Yes Pat, but it didn't do it on the basis of the 1st Amendment. As I
> understand it, the fine was to preserve "Net Freedom" (Powell's term)
> and although I like it, I still don't understand the legal basis for
> this action. It seems to me the Telco's ought to be concerned about
> this because if there is now a "must carry" rule for VoIP traffic, what
> happens when they start to offer TV/video? Will they be forced to allow
In the end, the only reason VoIP is so cheap is that it passes the costs off to other sectors. Personally, I have seen the quality of my phone service plummet in the past ten years, and I'd be willing to pay a little more to get my good service back. I don't want to pay a little less, get even worse service, and on top of it end up paying more for basic Internet. But that's where VoIP is leading.
-Joel
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases:
formatting link