Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sunybcs!boulder!hao!gatech!mcnc!ecsvax!dmkdmk
From: dmkdmk@ecsvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: The phone company
Message-ID: <4105@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 29-Oct-87 11:37:23 EST
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.4105
Posted: Thu Oct 29 11:37:23 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Nov-87 04:50:50 EST
References: <8710191436.AA10720@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <7443@dartvax.UUCP> <1827@dasys1.UUCP>
Organization: University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Lines: 49
Summary: FCC $4.77 charge for all data calls - Not so....

In article <1827@dasys1.UUCP>, patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) writes:
> In article <738@swlabs.UUCP>, jack@swlabs.UUCP (Jack Bonn) writes:
> > In article <1768@dasys1.UUCP>, patth@dasys1.UUCP (Patt Haring) writes:
> > > Interstate calls to BBS will have to be paid for with the
> > > $4.47/hr charge; I hope everyone has sent a letter of protest
> > > to his/her Congressperson as well as to the FCC.
> > 
> > I trust that you are indicating that the $4.47/hr charge will only be 
> > tacked on to PC Pursuit and other packet networks.  If I call interstate 
>     The way the Boston Computer Society and others are reading the
> craftily worded FCC Proposal is this:  not *only* would the $4.77
> charge be tacked on to PC PURSUIT (if you're using it) but would
> also be tacked on to your call to an out of state BBS - that means
> twice that you get hit with the $4.77 charge!  For example, if
> I dial in to PC PURSUIT and use it to call the Boston Computer
> Society's Telecom BBS (617-786-9788) then I'm hit twice with the
> $4.77 charge - once because I called the Packet Switching Network
> and the second time becuse I used it to call an out of state BBS.
 
This is not the case as I understand it or the intent of the FCC
proposal.  The proposal if passed will place a $4.77 charge to
services that provide packet switching services i.e. Telenet,
Tymnet, CompuServe's network.  This will *NOT* apply to private
BBSs in any way.  It will though restrict value-added network
services such as PC Pursuit, and thus change the way computer
enthusiasts access BBSs that would normally be long distance if
dialed over the voice network.
 
If it were imposed on all calls to ANY interstate BBS, then the
telephone cos. would have to monitor ALL calls through their
networks to detect carrier frequencies.  People who use the
call switched voice networks (such as AT&T) would not be subject
to this charge.  In short, this whole issue has become myths vs.
realities and somewhat been blown out of proportion by those who
use these services.  It will not affect me in any way - I dial
direct from North Carolina to a BBS in New Jersey quite frequently
using AT&T long distance.  If that same call were on PC Pursuit,
then it would be a different story.
 
While I do believe this proposal will harm some BBSs and other
information services, the reasoning behind it can be justified
from a non-data communicating consumer standpoint.  Personally I
take no stance either way.  Hope this sets the record straight
and alleviates some misconceptions.  Good day,
--
David M. Kurtiak
UNC - Greensboro
UUCP: dmkdmk@ecsvax.UUCP
Bitnet: DMKDMK@ECSVAX.BITNET