Texas suing Vonage over 911 calls

Posts: 1424 · Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:31 am Post subject:

otaku wrote:

This is probably way off topic for the Vonage forums, but government is not there to protect people from their own stupidity. At least, originally that's not what our government was intended to do...in a free country, the people should be free to be as stupid as they want, as long as they don't harm anyone else. If they harm themselves...

Getting this back to the current post. The State of Texas has a vested interest in providing easy access to emergency services because it reduces the amount of money spent by the State on disability, health care and other emergency related costs.

If the State believes that something is interferring with access to emergency services then they need to act to protect their investment in emergency services and to reduce costs associated with slower response to emergencies.

Posts: 281

elentz1 wrote:

I made a 911 call two weeks ago and it went very smoothly. The call went directly to the answering machine for the 911 center telling me to wait for the next available operator. Several minutes later the operator picked up the line. The actuall phone call took a total of 5 minutes, 20 minutes later an officer showed up. This call was concerning a possible breakin to a home next door.

Wow.. I never thought of 911 as having ACD before... .. guess it makes sence... we HAVE joked about it (friends)... but I've never actually had it happen when I've called.

Posts: 41 · Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:26 am Post subject:

I agree that Vonage clearly instructs their subscribers to activate the 911 feature of their phone service. I did it before I even received my equipment from Vonage. I dont feel like I am smarter than the adv. Texan. If the state of Texas is that concerned for us, then they should start a public awareness campaign addressing this issue with all Voip providers and cell phone providers. They could also issue stickers for each of our phones giving an alternate emergency numbers just in case 911 failed(on any phone system including POTS). I for one am doing this so my 9 year old daughter and anyone else that is in my home know the number for the local sherrif and fire dept. I would rather see this happen than this stupid law suit. I also think it would be cheeper for everyone involved. Just my 2 cents.

Doug

Posts: 281 · Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 9:34 am Post subject:

Well let Mr. Abbott know what you think:

greg.abbott@oag.state.tx.us

Also, I'm now wondering if SBC isn't behind all this.. My understanding is that SBC is a Texas based company.... I wonder...

Posts: 215 · Vonage Forum Master Joined: Nov 24, 2004 Posts: 215

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vonage advertises that its service includes “911 dialing.” However, it fails to make clear that when a customer signs up for Vonage’s service, the customer does not automatically have the ability to dial 9-1-1 and be connected to emergency personnel. Instead, the customer first has to take steps to activate Vonage’s “911 dialing” feature, which has significant limitations as compared to traditional 9-1-1 service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is what the lawsuit is about? I just did an activation for a customer yesterday, and it must have told us about 5x during the process in big red letters that 911 dialing was not automatic and I had to sign up for it. Not to mention in the TOS it states it very clearly. The above lawsuit is absolutely ridiculous.

Posts: 2251 · Posted: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:15 pm Post subject:

scerruti wrote:

Gosh Dan, the point of my post was to point out that everyone else was saying that people were stupid if they didn't know about the 911 limitations.

We have seen plenty of people on this forum who have been subscribers who didn't understand the 911 situation when they signed up. I know these people are not stupid, they are just uninformed. (And whose fault is that?)

I was even concerned that the post might be taken personally by someone from Texas thus my last line saying that this lawsuit could have happened anywhere, not just Texas.

I am truly sorry if my post offended anyone.

I understand your point and in fact agree with you. You just need to find a different analogy to get your point across.

Posts: 126 · Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:03 am Post subject: Re: Ridicilous

kenn10 wrote:

was thinking more along the lines that we're a nation of Democrats, ACLU members and attorneys. To them nothing is an individual's fault.

So now this a political issue? I thought this board frowned upon the topic of politics related to the US Government. I mean it isn't directly Vonage related is it? Democrats I mean..... Rolling Eyes

And furthermore, the above statement is a political opinion.

Posts: 281 · Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:59 am Post subject:

Actually, as I did some more research it appears SBC (a large phone company) has head quarters in Texas... now.... you don't think?

Posts: 7 · Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:23 am Post subject:

Quote:

From SiliconValley.com - Good Morning Silicon Valley: Texas AG baffled by anonymous gift of RTFM T-shirt: Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott sued Vonage on Tuesday, alleging the nation's largest Internet-based phone service provider failed to clearly inform customers that its 911 dialing feature is not automatically activated when they register for new service. Filed under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the lawsuit seeks $20,000 per violation (Vonage claims more than 500,000 subscribers) and an injunction barring the company from "misrepresenting" the terms of its 911 service.

I hope that the learned AG isn't trying to get $20,000 for customers who are not in Texas including those in countries like mine where 911 won't get us anywhere. Is suing the only way he can think of to get a point across?

Posts: 482 · Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 am Post subject:

scerruti wrote:

According to the article, the AG's argument is that cases of failed 911 attempts are proof in and of themselves that the warnings aren't sufficient.

If by "sufficient" one means sufficient to prevent the possibility that a customer might not realize the limitations of Vonage's 911 service, then it's impossible to argue with that logic. Clearly, no customer would dial 911 in an emergency knowing that their call won't be completed. So obviously this would not be happening if Vonage's disclaimers were truly sufficient in that sense.

But if "sufficient" means Vonage has taken reasonable steps to inform customers of the limitations of their 911 service, then Vonage is likely in the clear, and that's the more reasonable interpretation.

Anyway, Texas isn't trying to win a judgment against Vonage. They're just trying to induce Voip carriers to implement better 911 solutions out of the box. There's no reason why Vonage couldn't sign up all customers by default during the Vonage signup process...just make the current optional 911 configuration pages a mandatory part of the signup process with the same disclaimers that if you move or take your router on the road, your 911 calls will go to the wrong emergency center.

Worst case scenario would be someone calling 911 and getting the wrong emergency personnel, but that's better than getting nothing...it at least gives them someone who can talk them through basic poison control, choking, etc. and route them to another emergency center.