Should cable companies offering voice communications be subject to the same rules as traditional telephone companies?
In some ways, they are today. What Cox Communications, Time Warner Cable and CableVision are doing is certifying that when they provide telephone service, they are doing so as competitive local carriers. The question is: If we have a world where you know everybody is migrating to an IP-based voice service and there is a lot more competition, what rules, if any, should apply? The wireless industry provides a very nice model for a light-touch regulatory regime. They are still subject to certain things: CALEA, disabilities access, Universal Service contribution and 911–the social policies. But they are not subject to the traditional economic regulation, and they are not subject to state certification, and that has worked really well. Let’s say that John Kerry is elected, and the FCC shifts to a Democratic majority with a Democratic chairman. How might that affect the commission’s position on technology-related topics? Well, that’s just speculation that I don’t really want to (explore). W
Related Questions
- In opposing the telephone company proposals to begin offering video services, aren cable companies simply trying to protect their own monopolies?
- Should cable companies offering voice communications be subject to the same rules as traditional telephone companies?
- Do VoIP providers have to follow the same rules as traditional telephone companies?
