
New York State Classifies Vonage As Phone Company 328
securitas writes "CNet's Evan Hansen reports that on Wednesday, the New York State Public Service Commission 'ruled that Vonage Holdings is a telephone company and thus subject to state regulation.' The decision is seen as a blow against the emerging voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) company and the industry in general."
First? (Score:3, Funny)
This is a good thing! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is a good thing! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This is a good thing! (Score:3, Interesting)
All government programs are gonna have waste, someone will ALWAYS abuse the system, intentional or otherwise (I try and help them to NOT abuse the system and only ask for what they need)
And I am find it rather funny that someone who HAS internet acces should complain. You see in lots of areas where there is little income and parents can't afford internet access. The amount of funding a school recieves is based on the schools students poverty level. Many of these student have no internet
Re:This is a good thing! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:First? (Score:3, Insightful)
Taxes? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Taxes? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Taxes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Vonage provides an internet phone service over your internet connection (which, btw, is not subject to the same stringent standards that your PSTN service is subject to).
Phone companes need to be regulated because they are a natural monopoly, as in they own and maintain the lines that provide these basic and nessecary services to your home.
The PSC shouldn't be used as a crutch for people who are too lazy to practice consumerism. If you don't like the service Vonage provides, don't use them! Your local Verizon service is subject to the rules your PSC puts out becuase Verizon is using public land and providing a type of service no one else can becuase they are given special rights to do this by the government.
This is just simply a ploy by the government to suck more money out of people that does not belong to them (save for 911 service which should be paid for).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Taxes? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. Thankfully there's none of that stuff in the government agencies.
Re:Taxes? (Score:3, Insightful)
This could be a staging ground to compare email to snailmail and attempts to apply applicable taxes will surely follow.
Not that I'm wholly opposed to a digital postage stamp as it would help deter spam, but we are surely in poor shape if the argument comes up in the state of New York. They don't
Re:Taxes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah; what I'm wondering is: Suppose I use the builtin microphone and speakers in my Mac Powerbook, or the plugin mike and speakers in my linux box, and write software to connect these to a program on another machine on the Net?
Am I now a phone company? Do I have to file the appropiate papers, pay taxes, and so on?
It gets more interesting when you consider that both I and my wife have PDAs with WiFi access. There are a number of these on the market now, such as the Palm Tungsten and the Blackberry RIM handhelds, and they mostly have a builtin mike and speaker. Also, voice-recognition software is available for all of these machines. Combine these with the Internet, and using them to remotely access sound files looks a lot like "phone" service.
So if I write a browser plugin that lets me talk into my PDA, which connects to my home machine and retrieves some files, am I now running a phone company? How about if I connect to a friend's home machine and do the same?
And some of us are working on voice-based interfaces for the benefit of the visually impaired. Is this all now to be considered a "phone" service, to be regulated and taxed as such?
Maybe it's time to just declare the Internet to be a phone system?
Re:Taxes? (Score:5, Informative)
Oh Well (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Oh Well (Score:2, Insightful)
Walks like a duck
and quacks like a duck
It must be a duck.
Seriously, did you think vonage WASN'T a phone company?
Re:Oh Well (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Oh Well (Score:2, Insightful)
VOIP companies appear to be selling digital PBX services. Isn't that still being a phone company?
They're just replacing some of the POTS lines and phone switches with ethernet, routers, etc.
Re:Oh Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh Well (Score:5, Insightful)
If there is no interconnection with the PSTN then no charges are incurred. The problem is that most voip companies are routing voip traffic over the public internet and then interconnecting to the PSTN for the last-mile.
It makes it easier to embrace if its just a fancy phone.
The problem is that voip is going to be used by everyone - not just techies. The average person is not going to see the difference between POTS and voip. They will expect voip service to behave the same as POTS. However, becasue it is not regulated, voip service does not currently need to provdie 911 service, full battery backup or meet any other quality of service standards.
Many people who will purchase voip services in order to save a buck will not understand that these standards are not there. So when one of these consumers tries to call 911 from their voip phone and the 911 operator thinks they are in NYC when they are really in Albany - there will be excessive bitching from the general public - and with good reason.
The same will be true in situations where the power goes out and these people can't use their phones. The regulators are just trying to stay "ahead of the curve"...
