TELECOM Digest     Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:45:00 EDT    Volume 26 : Issue 94

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    CommunicationsDirect News Daily Update (communicationsdirect_daily)
    Vonage Barred From Adding New Customers (USTelecom dailyLead)
    Comcast Cuts Off Bandwidth Hogs (Fred Atkinson)
    Cities Challenge FCC Cable Rules in Court (Neal McLain)
    Google's Next Frontier: Television (Neal McLain)
    Re: A Stay of Execution Possible for Vonage (William Warren)
    Re: More on Internet and Patent History (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: More on Internet and Patent History (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Do Phone Chargers Waste Power? (Dave Close)
    Re: Verizon Objects to FCC Rules Preventing Pretexting (harold@hallikainen)
    Re: Judge Hits Vonage With Injuction; Stop Using (T)
    Re: Judge Hits Vonage With Injuction; Stop Using Verizon Tech (Thomas)
    Re: Fred Phelps Fax Machine Antics (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Fred Phelps Fax Machine Antics (William Warren)
    Re: Fred Phelps Fax Machine Antics (John C. Fowler)

====== 25 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest, and why not
support Net Freedom Now http://www.freepress.net/netfreedom . 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: CommunicationsDirect News Daily Update - April 06, 2007
From: communicationsdirect_daily <communications@communicationsdirectnews.com>
Reply-To: communicationsdirect_daily-owner@communicationsdirectnews.com
Date: Fri,  6 Apr 2007 10:33:13 EDT


********************************
PricewaterhouseCoopers Presents
The CommunicationsDirect Daily Update
For April 06, 2007
********************************

France Telecom Acquires African Mobile/Internet Licence
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/130/23662?11228

     France Telecom has acquired a mobile and internet licence in the
     Central Africa Republic, preparatory to a service launch before
     the end of the year. In a statement, France Telecom said that it
     has just signed an agreement with the government for the licence
     and to create a new Orange subsidiary that will operate the
     service.  ...

Telecom Italia Chairman Guido Rossi Resigns
http://communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/23649?11228

     MILAN, Italy - Telecom Italia chairman Guido Rossi resigned on
     Friday, just days after the company's largest shareholder
     moved to oust him from his post.  Olimpia, the holding company
     set up by Pirelli and Benetton group to control Telecom Italia,
     omitted Rossi's name from a list of proposed new board
     members released ...

Your feedback on our e-letter is always welcome. Send email to:

CommunicationsDirect Editor <telecom_direct_editor@us.pwc.com>

Copyright (C) 2007 PricewaterhouseCoopers.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 12:16:55 CDT
From: USTelecom dailyLead <ustelecom@dailylead.com>
Subject: Vonage Barred From Adding New Customers


USTelecom dailyLead
April 6, 2007
http://r.smartbrief.com/resp/gBwEfDtusXpibUCibuddbqNc

TODAY'S HEADLINES


NEWS OF THE DAY
* Vonage barred from adding new customers
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* AT&T will consider Italian partners
* Nacchio case could end without spilling secrets
* Motorola tops one million IPTV set-top boxes shipped
USTELECOM SPOTLIGHT
* Register for NXTcomm today!
TECHNOLOGY TRENDS
* Ethernet coming to storage networking
* The YouTube of 2007
* Taking the voice out of voice mail
* Gearing up for mobile marketing
IP DOWNLOAD
* Verso makes VoIP-technology buy
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* FCC to review wireless 911 accuracy

Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://r.smartbrief.com/resp/gBwEfDtusXpibUCibuddbqNc

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Comcast Cuts Off Bandwidth Hogs
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2007 05:02:58 -0400
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $19.95


http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2111373,00.asp
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2111375,00.asp

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 05:45:37 -0500
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Cities Challenge FCC Cable Rules in Court


Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Local governments across the country went to court Tuesday 
to challenge federal rules intended to spur competition in the cable 
television industry.

