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

politics

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."

Brain Drain and TBTF

March 29, 2010

This is about tech in general and very specific to my current location. Kind of a rant.

There was an article in the St. Pete Times about the Tampa Bay Technology Forum working on a state-wide initiative. State-wide?

Our Economic Survival

March 25, 2010

The FCC's National Broadband Plan suggests that adding 500 MHz of spectrum to the mix will fix most things. HA!

I thought when Julius became FCC Chair we would have some change. Instead, we get the idea that if we give more spectrum to companies that already have spectrum we will improve the current situation.

Somebody please explain how?

Sprint, Clearwire, T-Mobile, VZW and AT&T have spectrum that they have not turned up yet. Giving them more - and varied - spectrum will not make any marked improvement. 

How many radios do you thing we can add to a cellular handset?







Is it the Regulatory Environment?

February 9, 2010

In a twitter exchange with Erik Cecil, former regulatory counsel at Level3, we were dialoging about the Fairpoint bankruptcy. (FairPoint aims to cut debt by two-thirds).

My reply stated, "Just 2 years after the deal w/VZ to create an unstable Fairpoint despite opposition, Fairpoint screws everyone." By everyone, I mean the customers, the economy, the state, the PUC who approved the deal despite being against it (And Erik, you think there is regulation?), the workers, the Union, shareholders and the debt holders. I actually don't care about the last two, because both should have known it was going to go POOF!

Featured Events