Sign up
 Vonage  

       
 
Vonage Forum Menu

Vonage Forums
Vonage VoIP Forum
MichaelMub Posted:
PORN...
In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
The best pron
On Dec 04, 2016 at 10:22:56

Dwightkaw Posted:
kredyt bez
zaświadcze
24; kredyt bez
zaświadcze
24; o dochodach
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
kredyt bez zaświadczeń
On Dec 03, 2016 at 03:27:10

Kevingrarl Posted:
Су
95;ас&
#1085;иl
1;
пі
76;пр&
#1080;&
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
Сучас&
On Dec 02, 2016 at 12:51:38

IsaawUnace Posted:
does cialis work
as well as cialis
add.cgi buy
cialis cialis
the team <a
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
Condition good pill instead of ed
On Dec 01, 2016 at 11:11:59

MatrickVop Posted:
buy cialis today
columbus oh
generic cialis
buy cialis online
registered users
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
Classify miserly pills no means
On Nov 28, 2016 at 10:42:47

dracossumo Posted:
Ко
84;па&
#1085;иn
3; Tritel
пр
77;до
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
&#1048;&#1085;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&
On Nov 27, 2016 at 23:00:39

DWSupport Posted:
After recent
Vonage update that
took place on the
4th and 5th of
Nov. E-mails with
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
Voicemail Not Forwarding to Outlook Accounts
On Nov 10, 2016 at 12:23:26

peterlee Posted:
Had a call from a
Hospital in Ajax,
Ontario to my home
in
Scarborough, Onta
rio
...

In The Forum:
Vonage Canada
Topic:
Hospital Incoming call unable to connect
On Nov 08, 2016 at 11:59:50

TELLDOUG Posted:
I am looking for a
product that will
make my phone ring
louder so I can
hear using
...

In The Forum:
Vonage
Topic:
Looking for a ringer ameliorate
On Oct 26, 2016 at 09:21:30

HildBeft Posted:
You can recollect
password by
connecting the
router to your pc
and open the
browser
...

In The Forum:
Hard Wiring - Installation
Topic:
How to arrive at wifi password?
On Oct 20, 2016 at 05:05:49


Vonage VoIP Forums

Vonage In The News
Vonage Holdings Corp. Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2013 Results

Carolyn Katz Elected to Board of Directors of Vonage Holdings Corp.

Syndication

Vonage Customer Reviews
Vonage vs. Time Warner Cable SoCal
Vonage vs. Time Warner Cable SoCal



Vonage UK Review
Vonage UK Review



Vonage Pros and Cons for 2006
Vonage Pros and Cons for 2006



Vonage, a VT2142 and a RTP300, My Experiences - A Detailed Review
Vonage, a VT2142 and a RTP300, My Experiences - A Detailed Review



Salt Lake City: impressions after several months
Salt Lake City: impressions after several months




Vonage Reviews


Post new topic   Reply to topic  Vonage® VoIP Forum - Vonage News, Reviews And Discussion » Vonage Forum Archive
Author Message
Trek234
Full Forum Member
Full Forum Member


Joined: Jan 30, 2005
Posts: 68

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

DarKev wrote:
Here in Canada, one of our largest monopolies is Bell Canada. They have hooks into Canadian telephones (millions), cell phones, television networks, satellite dishes, and several other smaller ventures. Their customer service is the worst that you can find. This is a regulated company. They are regulated by our FCC, which in Canada is called CRTC - Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission. I currently have cell phone service with Bell. Since May 2004, I have had my phone bills come with a different flavor of price each month. I have to call them each month to get it corrected, and last month the customer service rep would not correct it. He would not put me through to a supervisor either. I called back - same thing. They are charging me $6.00 more per month now, for nothing. I signed a 2-year contract and cannot get out of it until December of this year. In the meantime, they seem to be allowed to change my monthly charges to whatever they please. One month I received a bill for over $75. My bill was always $34.74 prior to signing the 2 year contract when I bought a new cell phone.

This is a company that is regulated. What good does it do? I've stressed myself out over these problems for months with Bell, and I seem to have no control or power over what they are doing to my phone service. I have even threatened to take them to court over this. They don't care.

Currently, several Canadians are in court due to Bell Canada charging a CRTC Fee of $6.95 per month on everyone's cell phone bill. They say that this fee is to provide you with a license to transmit your voice over the airwaves. However, the CRTC when questioned stated that they do not receive any of this money from Bell. So where is the money going? This is where the law suit starts. They are being taken to court by a very large group of people who are getting fed up with their scams. I just hope that they win.

Once again I reiterate that Bell is a regulated company. It means diddly squat. They do whatever they please anyhow.


Apples and oranges. The canadian government's failure (in your opinion, don't know if you're right or not) does not mean another government will fail. Here a complaint to the right gov agency, sometimes even state level, can get a regulated company on the ball pretty fast.
View user's profile Send private message
dconnor
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Posts: 2263
Location: The Beach

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

SaltAquatics wrote:
HEY!! What happened to VitaminM's post? Why was the link edited? Why was it taken out? Because it contains Vonage competition? Unreal. It is the same link that Trek put up... Evil or Very Mad


We do not allow links to Vonage affiliates

_________________
Have Questions? Need to speak to Vonage before signing up?
Call: 1-888-692-8074
Both Business and Residential customers can call and speak to a Vonage Sales Rep 24 hours a day.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
VitaminM
Vonage Forum Associate
Vonage Forum Associate


Joined: Mar 05, 2005
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Quote:
However, the CRTC when questioned stated that they do not receive any of this money from Bell. So where is the money going?


In most cases regulatory fees (not taxes) are amounts added to your bill by your service provider to recoup costs associated with meeting some regulation or other. These are NOT amounts that the service provider is charged by the FCC or any other regulatory agency, they are direct from the service provider to you the consumer by way of your bill.
View user's profile Send private message
DarKev
Vonage Forum Evangelist
Vonage Forum Evangelist


Joined: Jan 25, 2005
Posts: 336
Location: Gatineau, QC

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Trek234 wrote:
Apples and oranges. The canadian government's failure (in your opinion, don't know if you're right or not) does not mean another government will fail. Here a complaint to the right gov agency, sometimes even state level, can get a regulated company on the ball pretty fast.


It is not apples and oranges. The same government body would be regulating Voip as they now regulate POTS. I am not the only one with Bell problems. If you fully read my last message, you would have understood that they are currently being sued for service fees that are not legitimate. I am not part of the lawsuit. I would rather have problems with Vonage than the type of problems I am having with Bell.

With the comments you have made about Vonage, I could only imagine how explosive you would be if a telephone company charged you escalating prices each month, immediately after you signed a 2 year contract with them. That's just dirty business practice.

Trek, you asked someone earlier if they were on the Vonage payroll. I am beginning to wonder if you are on the government payroll.
View user's profile Send private message
VitaminM
Vonage Forum Associate
Vonage Forum Associate


Joined: Mar 05, 2005
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

dconnor wrote:
We do not allow links to Vonage affiliates


I didn't realize they were an affiliate of Vonage. They APPEAR to be a legitimately unbiased 3rd party site with reviews for multiple Voip providers. Is this not true? If that is the case I find it strange that they put Packet8 higher in the ranking that Vonage. Interesting.
View user's profile Send private message
mikedief
Full Forum Member
Full Forum Member


Joined: Feb 08, 2005
Posts: 67

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

i have to come down on the side of not regulating. i knew when signing up that Vonage was not going to be as reliable as POTS, and i accept that. even my cell phone (t-mobile in colorado), which is supposed to be really reliable is out almost state-wide today. i've hedged my bets as best i could by making sure my 911 was configured so i don't have the houston tragedy. but if i want the bullet-proof reliability (and the costs that go with it) of pots, i'll go back to qwest.

at least this gives people a choice. if everything was regulated, you'd never have an alternative to pots.
View user's profile Send private message
mcdowelljc
Full Forum Member
Full Forum Member


Joined: Feb 07, 2005
Posts: 66

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

mikedief wrote:
i have to come down on the side of not regulating. i knew when signing up that Vonage was not going to be as reliable as POTS, and i accept that. even my cell phone (t-mobile in colorado), which is supposed to be really reliable is out almost state-wide today. i've hedged my bets as best i could by making sure my 911 was configured so i don't have the houston tragedy. but if i want the bullet-proof reliability (and the costs that go with it) of pots, i'll go back to qwest.

at least this gives people a choice. if everything was regulated, you'd never have an alternative to pots.


AMEN!
View user's profile Send private message
Martlet
Vonage Forum Master
Vonage Forum Master


Joined: Feb 13, 2005
Posts: 206
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

VitaminM wrote:
Quote:
However, the CRTC when questioned stated that they do not receive any of this money from Bell. So where is the money going?


In most cases regulatory fees (not taxes) are amounts added to your bill by your service provider to recoup costs associated with meeting some regulation or other. These are NOT amounts that the service provider is charged by the FCC or any other regulatory agency, they are direct from the service provider to you the consumer by way of your bill.


Actually, they aren't customer charges, they are line charges. You're correct that most of them are to recoup losses. The FCC authorizes them. They get put on every line. If you use a CLEC, the CLEC gets charged. Of course they generally pass that through to you, though.

The same could, and probably will be someday, easily be applied to data lines.
View user's profile Send private message ICQ Number
ToddlerTN
Vonage Forum Evangelist
Vonage Forum Evangelist


Joined: Feb 12, 2005
Posts: 482
Location: Nashville, TN

PostPosted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

mikedief wrote:
if everything was regulated, you'd never have an alternative to pots.

I wonder how many years from now it will be before people refer to POTS as "the alternative" to Voip. Considering the convergence of cable, broadband, on-demand programming and telephony, and the convenience of receiving all of those services from a single provider on a single bill, it really could happen within 5-10 years.
View user's profile Send private message
ToddlerTN
Vonage Forum Evangelist
Vonage Forum Evangelist


Joined: Feb 12, 2005
Posts: 482
Location: Nashville, TN

PostPosted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 2:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

I know this is long, but if you want a comprehensive view of Voip regulatory issues (which is what this thread is about), then it's worth the read.

Voip Regulation: The Time Has Come
From New Telephony (www.newtelephony.com)
Posted on: 02/06/2004
By Michael Specht
Law & Policy Editor

All good things must come to an end.

A watershed event in the life of voice over IP occurred this week. That event, the United States Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Voice over IP Forum, held on Dec. 1, 2003, marks the end of a hands-off regulatory era for IP voice. Make no mistake, Voip will be regulated.

Perhaps more important, the fact that the FCC convened such an event heralds the arrival of voice over IP as a serious alternative to traditional voice telephony services. The industry will notice. Consumers will notice. Investors will notice.

And, perhaps less fortunate, more regulators will notice. If the level of attendance (standing room only) at the forum was any indication, many people are noticing and much is at stake.

The forum served a number of purposes. FCC Chairman Michael Powell explained the announced purpose in a Nov. 5 letter to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). Powell explained, "Given the complexity and significance of [VOIP] issues, the FCC has recently announced that it will comprehensively tackle the proper regulatory treatment of Voip and related issues. . . . We will look at how the digital technologies are being used to provide a variety of voice services in the marketplace.

"We will also explore emerging regulatory issues, such as FCC precedent and the classification issues raised in the recent Minnesota District Court ruling on Voip services. Finally, we will begin a conversation on how best to achieve important health, safety and welfare policy objectives, such as E911, universal service and securing our homeland."

Staying Ahead of the Game
Another purpose existed. The FCC needed to re-establish its regulatory leadership in dealing with IP voice issues in the ongoing (and beneficial) tug of war between the FCC and the state regulatory bodies as to who should regulate what. The recent regulatory initiatives by numerous states aimed at voice-over-IP services (as well as the prodding of the industry for the FCC to get involved) forced the FCC to launch the forum quickly.

Without immediate action, the FCC risked being late to the Voip regulation debate and allowing disparate, and likely inconsistent, state regulations to develop. These regulations would impede Voip growth and call into question the FCC's role. The FCC's assumption of a leadership role will serve industry and the development of Voip services well.

The FCC must stay at the forefront and move promptly, relatively speaking. The comments at the forum suggest that it will. And, at least for the moment, the FCC should be applauded for its approach and assumption of the leadership role.

Possible Grounds for Agreement?
The views exchanged during the forum covered a broad spectrum. It was encouraging and somewhat surprising at this earlier stage in the regulatory debate that there seemed to be a fair amount of common ground on the major issues. All parties seemed to recognize the need for regulation of voice over IP.

At the extremes, Carl Wood, commissioner, California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) seemed to advocate the most regulation, while Jeffrey Citron, CEO of consumer Voip service Vonage seemed to be at the other end of the spectrum advocating a minimalist approach to regulation.

Wood contended that extensive regulation is needed to protect consumer interests, while Citron cited the risks of stifling innovation, losing American jobs and reducing tax revenues as the basis for minimal regulation. In other words, they provided the usual arguments that can apply no matter what the topic of regulation. The answer will fall between these points of views, and was shared by most in attendance.

The Regulation Issues and Possible Answers
The issues can be organized into five categories: regulatory framework, social program support, competition regulation, homeland security and law enforcement support.

Regulatory framework will lay the foundation for the many of the other issues. The primary regulatory framework issues include determining whether voice over IP should be considered interstate or intrastate, and whether it should be classified as a telecommunication service or an information service.

Furthermore, there seems to be a recognition that perhaps these two classifications are no longer useful in the context of voice over IP, a point both Powell and Abernathy seemed to acknowledge. These are critical threshold questions that will dictate much about how IP voice is regulated.

The comments of the commissioners suggest they are leaning toward defining voice over IP as an interstate information service, or creating a new classification, separate from the regulatory baggage associated with the terms "telecommunication service" and "information service," that will allow Voip to be treated without excessive regulation.

Such a determination is absolutely critical to ensure that Voip is not overregulated. From a regulatory perspective, saying that a service is an interstate information service is somewhat at odds with itself. Nonetheless, in order to stave off fragmented state regulation, the FCC will likely move quickly to characterize Voip as interstate, a somewhat easy decision to make.

While subsequently addressing the more challenging issue of whether Voip is a telecommunication service versus information service with a likely conclusion that MOST Voip services will be treated as information services. Creating a new classification will present challenges to the Commission given the statutory basis and precedent surrounding the terms "telecommunication services" and "information services."

Nonetheless, a determination, for example, that Voip is intrastate and a telecommunication service would necessarily impose fragmented state regulation and a plethora of arcane, complex telecommunication regulations on Voip.

Social Support
Another area near and dear to the hearts of most regulators, particularly the Democrats, is ensuring that Voip regulation continues to support social programs, such as emergency services (e.g., E-911), universal service programs and disability access.

E-911 and disability access will be the easy matters, while universal service will be far more difficult. The FCC will likely provide general guidelines requiring that Voip support E-911 and disability access. Consensus seems to exist that IP voice should support universal service goals, but many differences exist on the details and a lot of concern was voiced that the universal service fund mechanisms are broken and should not be imposed upon Voip in their current form. A long and tedious debate is likely to ensue on voice over IP and universal service.

Regulating Competition
Competition regulation encompasses items, such as intercarrier compensation and how the regional Bell operating companies' (RBOCs) Voip services should be regulated, either directly or through subsidiaries. Like universal service most agreed there needs to be intercarrier compensation regulation, and the current approach is broken, particularly as it relates to access charges.

Once again, this will be one of the toughest, longest and most tedious debates surrounding Voip regulation.

The last two areas dealing with homeland security and law enforcement have more technical underpinnings. The FCC will likely provide broad guidance here, but leave the details to industry groups to work out, provided that the industry appears to be supporting homeland security and law enforcement efforts. The challenge related to law enforcement efforts will be to determine how minimal regulation can apply within the existing statutory structures.

A Broad Spectrum of Voip
Forum participants represented diverse interests and expressed a wide range of views on how Voip should be regulated. A morning panel, titled "What is VoIP?", included Kevin Werbach, founder of consulting firm Supernova Group, Charles Giancarlo, senior vice president and general manager, Cisco Systems Inc., Jeff Pulver, president and CEO, Pulver.com, John Hodulik, managing director, communications group, UBS Warburg and John Billock, chief operating officer, Time Warner Cable.

A second panel, titled "VOIP and Public Policy," Included Michael Gallagher, acting assistant secretary, Department of Commerce, the California PUC's Wood, Charles Davidson, commissioner, Florida Public Service Commission (PSC), James Crowe, CEO, Level 3 Communications Inc., Tom Evslin, CEO, ITXC, Vonage's Citron and Gregg Vanderheiden, Rehabilitation Engineering Research Project on Telecommunications Access, University of Wisconsin.

While the first panel was intended to focus more on technology, the emphasis, as one might expect, of both panels was on how to regulate Voip. Interestingly, no RBOCs participated on the panel. Of note, all five FCC commissioners attended the full four hours of the forum, and all were engaged in the exchange, particularly Powell.