Lawyers for organizations representing cities and counties asked the
courts to invalidate rules the Federal Communications Commission
approved in December to smooth the way for new competitors that want
to offer cable television service.

http://tinyurl.com/28rz5o

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 05:55:59 -0500
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
Subject: Google's Next Frontier: Television


By Jon Brodkin, Network World, 03/27/07

Google is coming to your television set. The Web search giant is
hiring a team of software engineers to develop products for television
and is building a sales team that will secure advertising for
Google's TV offerings. Google's intentions are made clear in a
series of job advertisements posted on its career Web site.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:42:17 -0400
From: William Warren <w_warren_nonoise@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: A Stay of Execution Possible for Vonage


hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
[snip]

> (I personally feel Comcast is overpriced, but the marketplace
> disagrees.)

Lisa,

Comcast is the least-cost option in my case: since their phone service
includes long-distance calling, I was able to justify their service
when Internet costs were included.

I may be the exception: my family is spread out all over the map, and we 
had a high long-distance bill.

The marketplace doesn't "disagree": it's nothing personal. The 
marketplace simply compensates for disequilibrium between supply and demand.

William


(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: More on Internet and Patent History
Date: 5 Apr 2007 15:38:14 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


Scott Dorsey wrote:

> You don't really _need_ memory management to do timesharing, but it
> sure helps a whole lot and keeps users from killing one another.  IBM
> made an aftermarket DAT box that could be attached to the 360/50 and
> some other models in order to run TSO, when it became clear that this
> was a big deal for computer buyers.

True.

In the early 1960s, IBM made the decision not to include time sharing
hardware, then rushed later to add it on.  I wonder if that was a good
decision, but it appears it was.  The vast majority of customers at
that point were batch oriented.  S/360 DID include the basics of good
storage protection and interupts to handle real-time processing.

> Most of those predictions actually described the internet of 1990,
> really, which was greatly superior in some ways to the internet of
> today.

Could you elaborate as to why you think the 1990 Internet is partly
superior to that of today?

For myself, I think there is way too much unnecessary bloat.  For
example, try to look at the schedule page of FX TV network.  There's
dancing logos all over the place but it's hard to find actual data.
Plain old Courier type tables is "boring" but real quick to show.  My
14.4 modem accesses the very few sites just fine.  I do like .pdf
files of documents, such as actual images of train and bus schedules
and maps which I frequently download.

Would anyone know the percentage today of homes that have Internet
access?  The public terminals at the library still have plenty of
users (including me).  Of course, "access" quality varies from slower
modems to high speed connections.

------------------------------

From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: More on Internet and Patent History
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:52:30 -0000
Organization: Widgets, Inc.


In article <telecom26.92.4@telecom-digest.org>,  <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

[[..  munch  ..]]

> ARPA devised "TCP/IP" protocol.  Was it patented?  Did IBM patent
> their Bi-Sync and later SNA protocols?  Did Bell patent its early
> dial- up handshaking?  Does JCR Licklider, director of a ARPA computer
> defense project in 1962, hold to sponsor any patents? 

Software was -not- patentable, under the laws then in effect.
Nor was a 'process', be it the means of producing an industrial chemical
or 'dial-up handshaking'.

> Time sharing required a facility known as "Dynamic Address
> Translation".  I wonder if this was patented.

The process?  "impossible".

A specific _circuit_ that did it?   possibly.

Writing the claims broadly enough to apply to different physical address
bus architectures would have been a challenge.

> include it in its original System/360 line in 1964 and not support
> timesharing, but General Electric did and their machines were used for
> early timeshared computers.  IBM later added this to its System/360
> model 67 and its System/370 line.  Time sharing proved to be a lot
> harder to implemented than first predicted; it was a heavy CPU and
> meory drain which was a problem on the technology of the 1960s.

> Some in the early 1960s predicted time sharing would allow
> "democratization" of computer services, by allowing acess by anyone
> through a terminal to an expensive computer.  Some of these published
> predictions described the Internet as we have it today [in 2007] as
> being available in 1990, it took another full decade for that to come
> to fruition.

> The book also covers various other aspects of the computer and
> information processing industry.

------------------------------

From: Dave Close <dave@compata.com>
Subject: Re: Do Phone Chargers Waste Power?
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 05:58:28 UTC
Organization: Compata, Costa Mesa, California


Peter Svensson, Associated Press <ap@telecom-digest.org> writes:

> - Q: Does my cell-phone charger consume electricity if I leave it 
> plugged in to the wall when it's not charging the phone?

