For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
For your convenience in reading: Subject lines are printed in RED and
Moderator replies when issued appear in BROWN.
Previous Issue (just one)
TD Extra News
TELECOM Digest Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:50:00 EST Volume 24 : Issue 138
Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson
SBC Rejects Vonage Bid to Work On Joint 911 System for VoIP (J Decker)
Vonage May Route 911 Call to Congress, FCC (Jack Decker)
Blocking VoIP, Other Apps - Clearwire Blockade Finds Industry (J Decker)
New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911 (Jack Decker)
Supreme Court to Hear High-Speed Internet Case - Cable (Jack Decker)
The Real Reason SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911 (Jack Decker)
Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase (Eric Friedebach)
Cell Phone Compatibility (SmarSquid)
Classic Telephone Call on PC (Gerhard Nowak)
Microsoft Launches Downloadable TV For Handheld (Telecom dailyLead USTA)
EU Needs More Time For Biometric Passports (Marcus Didius Falco)
Microsoft Files 117 Suits That Target 'Phishing' (Lisa Minter)
Every Ten Days (Choreboy)
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:56:12 -0500
Subject: SBC Rejects Vonage Bid to Work on Joint 911 System For VoIP
http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=11637&hed=Vonage%E2%80%99s+emergency+call+to+SBC§or=Capital&subsector=EconomyAndPolicy
Vonage's Emergency Call to SBC
March 30, 2005
SBC has turned down overtures from Vonage to work together on
developing 911-style emergency services for the VoIP company's
customers.
Vonage approached SBC with an offer 'to test and deploy a joint VoIP
E-911 service' in a February 18 letter from CEO Jeffrey Citron to SBC
CEO Edward Whitacre. "We cannot resolve fundamental issues associated
with providing a native E-911 service to VoIP users without your
assistance," he said.
Mr. Citron received a response on March 25 from Christopher Rice,
SBC's Executive Vice President of Network Planning & Engineering. "SBC
would welcome the opportunity to have its 911 expert meet with Vonage
to explain SBC's current 911 offerings," said Mr. Rice. "We cannot
agree, however, to participate in a separate, proprietary trial with
Vonage."
Mr. Rice also pointed to Telcordia as a carrier with which SBC has
been working to deliver 911 calls, and cited SBC's own 911 solution
available to VoIP providers, called the Switched IP Service.
SBC's decision didn't sit well with Mr. Citron. "I write to express my
concern and disappointment at SBC's refusal to work directly with
Vonage," Mr. Citron wrote in a March 28 letter. "Vonage renews its
request to jointly test and deploy a VoIP solution as soon as
possible."
Full story at:
http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=11637&hed=Vonage%E2%80%99s+emergency+call+to+SBC§or=Capital&subsector=EconomyAndPolicy
How to Distribute VoIP Throughout a Home:
http://michigantelephone.mi.org/distribute.html
If you live in Michigan, subscribe to the MI-Telecom group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MI-Telecom/
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:40:03 -0500
Subject: Vonage May Route 911 Call to Congress, FCC
http://news.com.com/Vonage+may+route+911+call+to+Congress,+FCC/2100-7352_3-5647706.html
By Ben Charny
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Internet phone provider Vonage may ask Congress and the Federal
Communications Commission to help it solve problems with SBC over
subscriber access to the 911 emergency call network.
SBC's decision not to work more closely with Vonage, made public
Wednesday, may delay efforts to fix the problem that keeps a majority
of U.S. Net phone providers from successfully routing 911 calls to the
right emergency calling center. Many of those 911 calls are instead
sent to non-emergency operators, with no guarantee the calls will
reach dispatch centers close enough to provide the most effective
help.
In mid-February, Vonage asked SBC, BellSouth, Qwest and Verizon, the
nation's largest local phone companies collectively known as the
Bells, to provide access to their 911 infrastructure within the next
60 days. At first, it appeared the logjam had been broken: SBC met
with Vonage to work out the logistics; Verizon, the largest Bell, also
committed to testing just such a system; and Qwest, the smallest of
the Bells, began considering its options.