Change, but Not Quickly
When does it all happen? Although, the FCC is poised to move quickly, and has stated that it will move quickly to open a notice of proposed rule-making, regulation of IP voice at the federal level still is at least 18 months away.

Powell said, "shortly after the forum" the FCC will initiate a notice of proposed rule-making on voice-over-IP services to gather public comment. He further stated that the FCC will issue a report and order on Voip issues "over the course of the next year." Given these public announcements, the FCC will likely issue a notice of proposed rule- making either in late December or early January.

Furthermore, the FCC will likely act upon existing Voip petitions by AT&T and Pulver.com to classify Voip as interstate within the next month to assert jurisdiction and prevent states from imposing diverse regulations. Given the pace at which the FCC addresses most issues, further federal IP voice regulation in 2004 seems unlikely. Nonetheless, the time for regulation is upon us.
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Vonage Service Plans


Vonage VoIP Members
Members List Members
New gaylemv3
New Today 2
Yesterday 8
Total 99011

Who Is On Site
Visitors 78
Members 0
Total 78


Vonage VoIP Forum Members:
Login Here
Not a Member? You can Register Here
As a registered member you will have access to the VoIP Speed Test, Vonage Service Announcements and post comments in the
Vonage VoIP Forums

Vonage Stock Price
Value: 6.57
Change:   N/A
Up to 15 Minute Delay

Site Search
 






†AK and HI residents pay $29.95 shipping. ††Limited time offer. Valid for residents of the United States (&DC), 18 years or older, who open new accounts. Offer good while supplies last and only on new account activations. One kit per account/household. Offer cannot be combined with any other discounts, promotions or plans and is not applicable to past purchases. Good while supplies last. Allow up to 2 weeks for shipping. Other restrictions may apply.

1Unlimited calling and other services for all residential plans are based on normal residential, personal, non-commercial use. A combination of factors is used to determine abnormal use, including but not limited to: the number of unique numbers called, calls forwarded, minutes used and other factors. Subject to our Reasonable Use Policy and Terms of Service.

2Shipping and activation fees waived with 1-year agreement. An Early Termination Fee (with periodic pro-rated reductions) applies if service is terminated before the end of the first 12 months. Additional restrictions may apply. See Terms of Service for details.

HIGH SPEED INTERNET REQUIRED. †VALID FOR NEW LINES ONLY. RATES EXCLUDE INTERNET SERVICE, SURCHARGES, FEES AND TAXES. DEVICE MAY BE REFURBISHED. If you subscribe to plans with monthly minutes allotments, all call minutes placed from both from your home and registered ExtensionsTM phones will count toward your monthly minutes allotment. ExtensionsTM calls made from mobiles use airtime and may incur surcharges, depending on your mobile plan. Alarms, TTY and other systems may not be compatible. Vonage 911 service operates differently than traditional 911. See www.vonage.com/911 for details.

** Certain call types excluded.

www.vonage-forum.com is not an official Vonage support website & is independently operated.
All logos and trademarks are property of their respective owners. All comments are property of their posters.
All other www.vonage-forum.com content is © Copyright 2002 - 2013 by 4Sight Media LLC.

Thinking of signing up for Vonage but have questions?
Business and Residential customers can call Toll Free 24 hours a day at: 1-888-692-8074
No Vonage Promotion Code or Coupon Codes are required at www.vonage.com to receive any special,
best Vonage cheap deals, free sign up offers or discounts.

[ | | | | | ]

Vonage Forum Site Maps

Vonage | VoIP Forum | How VoIP Works | Wiring and Installation Page Two | International Rate Plans 2 | Internet Phone
Promotion | Vonage Review | VoIP | Broadband Phone | Free Month | Rebate | Vonnage | Vontage | VoIP | Phone Service
Phone | llamadas ilimitadas a Mexico | Latest News | VoIP Acronyms | Deal | Philippines Globe Phone | Site Maps

The Vonage Forum provides the Vonage sign up Best Offer Promotion Deal.
If you are considering signing up for Vonage and have found our Vonage News, Customer Reviews, Forums
& all other parts of this site useful, please use our Vonage Sign up page.


Vonage VoIP Phone Service is redefining communications by offering consumers
& small business VoIP Internet phones, an affordable alternative to traditional phone service.
The Vonage VoIP Forum Generated This Page In: 0.96 Seconds and 539 Pages In The Last 60 Seconds
The Vonage VoIP Forum