Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ns-mx!ceres!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: iiasa!wnp@relay.eu.net (wolf paul) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: BBS as a Business Message-ID: <2824@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 12 Jan 90 08:56:12 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria Lines: 31 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 24, message 8 of 12 In TELECOM Digest Volume 10, Issue 16, John Higdon writes: > The question remains: Why should anyone have to pay more for telephone > service simply because they allow a modem to speak over the line? In the SWBT vs. COSUARD situation, that is not the question. SWBT argues that a BBS is a business not because it uses a modem, but because it advertises and offers a service. That the vast majority of BBSs are not making any profit, and are not charging for their service is immaterial -- after all, non-profit organizations like the Salvation Army also pay business rates. To illustrate their argument, they maintain that when a sysop imposes online time limits, but then gives time credit for uploads, that actually constitutes a business transaction. He accepts the upload as payment for increased online time. Needless to say, I don't share SWBT's opinion; however, even if business rates were imposed on BBS operators and users, telecommunications as a hobby would still be much more affordable in the US, and offer greater possibilities (even in GTE areas :-) than over here in Austria :-(. Wolf N. Paul, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Schloss Laxenburg, Schlossplatz 1, A - 2361 Laxenburg, Austria, Europe Phone: [43] (2236) 71521-465 BITNET: tuvie!iiasa!wnp@cernvax.BITNET UUCP: uunet!tuvie!iiasa!wnp INTERNET: wnp%iiasa.at@uunet.uu.net