Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: eci386!jmm@uunet.uu.net (John Macdonald)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: COCOTs, FCC, DPU, etc
Message-ID: <10200@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 27 Jul 90 07:23:21 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Reply-To: John Macdonald <eci386!jmm@uunet.uu.net>
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Lines: 23
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 523, Message 8 of 10


In article <10037@accuvax.nwu.edu> smk@attunix.att.com (S M Krieger)
writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 508, Message 2 of 5

|When I was in Las Vegas last week, my observation was that at least
|75% of the public telephones are COCOTs (CenTel is the local operating
|company).  What made things really rough is that the COCOTs I did use
|looked like the Bell company phones.

Is it not possible for the Bell companies to sue the COCOTs who do
this sort of thing for copyright/trademark infringement?  Surely they
don't like to have customers compaining about "their" phone booths not
providing proper service, etc.

This comment about (presumably intensional) look-alike phone booths
has been made a number of times in the telecom digest.  It sounds like
a widespread practice across much of the US - has anyone heard of a
Bell company taking action?


John Macdonald
 jmm@eci386