SWBell proposing to charge per minute for local calls

Thread View: austin.freenet

4 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

4 total messages Started by Bhala Ghatate Tue, 11 Feb 1997 00:00

#38

Author: Bhala Ghatate
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 00:00

42 lines
2316 bytes

Dear FlashNet customer,

We are writing you this to inform you of a very important matter 
currently under review by the FCC.  Your local telephone company has
filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your 
internet service. They contend that your usage has or will hinder 
the operation of the telephone network.  

It is our belief that internet usage will diminish if users were
required
to pay additional per minute charges.  The FCC has created an email box
for
your comments; responses must be received by February 13, 1997.  Send
your comments to isp@fcc.gov and tell them what you think.

Alert everyone in your addressbook, and most importantly the subject
line should have "CC Docket No 96-263". FULL NAME AND ADDRESS SHOULD
ACCOMPANY THE EMAIL otherwise it will be deleted. Again, the email to
FCC is
isp@fcc.gov 

More information can be found at the FCC website:
        http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html

Please forward this email to all your friends on the internet so all our
voices may be heard.

Thanks for your time.

******************************************
M. Scott Leslie
President - FlashNet Communications
a division of WebSite Management Co., Inc.
******************************************


-- 
Bhala Ghatate
DAMAN, http://www.daman.org
803 Single Oak Cove. Austin Tx 78746
Tel: (512) 327-9163/(512) 327 7868 Fax: (512) 327-9163

Re: SWBell proposing to charge per minute for local calls

#39

Author: Mickey Mouse
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 00:00

14 lines
1359 bytes

On Tue, 11 Feb 1997 21:54:19 -0600, Bhala Ghatate <bhala@daman.org>
wrote:

>Dear FlashNet customer,
>
>We are writing you this to inform you of a very important matter 
>currently under review by the FCC.  Your local telephone company has
>filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your 
>internet service. They contend that your usage has or will hinder 
>the operation of the telephone network.  

Guess Clinton's idea of every home having internet access will come at
a price...

Re: SWBell proposing to charge per minute for local calls

#36

Author: Simon
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 00:00

37 lines
2513 bytes

In article <5e5tt6$15jc@news3.realtime.net>, bladex@bga.com (David Smith) wrote:

> Simon (simons@who.net) wrote:
> 
> : Nothing like panic-mail from an ISP President -- Spammariffic!

> So I think that you are way off base in slamming Flash Net for participating 
> in these efforts.  Democracy is sloppy -- sorry it doesn't fit into your 
> pre-conceived notions about how the world should or shouldn't be.

I was flaming Flash Net for propagating a Net-panic-letter that not only
has been spammed across several newsgroups and list-serves, but has shown
up multiple times in people's emails.

As was clear from the article I attached:

1) Local phone companies did not ask the FCC "to impose per minute charges
for *your* internet service." What they did do was try to get interstate
access premiums from local ISPs similarly to how they charge long distance
carriers.

2) The FCC already rejected this in December, which was unmentioned in the
notice. They had been seeking public comment on that decision.

3) The notice has a "call to action" telling people to write the FCC but
fails to also mention that the deadline is (was) Friday, February 14.

4) Finally, the spam failed to offer any additional veracity or background
for its claims (see: http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html)

All-in-all a very naughty piece of hysteria, akin to the classic "modem
tax" panic of the late-80s.
---
simons@who.net
Read me in MacSense (http://www.macsense.com)
I courtesy-email replies.

Re: SWBell proposing to charge per minute for local calls

#37

Author: Simon
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 00:00

23 lines
2044 bytes

> 3) The notice has a "call to action" telling people to write the FCC but
> fails to also mention that the deadline is (was) Friday, February 14.
> 

Actually, to correct myself, the deadline for the FCC's decision is
currently March 24, with the reply (responses to other's comments) deadline
April 23.

The February 14 date was the reply deadline for the Access Charge Reform NPRM.

Those wanting to make a comment at isp@fcc.gov on the Internet decision
should follow these specifics:

              The Internet Access & Information
              Service Provider NOI (CC Docket No. 96-263).

              Only one copy of electronically-filed comments must be
              submitted. You must put the docket number of the proceeding in
              the subject line, and you also must note in the subject line if an
              electronic submission is an exact copy of formal comments. You
              also must include your full name and Postal Service mailing
              address in your submission.

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads