IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog

Wednesday, April 21, 2004

A Distinction without a Difference
(previous | next)

The FCC has denied AT&T's Petition for a Declaratory Ruling that access charges should not apply to phone-to-phone calls with IP transport. While it might have been a good business decision for AT&T to upgrade its network with IP transport from an efficiency standpoint, its decision to stop paying access charges was a regulatory ploy. Chairman Powell noted that AT&T's service does not add any enhanced functionality for consumers, and future classification decisions "may be guided by the consumer's perspective in what they are purchasing, in terms of experience or capability." Added Powell, "[t]o allow a carrier to avoid regulatory obligations simply by dropping a little IP in a network would merely sanction regulatory arbitrage and would collapse the universal service system virtually overnight."

The decision was not a clean sweep for LECs as the FCC took a pass on the issue of retroactive liability. Indeed, this is the only issue discussed in Commissioner Martin's statement, which implies that AT&T should be shielded from paying past access charges. Millions of dollars are at stake, so the lawyers will get to bill a bunch of hours on this one.

The FCC has now clarified its views on two of the "easier" issues in the VoIP debate - today's decision and its prior ruling that pulver.com's FWD is an interstate information service. 4 of 5 FCC members addressed the need for intercarrier compensation reform in today's order. It's go time.

posted by @ 8:57 PM | General

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly

Post a Comment:

Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation