[IP] impact on those with physical problems Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute
Begin forwarded message:
From: Mike Todd <Todd@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: April 30, 2006 4:25:22 PM EDT
To: ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: bod@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee
dispute
Dave and other IP list readers,
I have been watching the exchange of messages on this topic and am
concerned
about the impact of this kind of heavy-handed action and its impact
on more
of our Digital Divide affected netizens than just those who might be
concerned by the cost factor.
My concern is for those who have physical and other challenges that
cause
them to stick with older computer technology, such as DOS and specific
computer related hardware that interface with devices and software
that have
been developed to accommodate their needs.
Because this is not a "large and lucrative" market for hardware and
software
developers, these folks are often faced with making due with what is
available - and it has to keep on working even though the current
technologies are moving on.
If companies like Microsoft were truly dedicated to supporting the
"accessibility community", they would not continue dropping support for
"legacy" systems that may be a convenience factor for some people but
are
definite barriers for others who have no way to accommodate that kind of
action. I don't know about the general public but I know I am not
really
concerned about Microsoft's ability to focus on the most profitable
ventures. Even Microsoft investors should have some concern for
Microsoft's
public perceptions.
As you can see, it is easy for me to get off track when discussing
the many
facets of this category of problems.
In this latest issue, phone companies, insecure in their own "legacy"
problems and looking at reversing their "mistakes" regarding charging
by the
minute for local calls that happen to provide an internet connection,
are
literally cutting off the ability of a person who has the larger
kinds of
accessibility problems, from being able to take a trip and still be
able to
make an internet connection by using someone's dial-up service when
they are
not in their at-home environment.
At-home is where the accessibility challenged have spent much money and
effort to enable using whatever computer technology they must in
order to
support their at-home connections. Quite often they are faced with
using
DOS (none of the "big" companies still support) and older hardware (no
portable computer made in the United States provides a modem with a true
UART that may be used with DOS - the only ones available for portable
computers require a "win-modem" that will only work within Microsoft's
supported Windows platforms). So who do the telephone companies hurt in
order to make some "last straw grabs at easy profits"? The people
who are
least able to find other alternatives.
It would be easy to end this note with a "shame on the phone companies"
thrust but there is a better solution for everyone. How about if the
technology companies, Microsoft included, accept a challenge to do
more for
the "accessibility" sector than build a web site that focuses on
accessibility issues that is barely accessible by those affected
(such as
Microsoft's that does not even pass the minimal tests of
accessibility that
the community has provided as a help for developers). The large
hardware
and software developers have the resources and could very easily extend
concepts like "backward compatibility" and offer assistance to smaller
companies that have developed solutions that folks in the accessibility
communities have found useful, to better enable them to accommodate new
hardware paradigms and new operating systems so that the accessibility
community is not left in a lurch.
Besides, I believe it is always better to expand a market than to
implement
options that make it shrink.
Mike Todd
President, Mike Todd Associates - www.MikeTodd.com
Supporting the Digital Coast
President, Internet Society Los Angeles Chapter - www.ISOC-LA.org
Center for Entrepreneurship and Technology Law
Pepperdine University School of Law - mltodd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Technology Expert Witness - ExpertWitness@xxxxxxxxxxxx
310-321-5706 Office Phone
310-321-5701 Office FAX
714-893-6684 After Hours Voice
714-893-6866 After Hours FAX
714-222-3700 Cell
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Farber" <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 5:26 AM
Subject: [IP] more on Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute
Begin forwarded message:
From: Thomas Leavitt <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: April 30, 2006 3:10:51 AM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: monty@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute
Dave/Monty,
What changed, after fifteen-plus years under the previous model?!? The
article's failure to describe the legal basis for the ruling and/or why
this dispute is different and distinct, and/or the precedent setting
nature of this ruling and how it differs from previous practice is very
frustrating!
I know plenty of small (under 5000 person) ISPs that still depend on
dial up for a substantial proportion of their revenue and as a backup
for DSL and for traveling customers... a ruling of this sort, especially
one that renders the ISP liable (how does that work?!?), is a death
knell to dial up, and will drive down adoption of the Internet for a lot
of people (they'll go back to casual / intermittent use, only connect
through WiFi at cafe's, etc. - I know a lot of poor people who simply
won't commit to a broadband contract). What will this to do non-profit
companies like LA Freenet (www.lafn.org), which my parents still use as
their primary Internet access method?
Thomas
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute / Ruling
favoring Verizon may hike price of service
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:24:10 -0400
Begin forwarded message:
From: Monty Solomon <monty@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: April 28, 2006 6:57:20 PM EDT
To: undisclosed-recipient:;
Subject: Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute / Ruling
favoring Verizon may hike price of service
Dial-up provider loses Net access amid fee dispute
Ruling favoring Verizon may hike price of service
By Keith Reed, Globe Staff | April 28, 2006
Service to thousands of dial-up Internet users in Massachusetts was
disrupted this week after a federal court ruled against a Quincy
company in a lawsuit that could have broad impact on the cost of
dial-up service.
The US Court of Appeals in Boston ruled April 11 that Verizon
Communications Inc. can charge per-minute fees for calls to local
numbers that dial-up users need to connect to the Internet -- in much
the same way that they charge for long-distance or other calls.
The ruling came after Verizon sued Global NAPs Inc., a Quincy company
that supplies local numbers to 28 Internet service providers for use
by their dial-up customers.
Verizon claims it is owed more than $65 million by Global NAPs. The
court did not rule on damages, but Verizon cut off Global NAPs's
access to its network, effectively shutting down Internet service for
customers of dial-up providers like MegaNet of Fall River, which had
to find another company to supply emergency connections for its
approximately 7,500 dial-up subscribers.
...
http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/04/28/
dial_up_provider_loses_net_access_amid_fee_dispute/
--
Thomas Leavitt <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 831-295-3917
Godmoma's Forge, LLC - www.godmomasforge.com
- Web and graphic design made spiffy -
Encrypted public key at http://www.thomasleavitt.org/thomas.asc
Download GnuPG (including for Windows) at
http://www.gnupg.org/download/ to read .asc attachment (encrypted
signature)
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as todd@xxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-
people/
-------------------------------------
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/