While Verizon and BellSouth are now cooperating, SBC has refused to do
so, telling the FCC that Vonage and other Net phone providers need to
develop a standard way to route the 911 calls appropriately. What
Vonage was asking to test, SBC claimed, was a proprietary fix. "SBC
can not agree to engage in numerous individual tests with each and
every VoIP provider," it recently told the FCC, referring to the Net
phone technology also known as voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). A
spokesman wasn't immediately available for comment.
Vonage spokeswoman Brooke Schulz said Vonage is considering asking
Congress and the FCC to demand SBC open up its 911 infrastructure to
Vonage and other Net phone operators. In rebuking SBC's proprietary
claim, Schulz said operators Packet8, AT&T's CallVantage and Verizon
Communications VoiceWing Net phone service all use the same 911
products, "so how can SBC call what we're doing proprietary?"
Full story at:
http://news.com.com/Vonage+may+route+911+call+to+Congress,+FCC/2100-7352_3-5647706.html
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:37:09 -0500
Subject: Blocking VoIP, Other Apps - Clearwire Blockade Finds Industry
Reply-To: VoIPnews@yahoogroups.com
Jack Decker notes: My comment follows the (very short) article ...
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61935
Blocking VoIP, Other Apps
Clearwire blockade finds industry support?
As mentioned last week
<http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61784>, Clearwire faces
criticism for blocking a number "high bandwidth" applications,
including some Vonage customers; their TOS says they may "without
limitation, block and allow traffic types as we see fit at any time."
Light Reading
<http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=71020>
has a number of curious quotes from ISPs who support Clearwire, and
features U.S. Internet Industry Association president David McClure
*mocking* Vonage for complaining about service blockades.
[Jack Decker Comment: The basic issue here is much larger than VoIP -
the fact is that most people who pay a monthly fee for broadband
expect to be able to connect to "the Internet" and all the
applications available there. For some strange reason a few ISP's
seem to have the attitude that it's not sufficient that their
customers are paying for an Internet connection, but instead they feel
that if they offer an add-on service such as VoIP, they should be able
to block competitive services. Now, I want you to think about the
Internet services you use and the web pages you visit, because let me
tell you, if they make this stick, NOTHING on the Internet is
guaranteed accessible to you.
Let's suppose, for example, that you use AIM or ICQ, and all your
friends are on the same instant messaging service. And let's say you
get your broadband from SBC, which as it happens, has a partnership
with Yahoo. And, of course, Yahoo has its own instant messaging
service. So let's suppose that suddenly one day you find that your
AIM or ICQ no longer works, because it can't connect to their server,
because SBC is blocking access to force you to use Yahoo's Instant
Messaging program. So, okay, you e-mail your friends and ask them to
download the Yahoo program, only maybe some of them find it won't work
because they have cable broadband and their cable company has struck a
deal with Microsoft and they are only allowed to use the MSN instant
messaging program. See the problem?
Or let's say your a politician, and you're running for re-election,
and you have put up a blog to communicate with voters. Only your blog
site is blocked by some ISP's because they have an exclusive agreement
with a particular blog syndicator and your blog isn't part of that
syndicate. Or, what the heck, maybe they just happen to like your
opponent, so on a whim the company president decided to block access
to everything you -- your web site, your blog site, whatever. Maybe,
just to make it more legit, they asked your opponent to pay them $1,
for which he receives exclusive access from customers of that ISP.
My point is this: Up until now, Internet providers have pretty much
acted like common carriers -- in fact, they have evaded prosecution on
copyright infringement charges by explicitly stating that they were
common carriers and do not monitor the traffic that their customers
send back and forth. Now, all of a sudden, a few of them seem to want
to go the other way. Well if that be the case, and they no longer
claim to be common carriers but in fact are actively blocking certain
kinds of traffic, then watch the lawsuits begin for the traffic they
DON'T block -- and they have brought it all on themselves by their
greed.