Many newer phones have a connector for a USB cable for transfering
information like address books, calendars, and pictures. USB generally
supplies power. It turns out that many phones will charge while
connected to a USB port on a computer. The USB port consumes no
additional power, beyond what the computer uses, when nothing is
connected to it. So, in addition to saving (a miniscule amount of)
power, using USB to charge a phone saves having to lug the charger
when travelling.

Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA  "Greed is to the moralists of the
dave@compata.com, +1 714 434 7359    left what sex is to the moralists 
dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu           of the right." - Cathy Young

------------------------------

From: harold@hallikainen.com <harold@hallikainen.com>
Subject: Re: Verizon Objects to FCC Rules Preventing Pretexting
Date: 6 Apr 2007 07:36:40 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


The Commission has been steering away from "how to" rules in recent
years, instead making rules that describe the required outcome. If
carriers do not want to use a password for access to customer private
records, I think they should be able to use whatever method they want
to protect the privacy of the records, and face substantial fines when
those methods fail.

Harold

------------------------------

From: T <nospam.kd1s@cox.nospam.net>
Subject: Re: Judge Hits Vonage With Injuction; Stop Using
Organization: The Ace Tomato and Cement Company
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 21:08:19 -0400


In article <telecom26.90.6@telecom-digest.org>, kludge@panix.com says...

> In article <telecom26.88.9@telecom-digest.org>,
> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:

>> And is exactly the same as electronic technology 50-60 years ago.
>> Back in 1957 IBM research discovered something they thought was
>> perfectly obvious but to their surprise was never patented.  So they
>> filed and got a patent for it.  On the flip side, a dubious patent
>> claim forced IBM to pay out millions of dollars in royalties.

> The difference between this situation and the current situation is that
> in 1957, the patent office had inspectors who were familiar with the
> technology, and who would reject attempts to patent devices that did not
> work, or which had become part of standard industry techniques decades
> beforehand.

> Today, we have the additional issue that the patent office does not
> have enough inspectors with actual familiarity with software
> technology or with algorithms.  This is how Microsoft can get away
> with patenting the ring buffer, a data structure used at least as
> early as the CDC 6000.

> We currently have a situation where huge numbers of obviously invalid
> patents are being issued, and there is no way for the patents to be
> declared so without going to court.  And once it comes time to go to
> court, sadly it tends to be a situation of the person with the most
> money winning.  

So the patent office needs to hire some CS, IS and EE grads. That'd
change things in a hurry.

------------------------------

From: Thomas <tauzinger@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Judge Hits Vonage With Injuction; Stop Using Verizon Technology
Date: 6 Apr 2007 18:08:15 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com


On Mar 24, 6:23 pm, Peter Kaplan, Reuters News Wire <reut...@telecom-
digest.org> wrote:

> By Peter Kaplan

> A federal judge dealt a blow to Vonage Holdings Corp. that sent its
> stock reeling on Friday, when he agreed to bar the company from
> usingInternet phonecall technology patented by Verizon
> Communications Inc.

> Vonage said it was confident its customers would not experience
> service interruptions, but investors sent its shares down nearly 26
> percent.

> U.S. District Judge Claude Hilton said he would delay signing the
> order for two weeks to give Vonage time to try to convince him to stay
> the injunction while it appeals the entire patent infringement
> case. "I will sign the injunction at the time I rule on the stay,"
> Hilton said at a hearing.

> Hilton agreed with Verizon that it would suffer irreparable harm if he
> allowed continued infringement of the Voice-over-Internet Protocol
> (VoIP) technologies that allow consumers to make calls over the Internet.

> He rejected arguments by Vonage that the harm to Verizon, the No. 2
> U.S.  telephone company, was outweighed by other factors, including
> the public interest.

> "I don't think it's going to kill Vonage," said Albert Lin, an analyst
> at American Technology Research. But he said the legal costs and
> management distractions were disruptive.

> Vonage has been public for less than a year, and its stock has lost
> value consistently since its initial public offering at $17 a share in
> May. It reached a new low Friday, closing down $1.05 at $3 per share
> on the New York Stock Exchange.

> Vonage said the patent battle was far from over and the company would
> vigorously defend itself.

> "Despite this obvious attempt by Verizon to cripple Vonage, the
> litigation will not stop Vonage from continuing to provide quality
> VoIP service to our millions of customers," Vonage chief executive
> Mike Snyder said in a statement.

