[95435] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: [funsec] Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk)
Fri Mar 23 09:43:24 2007
Reply-To: <frnkblk@iname.com>
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "'Andy Davidson'" <andy@nosignal.org>,
"NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:42:15 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1C7DDBA0-0B5A-4D9B-AC39-C04706166F8B@nosignal.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Don't confuse USF with ICC. It's USF that you're contributing to directly
on your telephone bill and ICC through your long distance payments (which
relates to the at&t case).
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Andy
Davidson
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:38 PM
To: Roland Dobbins
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: [funsec] Not so fast, broadband providers tell big users (fwd)
On 13 Mar 2007, at 20:31, Roland Dobbins wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2007, at 11:19 AM, Daniel Senie wrote:
>
>> A universal service charge could be applied to all bills, with the
>> funds going to subsidize rural areas.
>>
> This is already done in the U.S., to no discernible effect.
>
That isn't *quite* the opinion that AT&T have ...
... http://gigaom.com/2007/02/07/atts-free-call-bill-2-million/
Although that is people using the rural kickback as a loophole to
provide free telephony to people outside the area.. still shows that
regulation always comes with an unexpected effect when times,
technology and ideas advance.
Cheers
-a
