---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <r0acs6$27n3$2@grapevine.csail.mit.edu> Date: 22 Jan 2020 20:55:34 +0000 From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org> Subject: Re: 9th Circ. Won't Rethink Voiding AT&T Arbitration Agreement In article <20200122183332.GA19628@telecom.csail.mit.edu>, Moderator <telecomdigestsubmissions@remove-this.remove-this.telecom-digest.org> wrote: >9th Circ. Won't Rethink Voiding AT&T Arbitration Agreement > >The full Ninth Circuit won't review a panel's ruling that voided an >arbitration agreement AT&T had a customer sign, forcing the mobile >behemoth to face a decade-old class action accusing it of misleading >customers about overseas roaming fees. > >https://www.law360.com/corporate/articles/1235788/9th-circ-won-t-rethink-voiding-at-t-arbitration-agreement- Well, that's probably to AT&T's benefit, because it means they can file the cert petition immediately, and the Supreme Court will likely hear the case next year if they don't just issue a summary reversal.[1] An en-banc would likely have delayed the inevitable outcome until at least 2022. -GAWollman [1] The Supreme Court has a long history of reversing CA9 on what it regards as the lower court's misreading of binding precedent. It also has a long history of considering any purported agreement to arbitrate, no matter how atrociously one-sided, as valid and binding on the parties. -- Garrett A. Wollman | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can, wollman@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future. This is Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together." my employers. | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20200122190738.GA20051@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 19:07:38 +0000 From: Moderator <telecomdigestsubmissions@remove-this.telecom-digest.org> Subject: Disgruntled residents voice concerns over poor phone service in Glencoe, OH By: Kenny Jackson GLENCOE, Ohio (WTRF) - There is a growing concern among Glencoe residents regarding poor telephone service in the area. AT&T customers, David and Angela Gordon, say they have been without home phone and cell phone services for the last nine days. https://www.wtrf.com/news/local-news/disgruntled-residents-voice-concerns-over-poor-phone-service-in-glencoe/ -- Bill Horne Telecom Digest Moderator ------------------------------ Message-ID: <15331fe0-88ea-4c77-b17b-9355d514cc7b@googlegroups.com> Date: 20 Jan 2020 19:17:19 -0800 From: rove@swbell.net (no name given) Subject: Re: Does anyone remember this payphone trick? I received your response, and the mouth and ear piece of all handsets were hybrids, connected into the network board of the payphone. [It was] very simple, like the old rotary type desk phone, [and] it normally didn't have any power until the relay inside was tripped by dropping a coin, that ground started the relay, that sent a volts back to the step office from the ring side of the cable pair, (or 5E office, etc.) that tripped the L1 relay to provide an off hook loop, that provided a signal from the switch, [i.e.] dial tone. Then, the handset would be energized. Otherwise, it had no power because the relay was ground start and entire network was dead. The 1C and 1A that replaced the older 3 slot payphones were dial tone first and more electronic. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <3d8b1f0f-b97b-4e51-e99c-3d114cd971ef@phreaknet.org> Date: 22 Jan 2020 14:12:40 -0500 From: "Naveen Albert" <phreak@interlinked.cf> Subject: Re: Does anyone remember this payphone trick? On 1/21/2020 11:45 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote: > The CO equipment was modified for loop-start, so dial-tone-first. > Emergency calls, service numbers (including 4-1-1 which was a free > call back then) and 800 numbers would complete automatically. > > A coin in the hopper would still provide a ground through the coin > relay, so no modifications were needed in the paystations. If no > ground was present, CO equipment would intercept local calls and play > a recording, "The call you are making requires a coin deposit. Please > hang up, insert coin, and place your call again." Toll calls would > route to operator. > > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > The coin-collect and coin-return battery voltages were applied between > tip and ground AFAIK: +130 for coin collect, and -130 for coin return. > > The current crop of COCOT phones have computers in them, with ~4 volt > batteries that are trickle-charged from the CO line voltage. The > onboard computer does all the tasks which used to be performed by the > CO's equipment: rating calls, collecting or returning coins, etc., > thus allowing customer-owned payphones to be used with standard 1MB > dialtone. Technically, the dial tone provided by a COCOT is not from the CO. The COCOT plays its own dial tone and completes the call once a number is dialed. COCOTs don't let you get at the CO dial tone. You can hear the DTMF digits in the background once you've dialed the number and inserted the proper deposit. 0 and star numbers are also programmed to toll-free numbers. The COCOT itself is programmed to call home to the payphone provider every couple of days or so. There are a number of ways I've discovered in the past few years that make it possible to phreak COCOTs, too, particularly PTS ones, but they're not nearly as exciting as the old ways. I'm currently putting the finishing touches on virtual coin trunks for coin-first, post-pay (WECo and AE) and dial-tone first pre-pay operation. Surprised by how well they work, but also appreciative of just how many moving components there are with real trunks and how they operate together! ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20200123071004.GA22720@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 07:10:04 +0000 From: Moderator <telecomdigestsubmissions@remove-this.telecom-digest.org> Subject: NABET-CWA Members Win Largest Back Pay Settlement in NLRB History January 16, 2020 Last week, NABET-CWA won the largest back pay settlement in the 84-year history of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), requiring CNN to pay a total of $76 million to hundreds of broadcast technicians who were fired after CNN terminated its subcontract with union-represented employees at Team Video Services (TVS). The settlement provides substantial justice to workers who have been waiting more than 15 years to be made whole for the losses that they suffered as a result of CNN's unlawful conduct. NABET-CWA's longstanding labor dispute with CNN threatened to disrupt the CNN-hosted January 14 debate at Drake University, with NABET-CWA advising the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic presidential candidates who qualified for the debate, and CNN of its intention to picket the event. https://cwa-union.org/news/nabet-cwa-members-win-largest-back-pay-settlement-in-nlrb-history -- Bill Horne Telecom Digest Moderator ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Fri, 24 Jan 2020