> OPERATING CHALLENGES

> Vonage has previously said it is working on redesigned technologies to
> avoid infringing Verizon's patents.

> "It should likely continue as an independent company, but their
> operating challenges will have increased," said Stanford Group analyst
> Clayton Moran, who also warned that Vonage's subscriber growth could
> slow.

> A jury on March 8 found Vonage had infringed three patents owned by
> Verizon. The jury said Vonage must pay $58 million plus 5.5 percent
> royalties on future sales.

> "They could not have been commercially successful if they had not
> taken these patents we have and put them into their technologies," Dan
> Webb, an attorney for Verizon, said at Friday's hearing on the
> injunction request.

> Webb also cited documents Vonage filed with the court under seal,
> saying an injunction would cause "enormous business difficulties" for
> Vonage.  Webb said the Vonage filings suggested that Vonage "can't
> live with an injunction because of the way their technology is
> designed."

> Vonage's chief lawyer, Sharon O'Leary, declined to comment on the
> sealed documents.

> "We will get the stay, either through the district court or the
> Federal Circuit Court of Appeals," O'Leary told Reuters outside the
> court.

> One patent lawyer told Reuters that Vonage has a chance of winning an
> appeal, but it was crucial to get a stay of the injunction.

> "A one-and-a-half to two-year injunction, even if they win on appeal,
> could be very significant to Vonage," said John Rabena, a partner with
> the firm Sughrue Mion.

> (Additional reporting by Ritsuko Ando in New York)

> Copyright 2007 Reuters Limited.

Another reason to sign up with ViaTalk.

Thanks,

Thomas
http://www.betterphone.org

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Fred Phelps Fax Machine Antics
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:28:41 -0400
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $19.95


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is a pity. IMO, Reverend Phelps is
> an embarassment to everyone who claims to be a Christian. Of course,
> that's probably okay with him; he feels his church and himself are the
> only 'real Christians' anyway. They took the name 'Westboro Baptist'
> in the early 1950's when another Baptist organization in town called
> 'Eastside Baptist' (where Fred was also affiliated as a member)
> decided to 'expand their outreach' in another area of town, so
> logic dictated moving to a western area and thus the name "Westboro"
> was chosen, and Fred was selected to operate the new branch. I
> think Eastside held the mortgage originally on the Westboro property
> but that was many, many years ago, and Eastside has long since
> disavowed Fred and his bunch. 

Well, it depends upon how you look at it.  Are you embarrassed by The
Crusades?  Jim Jones?  Or David Koresh?  The KKK?  The Militiamen?
Many of them claim Christianity.  But I don't buy it nor do others.

They are disgraceful, that's true.  But I'm not letting it embarrass
me.  There are a lot of people who profess to be Christians that are
not really.

They just don't get it, do they?  

And yes, I am a member of a Baptist church.  

> And yes, telephone harassment is against the law.  PAT]

That's a fact.  

Fred 



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am an Episcopalian and we generally
believe that a person is a Christian if _they claim to be a Christian_.
I know no other practical and non-judgmental way to evaluate a person.
So much about churches, I suspect, has to do with the _social culture_
of which they are a part, rather than the _specific religious beliefs_
they hold, and many christian-based churches hold the same general
religious beliefs anyway. For example, a person going to First Baptist
Church in Independence, KS would be a different sort of person than a
Baptist at Riverside Church or Park Avenue Baptist in New York City,
or Rockefeller Chapel in Chicago. Both Riverside and Rockefeller
Chapel are Baptist institutions, having been founded, and substanially
endowed by John D. Rockefeller, a Baptist. True of Episcopalians also:
members of Epiphany Church in Independence are entirely different than
members of Trinity Church-Wall Street in New York. Personally, I think
we are living in a post-Christian era for the most part. If church
attendance is any indicator it is no where close to where it was fifty
years ago or more. 