Re:Oh Well (Score:3, Insightful)
I find this line of thinking extremely distasteful.
First, Vonage goes out of its way to make it very clear to new customers that it may not be as realiable as POTS, does not work for 911, et cetera. The warning is huge, and to imply that only techies would get it is
Re:Oh Well (Score:2)
Re:Oh Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh Well (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Oh Well (Score:5, Insightful)
If it looks like a duck
Walks like a duck
and quacks like a duck
It must be a duck.
Seriously, did you think vonage WASN'T a phone company?
Vonage may or may not be a duck... I mean phone comapany, but what about less dedicated companies? What about an ISP that includes VoIP? What about a company that outsources their network management to a company that sets up VoIP for them internally to their company? What if some friends and I set up our own system, say about fifty of us? What if we've created a new animal that can quack when it wants to and bark the rest of the time?
The only clear cut off point is when we start connecting to the existing phone network. But I could set that up from my home network with a bit of fiddling. Would they come down on me?
If you don't use the connection to the existing phone network then do they want to monitor all internet traffic? Do they want to access encrypted traffic? Because that's the only way they can regulate VoIP.
And if they do use the connection to the existing phone network as their definition, then what happens 5-10 years down the line when VoIP dwarfs the old network. Do we just disconnect and saev ourselves a lot of money?
So what kinds of extra fees do I have to pay now? (Score:4, Insightful)
If the taxes are large, then it is starting to look like I should just go back to having a cell phone again.
Re:So what kinds of extra fees do I have to pay no (Score:2)
http://vonage.com/help/?topic=rrf
The Regulatory Recovery Fee is $1.50 per phone number. This is a fee that Vonage charges its customers to recover the costs related to Federal and State Universal Service Funds (USF) and other similar country specific funds, as well as other domestic and international fees and surcharges. Your total Regulatory Recovery Fee reflects a $1.50 surcharge for every phone number you have, including primary voice lines, second lines, fax lines, Toll Free PlusSM nu
From the article (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:From the article (Score:5, Informative)
He is an advocate in that he wants to keep VoIP free. They make money be selling SIP phones (some of what actually look really cool).
He sees this as a disappointment, because if taxes are applied, it's going to be quite difficult to give a person free long distance in the US (from anywhere in the world) for free. They don't even sell off e-mail addresses.
Re:From the article (Score:2)
Only skyp offers both of these. Yes it only works via software now but they are coming up with a siemens adapter/phone later this year.
Also, unlike may of these voip software packages. Skype worked the first time around with NO configuration. Crystal clear sound every time all the time. Even when both or all parties are behind firewalls.
Try that with FWD..
Also, when will we be getting "a la carte" voip? here in the uk
This makes sense... (Score:5, Insightful)
I hate taxes (in general) as much as the next telephone user, I'm not saying they're fair-- but as long as they are there, customers should be taxed equally.
Re:This makes sense... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This makes sense... (Score:2)
Re:This makes sense... (Score:3, Insightful)
If so, why do you need a ham radio license rather than a phone bill?
Re:This makes sense... (Score:5, Informative)
I live in NY, adjusted appropriately will mean raised through the roof to match everything else
Re:This makes sense... (Score:5, Insightful)
This idea is doomed for two reasons:
1. Goverment is cut out of tax revenue.
2. Mega monopoly telcos that lobby/stroke/pay-off politicians are now being undersold and are pissed.
If Vonage was strictly IP to IP and did not provide public services like 911, I think it would be a different story. Anyways, you really don't need a 3rd party involved for IP to IP. That technology has been around for quite a while, although both parties wanting to communicate need the hardware/software to make it work.
Re:This makes sense... (Score:2, Insightful)
While I'm thinking about it: Has anyone developed a peer-to-peer VoIP system yet? Something that could be patched into a p2p IM network?
Re:This makes sense... (Score:2, Insightful)
That is irrelevant. You are taxed on your phone line at home because you use a piece of wired infastructure COMING TO YOUR HOME. You are not taxed for contacting others. You are taxed if you never make a call. If you were taxed at both ends, that would be double taxation.
Your call to Vonage only touches the line when it goes to someone that isn't a Vonage user and thus is paying taxes on THEIR line.
If you the customer have to pay tax on u
Re:-5 WRONG (Score:2)
Also, a phone number does not necessarily tie you to any exhange just like in IP address doesn't necessarily tie you to a physical location. Phone networks are _switched_ and it is trivial for a phone number to answer anywhere.
How do you think you can port your home phone to a cell phone and back again?
By the way, when signing up on Vonage YOU get to choose your
Becaue of the Internets Coverage (Score:3)
If each state sets down different regulations that could lead to a logistics nightmare.
Re:Becaue of the Internets Coverage (Score:2)
The internet is a fundamentally different communications system that needs different rules. I suppose that iChat AV, because it allows voice calls, would be considered a phone service and subject to regulation in NY.
Politicians and judges shouldn't be allowed to make rules about stuff they're clueless on. We have a bunch of stodgy old luddites telling us h
Taxes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Taxes (Score:2)
At this point the infamous analogy of horse and cart users protesting the unfairness of the motorcar undercutting them appears appropriate.
Whether that anaology is historically accurate or not I don't know, but this present situation is the same in principle. New technology is ready to change everything and increase society's wealth, and the entrenched powers are ready to cripple it in any way they can.
They do not care how big th
What about other VOIP apps (Score:5, Interesting)
At the moment its only going to be 'minor regulations', but when it takes off and the "potential tax losses" start getting serious will we see all these companies/ projects move offshore.
Certainly not much could stop it if people want to use it.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
The states want money (Score:5, Insightful)
This is an attitude of our government that frankly, you and I shouldn't put up with, this thinking that government is entitled to tax EVERYTHING.
Re:The states want money (Score:2)
This may not be a case of them wanting the money. It may be a case of them wanting to make sure regulations are on it so they don't run rampant and do things they shouldn't. SOmetimes regulations are needed when an industry won't police itself.
Re:The states want money (Score:3, Insightful)
Ha! Don't kid yourself, it's about the money (taxes)...
Just what is it that they should not be doing that required regulation? Vonage is a buisness, if they screw thier customers, some other company will step in and take thier customers away.
Re:The states want money (Score:2)
Re:The states want money (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, the government long ago sold the majority on the idea of getting "bread and circuses" from the public treasury.
It's so bad that "YOUR CHILDREN WILL STARVE" is effective propoganda against proposed tax cuts...
Sad.
Re:The states want money (Score:2)
That is correct, it is not a dictatorship, it is an oligarchy.
Already been declared void! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Already been declared void! (Score:3, Informative)
depends if deemed a utility (Score:2)
It all depends... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It all depends... (Score:5, Informative)
They seem to think they are. Right on their webpage is their tagline "The broadband phone company". Sounds like an open and shut case.. if you want to call yourself a phone company then prepare to be regulated like one. I have no problems with that.
The lesson here (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The lesson here (Score:4, Insightful)
And, said regulated industry has high-priced, professional lobbyists who are constantly making sure that a) their monopoly (if they have one) is protected; b) new entrants who try to offer a different, but competing service are barred from entry by regulation, taxes, etc , and c) that "shared" resources are priced high enough that startups have problems using them.
Look at the battle going on between the satellite companies and cable cos. Most cable cos are regulated locally, and have significant taxes. Satellite companies have been able (for the most part) to avoid this because of their model (only downlink located in most localities, and that downlink is privately owned).
I'm not surprised by this classification - every level of government believes that it has a $DEITY-given right to tax and regulate everything. Heck, hosting a home poker game in my state can get you a year in jail! I'm not opposed to all regulation by any stretch of the imagination, but regulation stifles creativity and needs to be applied only in very clear, very limited ways.
Re:The lesson here (Score:2)
Satellite companies have been able (for the most part) to avoid this because of their model (only downlink located in most localities, and that downlink is privately owned).
So, are you saying that cable companies want the satellite companies subject to the same regs? How do they justify this? Like you say, the satellite companies are a purely private venture - they don't need a right of way from the city or the state government.
This is pretty much like the vonage case - the only shared resource in use a
Nonsense (Score:4, Insightful)
This is pure nonsense. Weren't cellular telephones at one time considered an innovative service in a heavily regulated industry? Didn't the cellular phone industry manage to survive dispite regulation?
VoIP will survive as long as it provides a useful service that is in some way advantageous over existing land-based and/or cellular systems.
