<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Signal to Noise &#187; regulation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://macvoip.com/stn/tag/regulation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://macvoip.com/stn</link>
	<description>Teddy Wallingford, Rock and Roll CEO</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 17:04:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Google&#8217;s Entirely Frank Defense of Google Voice</title>
		<link>http://macvoip.com/stn/2009/10/09/googles-entirely-frank-defense-of-google-voice/</link>
		<comments>http://macvoip.com/stn/2009/10/09/googles-entirely-frank-defense-of-google-voice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2009 01:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ted Wallingford</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[voip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fcc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://macvoip.com/stn/?p=918</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s no secret Ma Bell isn&#8217;t happy with &#8220;upstarts&#8221; like Google Voice elbowing into their turf. The VoIP FUD machine, fueled by the telecom industry&#8217;s status quo, has been running on full blast for the last ten years, even to &#8230; <a href="http://macvoip.com/stn/2009/10/09/googles-entirely-frank-defense-of-google-voice/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><font face="sans-serif">It&#8217;s no secret Ma Bell isn&#8217;t happy with &#8220;upstarts&#8221; like <a href="http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/10/sex-conference-calls-and-outdated-fcc.html">Google Voice</a> elbowing into their turf. The VoIP FUD machine, fueled by the telecom industry&#8217;s status quo, has been running on full blast for the last ten years, even to the extent that, until recently anyway, I was willing to concede that Ma Bell had won. </p>
<p>Now that AT&amp;T has begun to ring the FCC about it&#8217;s dissatisfaction with certain players whose VoIP apps have gained momentum&#8211;chief among them Google Voice&#8211;the overwhelming debate between players in the Internet and telecom fields is now an out-front, obvious affair.&nbsp; This is due, I suppose, to Google&#8217;s use of very frank, conversational techniques&#8211;like blogging&#8211;in defending its policy positions and in describing its products or advances. </p>
<p>Ultimately, Google is arguing that AT&amp;T would like the FCC to regulate that all VoIP apps that originate or terminate calls on the PSTN&#8211;Skype and Google Voice, both mentioned in Google&#8217;s rebuttle&#8211;be treated like phone lines, and idea that Google and I both agree is silly. </p>
<p>I vote for getting rid of the term &#8220;phone line&#8221; altogether.&nbsp; Where the app can&#8217;t be separated from the transport (as in a phone line), leave the existing regulations (and taxes) in place.&nbsp; But as that paradigm dies, so should the regulations intended to take advantage of its popularity. </p>
<p></font></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://macvoip.com/stn/2009/10/09/googles-entirely-frank-defense-of-google-voice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1198</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