And why I feel embarassed for Fred Phelps? Because so many, probably
most, GLBT people feel that _he_ -- their contemporary, Phelps --_
represents what our beliefs are about. That's all they have seen or
know, in the the same way many small animals are afraid of humans. And
you know, Fred, even Baptists were at one point firm believers in
Calvinism and the T.U.L.I.P.  doctrines which Fred espouses. A century
and a half ago, most protestant churches were very big on
it. Many/most GLBT people are far from being intelligent theologians
or sociologists. Fred claims he is not picking on gay people; he says
we all are going to hell, not just gay guys, all of us!  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 17:29:52 -0400
From: William Warren <w_warren_nonoise@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Fred Phelps Fax Machine Antics


William Warren wrote:

> editor wrote:

>> Dear Mr. Townson:

>> I am employed as a spokesperson and administrator for Sweden's royal
>> family. Is it possible that your newsletter readers can help? I can
>> confirm that American preacher Rev Fred Phelps has been faxing hate
>> messages to us frequently, calling us 'gay faggots' and worse.

> [snip]

> Pat,

> The best advice to give Nina is to work through the U.S. State 
> department, which is responsible for such matters: I'm sure the Swedish 
> Royal Family has access to the equivalent government bureau in Sweden, 
> so her best option is to involve them.
> 
> William
> 
> (Filter noise from my address for direct replies)
> 
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am afraid, William, this has gone far
> beyond the point of no-return. You see, the United States has a big
> problem with the First Amendment getting in the way.

Pat,

I assume that you have verified Nina's bona fides, so I'll skip that
step.

Whether the First Amendment is "getting in the way" is _not_ yet
resolved: foreign dignitaries may be entitled to treaty protections
which override the U.S. Constitution.

In any case, where a king is involved, I assume that the State
Department is willing to negotiate a solution which avoids further
publicity and possible legal action. After all, diplomacy is what they
do for a living.

William

(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Nina is a known person. Apparently, it
has been resolved thus far this way: if Fred goes into Sweden, he will
be arrested as a public nuisance or a 'hate monger'. Being a public
nuisance or a hate monger is not an extraditable offense as of yet. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 17:14:44 PDT
From: John C. Fowler <johnfpublic@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Fred Phelps Fax Machine Antics


It sounds to me like it may be easier to handle the junk FAXes in
perpetuity rather than attempt to get the group to stop.  (Though if
Sweden's royal family would put their public FAX on one of those
premium international numbers, they'd actually make a little bit of
money every time they receive a FAX from the U.S., which would make
the situation interesting.)

To handle the junk FAXes, first, make sure you've taken care of the
basics.  These FAXes should not be printing out on paper anywhere.  If
the royal family FAXes are a room full of paper-printing machines,
it's time to upgrade to a fully digital solution.  You want to make
the FAXes easier to delete than they are to send, without killing
trees in the process.

For people you get a lot of FAXes from, or very important FAXers, give them a special private number, totally different from the public FAX number (not off by 1, for example).  These FAXes will be given preferential treatment.

I'm not sure if the next option is available in Sweden, but maybe it
can be made available by royal decree.  Ideally, you want your public
FAX receiving server to capture the caller ID from incoming FAXes, and
put them in separate "inboxes" depending on where they're coming from.
For example, FAXes coming from some other place in Sweden will go in
one box, other trusted international locations in another box, and
anything from Kansas or where ID is not available or blocked goes into
a "review first" box.  For this last box, hire someone not easily
offended to rush through all FAXes and mark them as junk (instantly
deleted) or possibly OK (sent to another box for a higher-up
reviewer).  It should not take very long to determine one kind of FAX
from another at this level.

Then, all you have to do is wait and see who gets tired first.  Heck,
donate all of the international call funds received from Fred Phelps'
organization to a pro-homosexual group, and thank them for their kind
support.

John C. Fowler, johnfpublic@yahoo.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's a good idea, except I do not
think telco call forwarding will allow phone numbers to be forwarded
to a 900 or 976 number, and even if the rules allow that, my
understanding is that tolls are charged to the person doing the
forwarding. What a surprise that would be for the King, eh ? Telco's
rationale for that -- if it is allowed -- is that the original caller
only intended to reach the first point; any forwarding to the second
point was being done for the convenience of the call recipient, who is
therefore obligated to pay the toll portion. Far better, IMO, for Nina
or whoever handles the King's telecom to require a passcode to get
past the telco switch. Let Swedish telecom fiddle around with it all.
PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V26 #94
*****************************