OT Sorry, but I agree with PacBell on this one.
Read the article carefully. The situation is rediculous.
You make a call to your ISP, originating it from your PacBell line. In most cases, you don't pay a per-minute fee, as the call is normally covered on unlimited local-use plans. You hang on the phone to your ISP for, oh, say, 2 hours at a time. You're tying up PacBell's facilities for 2 hours, something that they never anticipated when they created the unlimited local-use plans.
Your ISP signed-up with a cheapie carrier that undercuts PacBell. They never originate calls, but only take incoming calls. The cheapie carrier is charging your ISP less than you pay for your unlimited local plan. for example, you may pay $15/month. Your ISP is only paying $10/month.
Because of the law which was designed to encourage smaller competitive carriers, Pac Bell has to PAY A FEE to the smaller carrier that is undercutting them. This is on top of carrying a 2-hour call that they never expected when they designed the calling plan.
When the FCC set this up, they anticipated that the competitive carriers would be COMPETITIVE. That is, they expected them to enter the broad market, offering home service as well a service to businesses. Instead, they cherry-pick businesses, where they can spend minimally on infrastructure (wires, etc.) because of concentration (they only have to wire-up business centers). While the ISPs aren't as profitable for them as other businesses that originate calls, they are still a good deal because of the fees that PacBell is required to pay to them for every call that they receive. So, it is worth-while for them to serve the ISPs, which receive a lot of incoming calls.
PacBell is now claiming that calls to ISPs are, in essence, long-distance calls, for which they are not required to pay the fees when delivering to another carrier.
While I think that PacBell is wrong in their interpretation of the law, I also think the law should be changed, because it is not encouraging the type of competition that the law had anticipated. It's simply created a pocket where an unfair profit can be made as a side-effect of the law. These so-called "competitive" carriers are simply taking advantage of a loophole.
Disclosure: I don't work for Pac Bell, have any interest in Pac Bell's welfare, and don't work in the communications industry. I just read articles carefully. |