For those of you who read this and are connected with an Internet
Service Provider, and if your ISP belongs to the "U.S. Internet
Industry Association", may I respectfully suggest that you think long
and hard about David McClure's comments in Light Reading, and whether
that is the type of organization you wish to belong to. I say that
because in my opinion, with comments of the type he is making in this
article, he is inviting both government regulation and potential
lawsuits on Internet Service Providers such as yours. The RIAA and
the MPAA and similar groups would probably be absolutely ecstatic if
you were to renounce your defacto common carrier status, because you
have much deeper pockets than most of the people using your ISP.
Remember that sometimes there are unintended consequences to actions,
and in my opinion Mr. McClure is not thinking clearly about the
possible consequences of his attitude.
End of commentary.]
Article + reader comments at:
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/61935
Original article from Light Reading:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreading&doc_id=71020
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:18:02 -0500
Subject: New Technology Brings Back Old Problem For 911
http://www.sooeveningnews.com/articles/2005/03/31/news/news582.txt
By SCOTT BRAND/The Evening News
EASTERN UPPER PENINSULA - New technology threatens to bring old
problems back to local residents as Voice Over Internet Phone service
(VOIP) may be unable to connect residents with their local central
dispatch systems in times of emergency.
"What we want to make people aware of is they are not able to access
911 like you can on a traditional phone," said Mackinac County 911
Coordinator Pam Matelski. "The dispatch center will not get your
information."
In Chippewa County, callers should not have difficulty reaching 911
while utilizing the new system.
"It's an issue and we are on top of it," said Chippewa County Central
Dispatch Director Tim McKee. "We have done what we need to do to
insure VOIP calls are directed to the appropriate administrative
line."
Unlike Luce and Mackinac counties, which go through the Regional 911
Dispatch Center in Negaunee, Chippewa County has the advantage of
housing its emergency and administrative offices inside the same
building. As a result, 911 calls over the VOIP boxes can be directed
to the county's administrative line and, from there, quickly channeled
on to the dispatchers in the next room.
To date, Vonage is the only company that appears to be offering this
new phone service in the Eastern Upper Peninsula. [COMMENT: Actually,
that is not true. Viewed one way, any major VoIP provider can be used
from anywhere broadband service is available, including the Eastern
Upper Peninsula. However, at the present time, only VoicePulse and
Broadvoice offer numbers in the Upper Peninsula - in contrast, if you
go to Vonage's site and do a search on the 906 area code, it returns
"No Area Codes Available" (which probably really means no ratecenters
are available).]
Full story at:
http://www.sooeveningnews.com/articles/2005/03/31/news/news582.txt
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:30:39 -0500
Subject: Supreme Court to Hear High-Speed Internet Case - Cable
http://www.baltimoresun.com/technology/bal-te.bz.brandx29mar29,1,166907.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
Supreme Court to hear high-speed Internet case
Cable companies may have to open networks
By William Patalon III
Sun Staff
In a debate that will shape the future of high-speed Internet service,
the Supreme Court will hear arguments today to determine whether cable
companies must open their networks to competitors.
The court could decide, in effect, how companies can compete to
deliver high-speed Internet access to a rapidly growing market and how
much choice consumers will have. The case pits the Federal
Communications Commission and National Cable & Telecommunications
Association, representing cable companies including Comcast Corp. and
Time Warner Inc., against Internet service providers such as EarthLink
Inc. and consumer groups.
At stake are billions of dollars expected from the emerging new
markets such as Internet-based phone service and digital entertainment
that high-speed service -- or broadband -- makes possible.
"What I think that this case will decide is just who's going to get
the money," said Eric Easton, a telecommunications expert and
associate professor of law at the University of Baltimore School of
Law.
Full story at:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/technology/bal-te.bz.brandx29mar29,1,166907.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
------------------------------
From: Jack Decker <jack-yahoogroups@withheld on request>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:54:05 -0500
Subject: The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
It's probably no secret that I don't have a lot of love for SBC,
mainly because it seems as though any time they have a choice between
doing something that would be beneficial to their customers or the
general public, or making a profit, they always seem to choose to make
a profit. This seems to be the way of most large corporations, I fear
-- it seems that people in a pack will conspire to do evil that none
of the members of that group would think of doing individually. In
this case it's a pretty clear cut distinction -- SBC would rather see
people's lives endangered than lift a finger to help what they
perceive as a competitor gain acess to 911. The thing is, this
doesn't even surprise me anymore, in fact it's exactly the sort of
action I'd expect SBC to take.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=324
3/31/2005
The Real Reason Why SBC Won't Work With Vonage on E-911
-Posted by Russell Shaw @ 5:49 am
I am not surprised that SBC is declining to work with Vonage on a way
to allow Vonage subscribers access to the E-911 emergency network.
SBC's public reason for not being all that eager to do so is that
well, Vonage hasn't figured out all the tech stuff on their end and
we, SBC, don't have time to help them with it. Or, as the giant
ILEC recently told the FCC, "SBC can not agree to engage in numerous
individual tests with each and every VoIP provider."
But why then, are Verizon and BellSouth cooperating with Vonage on a
way to make 911 access work?
First of all,the "it would be a pain in the neck" issue doesn't hold
water with me. Since most VoIP service providers use similar
equipment, getting in the lab with Vonage could result in a template
for E-911 solutions that could be deployed by many, if not most, of
the 400 or so VoIP access companies in the U.S.
Full story at:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=324
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Can't you just see SBC chomping at the
bit to get the old 'Bell System' out of cold storage and back into
service with all its old ways, albiet modernized somewhat? Put this
thing down -- refusal to work on 911 with VOIP carriers as one more
thing to negotiate when the FCC is asked to approve the AT&T/SBC
merger. PAT]
------------------------------
From: Eric Friedebach <friedebach@yahoo.com>
Subject: Sprint PCS Vision Added to Open Relay DataBase
Date: 30 Mar 2005 16:17:51 -0800
First thing Monday morning I started noticing a lot of email I was
sending to my customers was bouncing back. I use a PCMCIA card with
the PCS Vision service from Sprint <http://tinyurl.com/4ggj7>.
It seems that Sprint has been added to the Open Relay DataBase
<www.ordb.org> by mistake somehow. Sprint has no idea how this
happened, and they can't tell me when this will be resolved.
Has anyone here had this happen to their ISP? How long did it take to
get it resolved?
Eric Friedebach
/An Apollo Sandwich from Corky & Lenny's/
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Was it truly 'by mistake' or has Sprint
been entertaining some spammers? PAT]
------------------------------
From: SmarSquid <smarsquid@hotmail.com>
Subject: Cell Phone Compatibility
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:26:26 -0700
I have a couple of inactive cell phones (Motorola 120e and Samsung
GS-x426) that are lying around because I have taken phone
upgrades. They are blanked out and ready for service, and I want to
sell them on E-Bay. Howver, prospective buyers will want to know what
cellular service providers the equipment will work with. How can I
learn this? The Motorola was originally used in the Verizon Wireless
network, and the Samsung was used in the AT&T Wireless network, but I
have a feeling other providers could work with these phones. More
network compatibility means a higher number of potential buyers.
------------------------------
From: Gerhard Nowak <nonspam@gmx.net>
Subject: Classic Telephone Call on PC
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 20:07:37 +0400
Organization: Arcor
Hi there,
Since 3 months I try to get any proggy and tried out everything starting
from Hyperterminal to make a phonecall on my laptop!
Its just not possible! It's amazing, how all related programs guide
into the wrong direction.
Please help, if there is anybody out there to do so. Maybe I got
something wrong, or else. I don`t know:
If I use hyperterminal of windows -- and all other proggies are
derived from this - I can call a party, of course; and I also hear the
voice, but there is never a conversation and I can never answer, I can
not even "lift" the phone of the hook!
What to do?
Thanks in advance,
Gerry
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:08:32 EST
From: Telecom dailyLead from USTA <usta@dailylead.com>
Subject: Microsoft Launches Downloadable TV for Handhelds
Telecom dailyLead from USTA
March 31, 2005
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20487&l=2017006
TODAY'S HEADLINES
NEWS OF THE DAY
* Microsoft launches downloadable TV for handhelds
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY WATCH
* Qwest mulls another bid for MCI
* Cisco scraps poison pill defense
* Cablevision COO says MSO would acquire given right opportunity
* Relationship between satellite radio providers may thaw
* Real estate developers, not consumers, increasingly choose TV providers
USTA SPOTLIGHT
* Learn about the "Wireless Triple Play": USTA Small Company Summit, April 6 to 7
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
* Qualcomm looks to bring push-mobile e-mail to masses
REGULATORY & LEGISLATIVE
* Nortel wins Defense Department contract
Follow the link below to read quick summaries of these stories and others.
http://www.dailylead.com/latestIssue.jsp?i=20487&l=2017006
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 22:29:33 -0500
From: Marcus Didius Falco <falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: EU Needs More Time for Biometric Passports
So much for the US government's big rush to get them done this year,
to the extent that they haven't thought out the implications of the
RFID chip (although they realize they should call it anything but
RFID, because the acronym RFID is a magnet for animosity).
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2005-03-30-eu-passports_x.htm?POE=3DTRVI
SVA
<http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=3Dcpt&title=3DUSAT
ODAY.com+-+EU+needs+more+time+for+biometric+passports&expire=3D&urlID=3D13726909&fb=3DY&url=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Ftravel%2Fnews%2F2005-03-30
-eu-passports_x.htm%3FPOE%3DTRVISVA&partnerID=3D1664&showBibliography=3DY>
EU needs more time for biometric passports BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) The
European Union on Wednesday told the U.S. Congress the bloc needed
another year to implement new U.S. rules on secure biometric
passports, which include a computer chip with data such as a digital
photo of the passport holder.
EU justice and interior ministers had said last year they would meet
this year's Oct. 26 deadline. But only six of the 25 EU countries
Belgium, Finland, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, and Sweden will be
ready to issue biometric passports by that date.
After Oct. 26, citizens from 27 visa-exempt countries will have to
apply for a visa or have a biometric passport.
The EU's Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner Franco Frattini wrote
on Wednesday to James Sensenbrenner, head of the U.S. House of
Representative's Judiciary Committee that although the bloc had made
substantial progress, it would require more time, until Aug. 28, 2006,
to introduce the new passports.
"Despite all the progress ... we would urge the Congress to consider a
second extension of the deadline," Frattini said in the letter. The
United States had already extended the original Oct. 26, 2004,
deadline by a year.
Frattini said the issuing of similar U.S. passports was also
experiencing "a certain slippage" due to problems in adapting the new
technology to passports. Japan also will be unable to meet the
U.S. deadline, officials said.
So-called biometric features can reduce patterns of fingerprints,
irises, voices and faces to mathematical algorithms that can be stored
on a chip or machine-readable strip. EU countries also want to include
a fingerprint on the chip.
"Despite all the progress made ... in reinforcing the security of
passports you are surely aware that critical aspects of the biometric
technology, such as data security and interoperability of reading
devices, are still being finalized," wrote Frattini.
Frattini said the EU "shares the view of the United States that more
secure travel documents are an important tool in the fight against
international crime and terrorism."
The United States is urging European countries to have new biometric
travel documents in place as part of its tighter border security
checks following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
All new U.S. passports issued by the end of 2005 are expected to have
a chip containing the holders' name, birth date and issuing office, as
well as a a photo of the holders' face. The photo is the international
standard for biometrics, but countries are free to add other
biometrics, such as fingerprints, for greater accuracy.
