Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: sbrack@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Steven S. Brack) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: FCC Proposed Rule Changes; Equal Access Message-ID: Date: 25 Feb 91 04:02:01 GMT Sender: news@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Mr. News) Reply-To: Steven.S.Brack@osu.edu Organization: The Ohio State University Lines: 34 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 159, Message 1 of 8 Originator: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: hub.eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu What is the legality of a property rentor blocking access of 10xxx numbers from its renters' phones? I rent housing from a large university, with its own PBX (actually a slightly scaled-down telco switch serving about 30,000 phones). Every dormitory room has its own phone. UNITS, the university telco, runs its own LD operation, which involves giving each subscriber an access code, which is intercepted by the university switch, which then completes the call through a regular LD carrier. I have an ATT calling card that offers a fair discount, and I would like to use it to place LD calls from my phone. All combinations of 10288, including using outside line designators, fail. When I dial an Ohio Bell operator (9-0) (9-0-0 doesn't work at all, I am informed that LD is not allowed from my phone, and I'm not connected to AT&T. My question: Can they do this? If so, what is the legal justification? Steve Brack Telecommunications Engineering The Ohio State University Columbus, OH 43210-1211 sbrack@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu sbrack@ewf.eng.ohio-state.edu (Avoid sending here, if possible) [Moderator's Note: I don't think there is any legal justification when the telco or (in your case pseudo-telco) has a captive customer base by not allowing installation of phones from off campus, etc. I think it passes legal muster when a private organization restricts employee phones like that. It is legal since I guess employees have no automatic right to make personal calls on company phones. It is a pity how some of these universities want to play telephone company and yet conveniently ignore the rules other telcos manage to follow. Some one or more people ought to start slapping them silly with lawsuits left and right until they wise up. PAT]