $ 69.00 (Including Shipping Charge, Cost of Book and Other expenses) Enjoy Reading!! Regards, Tarun Tyagi J-110, Patel Nagar - 1, Ghaziabad (U.P.), India -201001 Cell: (+91)9868337762 http://www.DataDoctor.Biz ------------------------------ Organization: Robert Bonomi Consulting Subject: Re: What Wal-Mart Knows About Customers' Habits From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:18:18 +0000 In article , DevilsPGD wrote: > In message > bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote: >>> Sure. However, since the customer can request cash back it's another >>> way to steal. The cashier fakes problems scanning an item, punches in >>> the amount manually as cash, and gives the customer the item. >>> The customer isn't over charged, so has no reason to complain. >>> The cashier's till is now over -- Now she just needs to grab the cash >>> at some point during the transaction. >> No, the till is _not_ over. Punching in the amount as 'cash due' >> instead of scanning the item, is no different than scanning the item >> itself, as far as the cash balance in the till goes. The *only* >> difference is in the store 'inventory', where the proper item was >> -not- deducted from the count. > I wasn't clear enough ... Not "Punches the amount as cash from the > customer", I meant "punches in a cash back request for the same > amount" AH. Of course, almost all even semi-current computerized cash-register implementations _will_not_ let you do that, *during* charged item entry. It has to be done at the end of the transaction. *after* the total has been calculated/displayed, _and_ the 'payment type' has been selected. And, a 'cash back' request is valid _only_ on a credit/debit/ATM card transaction. There is no need for it, on a 'cash' or 'check' transaction, because the 'cash back' is automatic, based on the over-payment recorded. And, on the 'card' transactions, 'cash back' is almost always itemized separately on the actual 'card transaction' (_not_ the cash-register) receipt. Just *one* of the reasons you get that _second_ piece of paper, that is the 'carbon' from the one you _signed_. Also, most 'newer' register systems won't do a 'cash back' request, *at*all*, unless the _customer_ keys in the amount on the keypad facing _them_. > In essence a cash back request means the customer is purchasing cash > from the till. This gets the cash out of the till (and into the > cashier's pocket), plus of course it screws up inventory. > Another twist would be to activate a $20 gift card instead of ringing > up a purchase of just over $20. This would be more likely to get > caught though, since you then have to spend the gift card at some > point. Not terribly practical. Requires (a) bypassing the scanner with the $20 item, (b) having the 'unregistered' card _in_hand_ at the opportune moment, (c) *scanning* (or swiping) the card, *and* making the appropriate entries on the register keyboard. >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You make it sound as though local >> acceptance of local C of C gift certificates is going to be a major, >> massive processing operation in a small town like ours. You make it >> sound as though joining the local C of C in a small town to show >> support of other community merchants and share tips, ideas, etc is >> going to cause a major outlay for Walmart. You make it sound as though >> any modicum of customer service and goodwill is going to have an >> effect on their 'lower prices'. > Unfortunately doing anything unique / "local" will probably cost more > money in the bureaucracy of accounting for the C of C gift > certificates then they could possibly bring in. Exactly. The 'hard dollar' cost of that 'special handling' is far higher than the possible 'intangible' good will generated. >> Walmart does have its own gift 'certificates' in the form of prepaid >> plastic credit cards, branded in their own name, in the 6011 series >> of numbers. Those are processed like credit card sales at the cash >> register, and must cost them something to process. > As a general rule those cards make money due to administration fees > that let Walmart keep the leftover money if a card gets lost or > destroyed, or otherwise goes unused. Plus, like all gift certificate > type programs, it gets the money out of the customer's hand sooner, > which means Walmart can invest the money now. > The cost to manage the cards shouldn't be substantial. There is a NON-TRIVIAL, *one-time*, already 'sunk', cost for the programming to support in-house-issued gift cards. Spread across _all_ the stores, and _all_ the gift cards sold. Over the entire lifetime of the software. On a 'per card' basis, that cost is 'close enough' to zero, as to not matter. The 'labor' for handling the in-house card, when presented, is, for all practical purposes, equivalent to that required for any other form of payment. No additional burden there. There is a bit of a cost in querying/updating the gift card database. It is, however, miniscule. The cost of purchasing the disk storage for say, 100 *million* cards is on the order of $50. Per card, this is _way_ down in the noise -- even if the system is being used at only, say =one=percent= of capacity. Unlike actual _paper_, the 'gift cards' are practically free of cost to the store. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not realize it was so expensive and impractical for Walmart to offer any customer service. It makes me glad I did not stop in this afternoon (Friday) to do any shopping after my visit to my hairdresser. You see, I forgot to take along my cell phone, so I would have had to impose on Bob Donaldson or one of his customer service people to call the cab to come pick me up. I would have hated to put them to that extra expense. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Andrew Subject: Re: 'Frontline' Files an Eye-Opening Credit Report Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:54:32 UTC Organization: North Avenue Trade School Monty Solomon wrote: > Secret History of the Credit Card > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/ Very interesting. Both Discover and Citbank seem to be using two different techniques desribed in the article to try to screw me. One way the issuers screw cardholders is by not reporting the cardholders' credit limit to the reporting agencies. This is an intentional attempt to keep your FICO score low to prevent other card issuers from poaching you. A big part of your fico score is your debt to credit limit ratio. Equifax/Experian/Transunion substitute your historical higest balance for purposes of calculating your debt/credit limit ratio when the card issuers withhold your credit limit. Discover does not report my $11k credit limit --my credit report just shows my high balance of $2400 instead. A review of my credit report also show that Citibank is pulling my credit report each and every month. This is no doubt an attempt to take advantage of 'universal fault', i.e. use a late car payment or utility payment as an excuse to raise your credit card rate even if your credit card payment history is spotless. I have never ever carried a balance on any of my credit cards, so in my case, it's rather pointless of them to try to dig up a late payment to one of my other creditors. A punitive credit card rate would not affect me. I'm going to have to try to catch a rerun of the NYT/Frontline documentary. Andrew Olechny | s/nats/gatech/g | Atlanta, Ga USA ------------------------------ From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Trial Shows How Spammers Operate Date: 26 Nov 2004 13:49:29 -0500 Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000) Dan Lanciani wrote: > kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: >> You _might_ do a lot better just to extract the first Received: line from >> the header and send a complaint to wherever that came from. For example, >> take the following procmail rule: >> # Comcast dynamic addresses >> :0 >> |* ? /usr/local/bin/formail -xReceived: -uReceived: | grep >> client.comcast.net >> |cat $HOME/spam - | Mail -s "Your Spam" abuse@comcast.net >> We can basically be sure that if something comes from a dynamically >> allocated address on comcast, that it's spam from a zombie machine, so >> the false positive rate on this is basically zero. Real mail from >> comcast customers comes from the comcast mail server. > I think that that would be an extremely bad idea for several reasons. > First, it would fail to fulfill the primary purpose of responding: to > inform false positives that an error has been made. No, it informs the ISP from which the message was sent that the error has been made. In most cases today, this would be the ISP that provides service to the zombie machine that is infected with a spam-propagating worm. In the rest of the cases, it would probably be the ISP providing service to the spammer. Only in the case of a spammer running a direct service themselves would mail to the contact addresses of the site in the first received line actually go to the spammer. The last received: line can be believed. The from: lines cannot be believed, ever. In the case of the rule I gave, it will send a message to comcast's abuse address whenever mail sent from a dynamically-allocated comcast address arrives. There is NO REASON for anyone on a dynamically-allocated block to be sending mail directly; mail sent from Comcast users should go through their mail server and not from their direct address. So the only mail you will ever get from these blocks will be spam, mostly from zombie machines. > Almost as important, it would require me to automatically create > _outbound_ SMTP connections as a matter of course. That really is > unsolicited email and, while I don't agree that it is actually "spam", > it would provide the C/R haters ammunition to have my mail server > blacklisted. No, it might cause the abuse desks at ISPs to start blacklisting you. Hell, half of the abuse desks today just throw away all the incoming mail anyway, I suspect. But it will do nothing to offend the "C/R haters" because it's not a C/R confirmation. > No, really, it won't make me feel better. :) I try to "feel" as little > as possible about spam. I would feel very bad if I incorrectly > reported someone for spamming, though. IMHO, too much "feeling" about > spam -- keeping the War on Spam raging -- is a big part of the > problem. There is a lot of empire building going on with hundreds