VoIP Fine Just Fine, Not Great

|

The FCC stepped up to fine some knucklehead ISP that tried to block voice over IP traffic. But VoIP fans note that the $15,000 fine—roughly $75 per blocked customer—is chump change in the topsy-turvy world of big Net companies.

True enough, but it is a start. Maybe someone can write a letter and claim the ISP also flashed some nipple to really get the FCC to drop the hammer.

NEXT: From Caged Heat to The Apprentice

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. ????? completely lost, especially after reading the article and its comments. Why would the ISP do this, and why is it wrong for them to do it? Suppose I have no intention of using voice over internet (I don’t) – is there any advantage in not carrying it? Also… it isn’t at all obvious to me why an ISP should be forced to carry whatever traffic is thrown at it.

  2. Suppose I have no intention of using voice over internet (I don’t) – is there any advantage in not carrying it?

    There is if you’re also a traditional phone company. Read Bob Cringely’s latest for some info.

  3. I recently looked at the agreement for netzero and one or two others. It certainly seemed like they were trying to forbid the use of VOIP, although I might have confused that with some other agreement. The netzero agmt is pretty entertaining for other things as well.

  4. Wait, I’m confused. I thought the FCC was upset about VOIP because it’s harder (impossible?) to tax.

    Wouldn’t they be happy about an ISP not allowing VOIP?

    Or is this a case of the one hand not knowing what the other is doing? If so, Cathy Young should straighten them out. She could go to the FCC and explain “On the one hand, you guys are doing this. On the other hand, you’re also doing that…” 😉

    Sorry, just couldn’t resist a cheap shot at the predictable format.

  5. The trouble with VoIP is it doesn’t have a cute enough nickname. They should call it something like Earcandy, maybe that would kick things into gear.

  6. I signed up for a VoIP service a couple of weeks ago (Lingo), and at this point at least, I can’t complain about what I’m getting. Unlimited calls to anywhere in the US, Canada, and most of Western Europe for $20/month. Call forwarding, call waiting, caller ID, voicemail, and several other features thrown in for no extra cost. You also get an online interface from which you can manage these features, as well as go over your call history. Call quality was problematic during the first couple of days, but after their tech support did a software upgrade for my adapter, it’s been as good as what I got from my now-disconnected landline.

    I don’t mean to sound like an infomercial for VoIP. I’d just like to do my part in seeing those monopolistic, handout-hungry, innovation-stifling dinosaurs known as our local phone companies bleed profusely, which in turn might lead them to get seerious about upgrading their decrepit local loop infrastructures to fiber.

  7. Am I the only one who thinks the FCC shouldn’t be telling the ISP what services it can block?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.