Peter : On Rad's Radar?
Peter
| Peter Radizeski of RAD-INFO, Inc. talking telecom, Cloud, VoIP, CLEC, and The Channel.

politics

Not a Political Piece

August 20, 2010

This isn't meant to be political but more like here are some thoughts for digestion.

This first is from FCC Commish Copps (thanks to Benton Foundation):

"I think most of you understand how important the Internet and access to high-speed broadband are to the future of our country. This incredible technology intersects with just about every great challenge confronting our nation-whether it's jobs, education, energy, climate change and the environment, news, international competitiveness, health care or equal opportunity.

Never Vote Incumbent

July 12, 2010

As long as I am ranting, I figured I would hit on Incumbents. I don't mean the ILEC's, although most of them don't care a wit about their customers. I'm talking about career politicians. We breed them in the US like a rare dog. 

Think about this: Why would someone spend $24 million to be governor?

The Green Zone Inside Out

July 7, 2010

[Just a warning: This is a Rant, so you can skip it if you want.]

I just finished reading Barry Eisler's book, Inside Out. Eisler used to work for the CIA. Page 301: "Number 1, the country is run by corporate interests.

Congressional Rural Broadband

June 7, 2010

For years no one in Congress cared about the Internet or Broadband. (In fact, it looked like they didn't care about anything but re-election).

But the ILEC's have them caring. Yep. Lobbying dollars into the accounts of about 40 congress critters will do that.

Rules of Engagement

May 18, 2010

It's a sometimes funny CBS sitcom, but to Agents in the Telecom Indirect Channel, Rules of Engagement are the sometimes written policy from carriers about Channel Conflict.

What is Channel Conflict?

Channel Conflict is when an agent and a direct account exec are battling for the same account. It helps if there is a written policy in place.

Just a Reminder

May 18, 2010

The masses. You know, the ratepayers, the taxpayers, the consumers. These are the people who have paid for the PSTN. These same consumers have also paid for the future broadband networks that the ILECs have refused to build despite taking rate hikes (for years) to pay for the promised land.

So when there is talk about No Investment in Telecom, I have to laugh.

What is the FCC Trying to Say?

May 6, 2010

The Buzz this week is the FCC's "Third Option" for some form of regulation of the Internet.

This is FCC Commissioner Michael Copps' statement about the Third Option.

"Frankly, I would have preferred plain and simple Title II reclassification through a declaratory ruling and limited, targeted forbearance--wiping the slate clean of all question marks. The quicker we can bring some sense of surety and stability to the present confusion emanating from the Comcast court decision, the better off consumers--and industry, too--will be."

The FCC General Counsel released this statement explaining what FCC Chair Genachowski was trying to say in this statement: "The Third Way: A Narrowly Tailored Broadband Framework".

Re-Title the Internet

May 4, 2010

Last Friday, FCC Chairman Genachowski received a letter from three law professors, all experts on telecommunications law and open Internet rules. "Tim Wu (known for first popularizing the concept of Network Neutrality), Susan Crawford (former White House advisor on telecommunications policy), and Marvin Ammori (lead attorney and representative of intervenors in the FCC's Comcast proceeding and court appeal), called on the FCC to reclassify broadband transmission service as a Title II telecommunications service." [save-the-internet]

Since AT&T blogged about it without mentioning Crawford's name, I know that the spin machine is in effect. But the FCC must act fast before the Duopoly can mount a PR campaign and a war machine.  I'm a firm believer that anything that a Fortune 1000 company lobbies against is best for the consumer. And every time AT&T wants anything, it usually means it's time to reach for the KY. 

For a detailed legal explanation of why broadband was never classified as a Title II telecommunications service, read this.

Of course, the re-classification would be fought, but so what?





USF now over 15%

March 30, 2010

VoIP Access Ruling

March 29, 2010

"On February 18, 2010, a federal district court stepped in to fill the gap left by the FCC's silence on the issue of whether transmission of Voice over Internet Protocol ("VoIP")-originated calls is an information service exempt from access charges or a telecommunications service subject to access charges." [from Kelley-Drye]

I spoke with Kris Twomey last week about this judgment. In summary, the judgment of Civil Action No. 08-0397 is as follows: "If the call leaves the customer premise as VoIP and remains VoIP until it hits the tandem, then there are not any LD or toll access charges. VoIP is an Information Service according to the FCC."

Featured Events