Later in the report Hambrecht & Quist explain that it is the computer industry which is probably the more greedy and self-serving than the RBOCs. I agree completely. A bunch of freaks downloading porno are trashing the phone system - including the emergency response networks.
<<<<<
On the regulatory
front, the RBOCs have been petitioning the FCC for changes in the
access charge rules that would allow them to charge usage-sensitive
rates to ESPs. Pacific Bell, US West, and Bell Atlantic have each
filed reports with the FCC detailing the deleterious effects of data
traffic on their switched voice network. Pac Bell has claimed that it
will need to spend about $500 million over the next three years to
support increased Internet use.
So far, the FCC has resisted imposing ISP access charges, and said
so explicitly in a recent Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
issued on access charge reform.
While the RBOCs are protesting to the FCC that unlimited usage
pricing schemes are driving up their infrastructure costs and sacrificing
the reliability of their voice networks, they are also busy marketing
their own unlimited usage Internet services. Not surprisingly, this
double standard has not been overlooked by the computer industry,
which stands to lose from higher access fees. A computer industry
lobbying group called the Internet Access Coalition is arguing that the
telecommunications companies are crying wolf and exaggerating the
severity of the problem in order to persuade the FCC to pass
favorable legislation. The group, which includes Microsoft, Netscape,
Intel, AOL, and others, contends that the current problems can be
addressed with existing technologies. In our opinion, there is some
truth to this contention. The RBOCs have great experience on the
regulatory front, and playing the panic card is a time-proven tactic.
Nobody wants to be responsible when a 911 call is blocked because
too many
computer nerds are tying up the lines downloading dirty pictures.
Of course, the motivations of the computer industry should also not
be overlooked. Although the coalition has positioned itself as
protecting consumers from telco greed, in reality it is equally guilty of
putting its own interests first. Denying the irrationality of flat-rate
pricing on the switched network will not lead to a stable long-term
business environment. And arguing for telco subsidies on behalf of the
public good is disingenuous and sets a potentially dangerous
precedent for an FCC set on expanding universal service dictums to
include data services. As others have pointed out, Intel's charitable
acts do not include passing out Pentium processors to the
CPU-challenged.
>>>>> |