Colour me cynical but - (Score:2, Funny)
Riiiight. Because when you hand a new area of legislation to a bunch of bureaucrats the last thing on their minds is interfering.
Watch this space for a long list of restrictive and unneccesary regulations being pushed through by people who haven't suddenly become the phone companies best friends, oh no.
Hmmm...
1) Spot a new area of technology that threatens entrenched interests.
2) Sta
horrible precendent (Score:4, Insightful)
Very unfortunate. I had hoped to jump onboard the VoIP bandwagon in the near future (once my area code is available), but the cost benefit could be going out the window.
Right or wrong, it is going to stifle VoIP in NY. (Score:3, Insightful)
When was the last time a Government Agency applied "only minimal regulations" to anything? The tendency of bureaucracy, once involved in something, is to strengthen their involvement in that thing.
Re:Right or wrong, it is going to stifle VoIP in N (Score:5, Funny)
Environmental protection, mental health care, the Microsoft antitrust case, food safety inspections, just about anything where megacorporations are involved...
IP only telephony (Score:4, Interesting)
Imagine, free unlimited and unrestricted (open source, of course) telephone services worldwide. Just like email. It will happen and there's nothing they can do about it.
And cell phones will be replaced by WiFi phones, with the gentle propagation of free WiFi hot spots in Cafes etc who's going to need to pay for a cell phone?
80N
Re:IP only telephony (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, just wonderful. We all know how well e-mail works now that it's completely unregulated and free for all. VoIP spam. I can't wait. "Mommy, what's a hot young asian fuck stud and why does he want to sell me viagra?"
Re:IP only telephony (Score:5, Informative)
27.9% - UUNET/WorldCom/MCI
10.0% - AT&T
6.5% - Sprint
6.3% - Genuity (level 3)
4.1% - PSINet (cogent)
3.5% - Cable & Wireless
2.8% - XO Communications
2.6% - Verio
1.5% - Qwest
1.3% - Global Crossing
Hmm, these names are sounding awfully familiar!
Re:IP only telephony (Score:2)
Much of the PSTN and IP traffic is transported along the same physical lines already.
Assuming there is a proportional drop in PSTN calls, that much more bandwidth can be shifted to IP (and the major transit providers still get their cut)
New Yorkers didn't see this coming? (Score:2, Interesting)
Common Carier Laws? (Score:4, Insightful)
But this does bring up an interesting point. Phone companies are regulated in what they are and aren't allowed to do with the phone conversations. They can't, for example, monitor your calls for marketing ala Gmail "Oh, you asked your wife to bring home some milk- well there's a deal at the local Megamart".
So can we as consumers now require that if VOIP providers are telephone companies, that ISPs be regulated in how they can and can't monitor us, and stop practices like purposefully slowing down connections from rivals? (Time Warner Cable vs Disney.com, etc.)
I would rather none of this existed, but maybe we can force the legal arm to swing in our favor as consumers.
Taxing Internet Traffic (Score:3, Interesting)
Regulate? Ok, but not exactly as a phone company. (Score:4, Insightful)
As the traditional telcos move from the traditional circut switched networks of current phone systems to a more packet switched network, there needs to be a way for the regulatory agencies to keep up with the changes, and ensure that necessary services (e.g. 911) and quality are maintainted.
In the long run, this will probably be seen as a good move, since they're actually trying to keep up with changes in technology, rather than waiting to get run over by it.
I find this very interesting timing (Score:5, Insightful)
HELP! Small home business (5-8 lines) & VoIP.. (Score:2)
Are there phone companies -- regular or VoIP -- that folks use on a small scale, such as Cavilier, that anyone can recommend?
Any good sites -- something like Broadband/DSL Reports [dslreports.com] but for phone/VoIP issues?
Impact in Canada (Score:2)
Re:Impact in Canada (Score:2)
traditional telcos must follow traditional regulations for VoIP, but those regulations do not apply to non-telcos such as cable companies, Vonage, etc... that offer/will soon offer VoIP services in Canada. Seriously hurts the ability for telcos to compete.
Then maybe it's time for the incumbent telco to offer VOIP.
Re:Impact in Canada (Score:2)
A crap load more of info can be found here [cablecastermagazine.com].
Vonage Rocks (Score:5, Informative)
Surprise surprise (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting, but perhaps not too bad (Score:2, Interesting)
On the other hand, I am pissed that a friend who switched to vonage on my recommendation has been paying for two accounts for six months. It seems that not only does one company own the phone line to
Great (Score:2, Informative)
Dear FCC, (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just the U.S. Government's.
Please go home now and leave us in peace.
Thanks,
Matthew C. Williams
and a cast of thousands
If it looks like a telephone... (Score:5, Insightful)
Then it must be a telephone!
Who cares what technology it uses? If I can pick up the handset, dial a number, and expect a recipient on the other end to answer, then the state has every right (and obligation) to deal with it like any other telephone service.
If this were not the case, then cellular telephones would also be exempt from taxes.
Re:If it looks like a telephone... (Score:3, Insightful)
Why?
The massive web of regulation on POTS carriers exists for three reasons - One, dealing with them having a monopoly in many areas. Two, making sure everyone can have a phone. And three, dealing with the property rights involved in laying physical lines.
In the case of VOIP, none of those apply. Almost no barrier-to-entry exists (TW just stepped up to the plate, for example), and even if it did, you don't n
Re:If it looks like a telephone... (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, in many areas (such as my own), a single cell carrier does have a monopoly (ignoring the amazingly expensive satellite phones). I have a choice of US Cellular or nothing.
> Two, making sure everyone can have a phone.
How is Vonage exempt from this?
Because not everyone even has a computer yet.
Additionally, although you may well consider this unfair, the requirement that POTS carriers provide access to everyone satisfies the need f
How about e-mail?? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes. There is a cry for regulation and legislation. Just only think about spam.
and on the other hand: who forbids you to write your own application to communicate? eg write your own private VoIP server. Friends only, ssl, safe from tapping.
Just a thought...
Telephone == Interface (Score:3, Interesting)
Granted, not everyone that reads Slashdot is programmer, but clearly a lot either are or have more than a passing acquaintance with programming concepts and theory.
I think what we are seeing here is simply a bureaucratic manifestation of the separation of interface from implementation. The whole point of companies like Vonage is that the do all the stuff a normal telephone company does, but using non-standard methods. If they didn't, they'd have no customer base, and their users would stick with existing providers.
If the users think its a phone company, why shouldn't the regulators? Isn't that the whole basis of OOP over the last several decades? What a thing does is more important than how it does it.
If it looks like a duck... (Score:2, Interesting)
Its not about regulating the Internet... (Score:3, Informative)
What this is is a decision that a company that lets you call up people on any other phone companies network (Verizon etc) including calls to Emergency numbers shouldnt be granted an exemption from this particular piece of state legislation that regulates phone companies just because their phone connects to the Internet instead of to a regular phone network.
Programs (including voice chat progams and such), protocols and internet services that dont talk to the regulat PSTN network wont be affected by this decision.
Also, even programs that are used for services that connect to the PSTN wont be affected. The only affect this will have is on companies offering a telephone service that lets you ring up someone on the regular PSTN (or on a mobile etc) and lets them ring you.
Hostile Neighborhood (Score:2)
===---===
Re:Regulation isn't always bad (Score:3, Insightful)
Price controls are warranted on government-created monopolies - not in the free market.
Re:Regulation isn't always bad (Score:2)
That would be very expensive. You might want to consider the switch to Aquafina.
It is a mature market... (Score:2)
Re:It is a mature market... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It is a mature market... (Score:2)
Think of it this way. In 10 years, when everyone has a router with some sort of cable or hi-speed connection in their home, will it not just be likely that you dial an IP address instead of a telephone number? The handset that is hooked to your router would monitor any requests to a specific port, and it would open up for the calls.
Vonage takes VoIP and gives it capability to interact with
Re:It is a mature market... (Score:2)
Is it really the same? The end service becomes is the same, however, Vonage has a critical difference. Traditional telco networks require a vast, expsnsive infrastructure. Even with the partial deregulation in the late 90's, competing telcos stil had to lease service from
Re:free speech? (Score:2, Insightful)
Free speech means you cannot be prohibited from speaking, not that you cannot be charged(monetarily or criminally) for your speech.
Re:When you can't compete... (Score:2)
the internet and other architectures may have been borne out of government research, but they evolve
Re:Suppose (Score:2)