Also Wednesday, the EU head office released a report on the impact of
using biometrics, which said more large-scale field trials were needed
to ensure the new technology worked properly. It also urged
governments to ensure safeguards for privacy and data protection in
the use of biometric data.
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press.
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . Hundreds of new articles daily.
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, the Associated Press.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
------------------------------
Date: 31 Mar 2005 12:03:32 -0800
From: Lisa Minter <lisa_minter2001@yahoo.com>
Subject: Microsoft Files 117 Suits That Target 'Phishing'
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. on Thursday said it was filing
117 lawsuits against unknown Internet site operators it charged were
engaged in "phishing" schemes to obtain personal and financial
information from unsuspecting consumers.
Often scam artists pose as banks or other legitimate businesses,
sending out millions of e-mails or pop-up Web advertisements with
requests that the recipient update their account information but
instead direct them to fake sites.
The world's biggest software company said it was filing "John Doe"
defendant lawsuits in U.S. District Court in Washington state in an
attempt to establish connections between worldwide phishers and
discover the largest-volume operators.
"We must work together to stop these con artists from misusing the
Internet as a tool for fraud," Aaron Kornblum, Internet safety
enforcement attorney at Microsoft, said in a statement.
He was joined by officials from the Federal Trade Commission and the
National Consumers League who used the lawsuits and Friday's April
Fool's Day to encourage consumers to beware of these online schemes.
"Phishing is more than a dirty trick played on unsuspecting consumers
-- it's a serious identity theft problem," said Susan Grant, director
of the National Consumers League's National Fraud Information Center
and Internet Fraud Watch program.
Some scams are getting more and more sophisticated, some by including
what looks like a legitimate Internet address link but once clicked on
by the user, they are instead directed to a different, fraudulent site
asking for personal information.
The officials encouraged consumers to be suspicious of unexpected
e-mails seeking personal data, to not click on links in those e-mails,
and verify contacts from institutions that claim a person is a victim
of identity theft.
NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily
media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . Hundreds of new articles daily.
*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Reuters Limited.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
------------------------------
From: Choreboy <choreboyREMOVE@localnet.com>
Subject: Every Ten Days
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 18:08:04 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
March 9, somebody from 877 467 3277 called. I answered on the second
ring and they hung up. They did it again March 19 and March 29.
A search engine turned up a coed 3,000 miles from here whose blog
reported the same thing in November:
" ... omg someone called me and then hung up ... here I got their
number it's 1-877-467-3277 lol so if you wanna call and bitch at them
do so."
If she was annoyed that somebody didn't apologize for misdialing, it's
hard to imagine that instead of dialing back immediately, she would
have thought it over and asked those who saw her blog to harass the
caller. It's easier to believe that because she has a blog, the
company offered her a commission for anyone who called in her name.
I suspect that people all over the country are receiving these hang-up
so some will call back to bitch because if these calls are logged,
their names can be sold on a list of people who, according to
somebody's interpretation of the law, are fair game for telemarketers.
I hesitate to call the toll-free number, but I don't want to keep
running to answer the phone for a company that intends to hang up on
me. What should I do?
Choreboy
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That telephone number 1-877-467-3277
belongs to 'Sears Home Improvement Products'. PAT]
------------------------------
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the
moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
Post Office Box 50
Independence, KS 67301
Phone: 620-402-0134
Fax 1: 775-255-9970
Fax 2: 530-309-7234
Fax 3: 208-692-5145
Email: editor@telecom-digest.org
Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
(or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)
Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org
Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for
a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system
for archives files. You can get desired files in email.
*************************************************************************
* TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from *
* Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate *
* 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. *
* http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com *
* Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing *
* views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. *
*************************************************************************
ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.
One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com
Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
************************
DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !
************************
Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.
The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum. Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.
Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu
************************
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of TELECOM Digest V24 #138
******************************
| |