of > blacklists trying to punish various behaviors (apparently including in > some cases the behavior of wanting to fight spam differently from the > list's owner) yet ultimately doing little to prevent the increase of > spam (let alone reduce it). This worries me in the same way that the > anti-virus companies' dependence on the virus worries me. The problem is the explosive growth of the network, and the consequent incompetence of most of the larger backbone sites, which are run by people who do not understand the nature of the early internet. I suspect that this will settle down in the US, but as the net expands throughout the industrializing nations, it's just going to get worse. But C/R is a really bad idea. Trust me on this one. C/R is not fighting spam, it's just making the problem worse, because it's sending a huge number of messages to people who are unrelated to the issue. That's bad, and it is just going to piss people off. >> If every single one of us here went and injured a single spammer, the >> spam problem would be more or less gone. In fact, if one person beat >> Ralsky up with a baseball bat, I think we'd all see about a 50% drop >> in spam. > Yes, it seems to be ok to propose totally absurd solutions since there > is little danger of their being implemented. When spam was new, that sort of thing was being implemented all the time. The guys who spraypainted "SPAMMER" on the front door at uunet ... the guys who set Jeff Slaton's car on fire. These are the sort of behaviours that used to be common ways of dealing with spamming, and it's about the only sort of thing that the spammers really understand. > Oh, and I also understand the argument about zombies using their > host's legitimate relay. (a) I don't see a lot of that kind of > traffic and (b) I'm not convinced that I owe such users (whose machine > would be, after all, spamming me) the duty to silently absorb their > spam. They are not quite the same as the competely innocent victims > or forgery. Check the headers. You will find that 90% of the spam you receive today is being routed through zombie machines. Blocking dynamic addresses cuts down the vast majority of that. > Anyway, as I said the the other correspondent in this thread, please > feel free to have the last word. I realize that this is a religious > issue and could be debated forever. However, I ask that you not > assume that I haven't done some fairly extensive analysis before > implementing my solution. Does that include looking at breakdowns of where the spam comes from? Not where the From: field says it comes from, but where it actually comes from? --scott "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A question on spam for anyone who wishes to answer: I have been allowing my computers to stay turned on all the time, although there is always 8-10 hours per day (or overnight actually) when I am not using one or more of them. My assumption is because I run so many protective things on them, (Spybot, AVG 6.0, Ad-Aware, Mail Washer, etc) and the 'bots' of these things do their work during the night while I am asleep so I do not have to waste time waiting for the bots to run during the day, that I am safe, and of course there is a firewall router on line as well. But a couple people have independently stated that I should turn all computers off when not actually sitting here to supervise them. And on a couple occassions I have seen the disk drive on my Linux computer (which also has Win 2000 on it) spinning for relatively long periods of time when the machine was otherwise idle or not being used. But I would hate to think I was being used as a spam sender overnight when I was not here to watch over things. What are your thoughts? I know I have recieved from many of you total garbage things which implies to me that either your own computer has been compromised or at least your email address has been forged. Do any of you get things allegedly from me which is garbage that I 'sent' you? Should I turn the system completely off when I am asleep/not home? PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tony P. Subject: Re: How Do I Learn an Unknown Number? Organization: ATCC Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:43:21 -0500 In article , billb@ftldesign.com says: > Andrew Bell wrote: >> Nathan Strom wrote: >>> If there's a dialtone on the line, hook up a phone and try >>> calling 1-888-902-9998. It should read back the number of the >>> calling phone. >> It seems to read back the caller ID info presented, not the ANI. >> I tried it from behind a PBX and got my DID number back. > Googling on 1-888-902-9998 finds an interesting discussion thread: > http://www.tek-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=583069 > which includes these useful notes: > "Also check out 888-294-9681 - it gives you the voice circuit type and > the number... will even do callback at the end of the call to confirm > that it is working fine." That one also returns CLID and not ANI. > and > "Here is a nation wide ANI # from MCI 1-800-444-4444" This one also returns CLID. Come to think of it, maybe it's something funky that Vonage is doing though. They do set the CLID and ANI so that could be it. Tony ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Holidays Looking Merry for Web Retailers Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:59:10 EST SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - It's shaping up to be a very merry holiday season for online retailers. Web shopping got off and running for the busiest season of the year with traffic up 60 percent for the week ended Nov. 14 from the prior seven-day period, Nielsen//NetRatings said on Tuesday. The share of Internet traffic going to shopping sites already has surpassed last year's high, set on Thanksgiving Day, Internet traffic monitoring company Hitwise said. "As Black Friday approaches, shoppers are flocking online to research holiday gifts, comparison shop, and look at the vast array of products available," said Heather Dougherty, senior retail analyst at Nielsen//NetRatings. Black Friday, the day after the Thursday's U.S. Thanksgiving holiday, is traditionally the biggest shopping day of the year. U.S. consumers are expected to spend $16.7 billion online during the holiday months of November and December, an increase of 29 percent from the year-earlier period, according to research firm eMarketer. Meanwhile, total U.S. holiday retail sales are seen rising 4.5 percent to $219.9 billion, according to the National Retail Federation. "Online shopping appears to be occurring earlier and in greater force than last year," said Bill Tancer, vice president of research at Hitwise. "If last year is any indication, we're likely to see weekly shopping levels increase with a peak roughly a week before Christmas," Tancer said. Nielsen//NetRatings, an Internet audience research firm, which unveiled its sixth annual Holiday eShopping Index on Tuesday, said home and garden, books/music/video, and toys and video games led Web shopping traffic growth. The home and garden category saw weekly traffic soar 88 percent, as sites run by Home Depot Inc. and Pottery Barn saw traffic increases of 159 percent and 97 percent, respectively. Visits to books/music/video sites were up 87 percent, fueled in part by a 233 percent increase in visits to No. 2 online bookseller barnesandnoble.com. The toys and video games category was up 85 percent as traffic to KBToys.com skyrocketed 276 percent and EBgames.com soared 210 percent. Apparel, another key category for holiday sales where retailers garner a bulk of annual sales, saw a 75 percent increase as the Gap Inc.'s online traffic rose 245 percent and Lands' End increased 68 percent. Shopping comparison/portals rounded out the five fastest growing categories in the index with a 73 percent increase. Within the category, Yahoo Shopping's traffic grew 174 percent while MySimon's jumped 133 percent. Hitwise said that the 13 leading comparison-shopping sites claimed 5 percent of all shopping visits last week. Half of that traffic come directly from major search engines and directories like Google and Yahoo Search. Tancer said that marked "a new era in online shopping." "Users are becoming more sophisticated in their online purchase behaviors, clearly demonstrating the willingness to use comparison-shopping sites to find the best product at the best price," he said. The most-visited comparison-shopping sites last week were Yahoo Shopping, Shopzilla's BizRate.com and newly public Shopping.com, according to Hitwise. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Kazaa Offers Unlimited Free Internet Phone Calls Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:01:04 EST LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Sharman Networks Ltd., distributor of the Kazaa file-sharing software, on Monday launched its latest version which enables users to make free online calls anywhere in the world. Kazaa v3.0 includes the integration of Internet telephony software from Skype Technologies SA and also offers advanced search capabilities and a free weblog trial. Skype, headquartered in Luxembourg, is the newest venture of Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis, co-founders of Kazaa and Altnet, a secure peer-to-peer network. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:09:57 -0500 Subject: FCC Watching SBC Web Phone Charge http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/fortune500/sbc_fcc.reut/ Firm's new connection charge for calls made over the Internet is being watched, Powell says. WASHINGTON (Reuters) - SBC Communications Inc.'s new connection charge for calls made over the Internet is being watched, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell said Friday. Powell said SBC's "TIPToP" plan shouldn't be used to force higher connection charges on voice-over-Internet protocol (VoIP) services or to discriminate against SBC competitors. "Should we conclude that this tariff is being used to justify the imposition of traditional tariffed access charges on VoIP providers or to discriminate against SBC's competitors, the commission will take appropriate action ... ," Powell said in a statement. Full story at: http://money.cnn.com/2004/11/26/news/fortune500/sbc_fcc.reut/ ------------------------------ 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 ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 V23 #569 ******************************