[IP] Senate Tangles Over VOIP Rules
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: June 17, 2004 2:49:12 PM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Senate Tangles Over VOIP Rules
Reply-To: dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Senate Tangles Over VOIP Rules
By Ryan Singel
Story location:
<http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,63884,00.html>
02:00 AM Jun. 17, 2004 PT
Senators grappled Wednesday over how to free Internet-based telephone
calls from regulations while simultaneously protecting rural phone
service, 911 funding and antiterrorist wiretaps.
Internet telephony, known as voice over Internet protocol, which is
rapidly growing in popularity, allows people to make calls using a
computer and broadband connection by breaking the conversation into
digital packets, just as an e-mail is sent.
Some services, such as the peer-to-peer Skype service and phone
clients built into instant-messaging software, only allow Internet
users to call other Internet users.
However, "connected VOIP applications" such as Vonage allow
Internet-to-traditional-phone calls and can be substantially cheaper
than regular phone service.
Deputy Assistant Attorney General Laura Parsky told the Senate
Commerce Committee that unregulated VOIP would be a "haven" for
terrorists unless the government forces connected providers to build
special wiretapping capabilities into their systems.
"If legal loopholes allow criminals to use new technologies to avoid
law enforcement detection, they would use these technologies to
coordinate terrorist attacks, to sell drugs throughout the United
States and to pass along national security secrets to our enemies,"
Parsky said.
Under Sen. John Sununu's (R-New Hampshire) proposed bill, known as the
VOIP Regulatory Freedom Act, VOIP providers would have to honor
government wiretap orders, but would not have to design special
capabilities to allow wiretaps.
The Justice Department wants Congress to require VOIP providers to
adhere to the same wiretapping mandates that apply to traditional
telecommunications companies.
Those regulations were set forth in a controversial law known as the
Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994, or CALEA,
which requires phone companies to design their phone systems to meet
wiretapping standards set by the government.
Internet service providers were, however, exempted from the costly
requirements.
Civil liberties advocates and free-market technologists argue the FBI
is now trying to extend the rules to the Internet.
James X. Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and
Technology, told the committee that while he had no quarrel with the
FBI's right to intercept communications, the government does not need
to set standards for a rapidly innovating business in order to get the
necessary information.
"Tapping the Internet is different than tapping the telephone system,
but on balance it will be no harder, once law enforcement gets up to
speed on the technology," Dempsey said.
Dempsey argued the FBI unreasonably wants 100 percent perfection in
wiretapping, including requirements that providers be able to report
when people join and leave conference calls.
Dempsey's arguments seemed to resonate with a number of senators,
including Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) and Sununu.
Wyden told the DOJ's Parsky "you need to convince us first that there
is a problem."
Sen. George Allen (R-Virginia) wondered why the FBI's current
packet-sniffing technology would not do the trick. "Why can't you use
Carnivore to search these packets?" Allen asked.
Parsky countered that applying CALEA-style design requirements would
allow for better real-time interception and better privacy protection,
since the requirements would allow the FBI to laser in on the wiretap
target, instead of collecting reams of data it would have to sort
through for the right conversation.
While Sununu and other senators on the panel did not seem amenable to
changing the current language, a corresponding measure in the House has
language that codifies the FBI's position.
That bill, introduced by Rep. Charles Pickering (R-Mississippi),
explicitly extends CALEA design rules to Internet telephone providers.
Both versions would pre-empt the current FCC rulemaking process on
VOIP wiretapping, which is on an uncertain timetable. In March, the
Justice Department asked the FCC to expedite its decision, but the FCC
has yet to rule on whether to push that decision to the front of the
line.
Senators also grappled Wednesday with whether to require VOIP
providers to pay into the Universal Service fund, a telephone tax that
subsidizes low-income and rural telephone services.
Sununu's bill would require connected VOIP companies to pay some money
into the fund, but consumer advocates argue that it is not enough to
keep basic phone service affordable.
In a letter to Sununu, the Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of
America argued that "exempting VOIP services from virtually all of the
public interest obligations and consumer protections that apply to
telecommunications services ... will diminish the quality and drive up
the cost of basic telephone service for those who simply cannot afford
to switch to broadband."
The bill also prohibits state and local regulation and taxation of
VOIP, a prohibition that concerned Sens. Byron Durgan (D-North Dakota)
and Conrad Burns (R-Montana).
The senators argued the ban would eat into funding for 911 services
and said that could lead them to oppose sending the bill to the full
Senate.
Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/