On Mon, 20 Mar 2006, Ruben Safir wrote: <snip> > "common carrier" and, so far, have managed to do so. Before 1996, such > classification could be helpful in defending a monopolistic position, > but the main focus of policy has been on competition, so "common > carrier" status has little value for ISPs, while carrying obligations > they would rather avoid. The key FCC Order on this point is: IN RE > FEDERAL-STATE JOINT BOARD ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE, 13 FCC Rcd. 11501 > (1998), which holds that ISP service (both "retail" and backbone) is an > "information service" (not subject to common carrier obligations) rather > than a "telecommunications service" (which might be classified as > "common carriage"). So, which part of this is unclear to you, Ruben? ISPs are not common carriers. Done and done. In the alternate reality, the one you wish you lived in, they might be, but here on earth, we aren't.
That should end the discussion at least on this specific subject. -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
