Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: TK0JUT1@niu.bitnet (jt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Query on BBS Blocking by Long Distance Carriers
Message-ID: <12169@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 14 Sep 90 08:23:00 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 21
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 647, Message 1 of 9


Has anybody heard, or does anybody have evidence, of a long distance
carrier blocking BBS (or other numbers) with or without notifying the
calling or receiving parties? Teleconnect had this policy a few years
ago and there was a suit against them by a group in Iowa. Does anybody
know how that suit was resolved?  Have there been any recent instances
of litigation that anybody knows of?
 

Jim Thomas


[Moderator's Note: I think Telecom*USA still engages in this practice,
of blocking paid calls to numbers where they (Telecom*USA), in their
sole discretion don't like the nature of the conversation. The calling
party is notified of course by the recording that his 'call cannot be
completed as dialed' ... I am anticipating that a suit will be filed
soon against AT&T for their practice of refusing to honor their own
credit card if they don't like where you are calling from and/or where
you are calling to. Suits against telcos do not resolve easily. The
telcos have a huge amount of money and time to spend in litigation.  PAT]