Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!mcnc!decvax!ucbvax!delni.DEC.COM!goldstein
From: goldstein@delni.DEC.COM (Fred R. Goldstein dtn226-7388)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Connecticut's semi-Bell status
Message-ID: <8804081318.AA15133@decwrl.dec.com>
Date: 8 Apr 88 16:12:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 15
Approved: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu

Just to clarify...

Southern New England Tel used to be a "licensee" of the "Bell System".
That meant they paid maybe 3% off the top to AT&T, and got the rights
to AT&T's patents and manufacturing (cheap).  So they used a Bell in
their logo and provided Bell-quality service (if there was such a 
thing, but I suppose it was better than GTE California!)

But came the day of reckoning (the divestiture MFJ), SNET was NOT
classed as a Bell.  They're "innocent", and not prohibited from doing
things that the seven Baby Bells are prohibited from doing.  "Bell"
is now a trademark collectively owned by the RBOCs, but nowadays 
usually refers to those seven companies and their associated lawyers,
probation officers, etc.  :-)
      fred