1 The Bell System Divestiture: Background, Implementation, and Outcome Joseph H. Weber* I. INTRODUCTION II. THE RISE OF COMPETITION III. THE ANTITRUST SUIT IV. NEAR-TERM RESULTS V. LONGER-TERM RESULTS VI. CONCLUSIONS I. INTRODUCTION The telephone industry in the United States started with the Bell patent in Telephones were introduced into many communities during the next twenty years. After the Bell patents expired, around the turn of the century, multiple telephone companies began operations in many cities. In many cases, these companies did not even interconnect, so people needed two or three telephone services in order to be in contact with all of their * Joseph H. Weber is a telecommunications engineer with over 50 years of experience, mostly at AT&T and Bell Labs. Between 1980 and 1984, he held the position of Director of Technical Regulatory Planning, with responsibility for the technical aspects of all of AT&T s legal, regulatory, and legislative activities in the federal arena. In this role, he was the sole AT&T technical representative during the development of the MFJ, He subsequently led the development of the principles underpinning the division of assets between AT&T and the Bell Operating Companies and oversaw the actual division of assets process. After divestiture, he left AT&T and became a consultant, focusing on the technical issues related to telecommunications policy and regulation in the United States and abroad. 21
2 22 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 61 friends and customers. This chaotic situation also caused the carriers great financial difficulty. In 1907, Theodore Vail, having been installed as president of AT&T after the Panic of 1907, proposed that telephone service in the United States be provided based on the philosophy of one system, one policy, universal service. 1 This concept involved monopoly provision of service, coupled with pervasive government oversight and regulation. It was promoted in advertisements from 1908 and formalized in the so-called Kingsbury Commitment of 1913, 2 when AT&T was allowed to operate without governmental interference, but agreed to stop acquiring telephone companies and to interconnect with others. The Bell System followed that idea for half a century, fully integrating its systems and procedures to provide end-to-end service. In order to ensure a reliable supply of standardized equipment, it also designed and manufactured its own equipment. Bell Laboratories (Bell Labs) created from a merger of the design department of the manufacturer, Western Electric, and the engineering department of the operator, AT&T also embarked on an extensive and successful effort to perform the research necessary to promote technological progress in telecommunications. Using this model, AT&T successfully expanded telephone service in the United States until the 1950s, when universal service was essentially achieved. During this period, the concept of service was the predominant value within the organization, becoming almost a religion. Independent telephone companies, mostly in rural areas, were made partners in the system, encouraged by generous settlement payments from long-distance service. II. THE RISE OF COMPETITION Starting in the 1960s, new technologies, many pioneered at Bell Labs, were stimulating competitive activities. There were four principal technologies that led to this: (1) large radio systems for carrying longdistance calls; (2) semiconductor devices built for computers that could be used for switches; (3) miniature connectors for telephones and other 1. See AT&T, 1907 Annual Report (1908); see also MILTON L. MUELLER, JR., UNIVERSAL SERVICE: COMPETITION, INTERCONNECTION, AND MONOPOLY IN THE MAKING OF THE AMERICAN TELEPHONE SYSTEM 4 (1996). 2. What is commonly referred to as the Kingsbury Commitment is a compilation of three letters memorializing an agreement between AT&T Vice President N.C. Kinsbury and Attorney General J.C. McReynolds. See LETTER FROM AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO. TO ATTORNEY GENERAL, OUTLINING A COURSE OF ACTION WHICH IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED UPON; ATTORNEY GENERAL S REPLY; [AND] PRESIDENT S LETTER TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Dept. of Justice, 1914).
3 Number 1] THE BELL SYSTEM DIVESTITURE 23 terminal equipment; and (4) tone signaling, that allowed signals to be sent over the network after a connection was established. Regulators, intent on limiting the rate of growth of the Bell System, tended to allow competitive entrance into various portions of the market, albeit slowly and unevenly. Competition began in the following areas: Large companies began building their own private microwave systems for internal communications; Telecommunications equipment manufacturers began building terminal equipment and customer switches that could be connected to the telephone network; Other manufacturers began trying, with some success, to sell equipment to the Bell companies; and MCI built a long-distance network using microwave radio systems, allowing people to make local calls to MCI s switches, and complete the calls by using tone signaling to get the necessary information to the MCI network. Others followed. The last development was not based on new technology so much as on pricing distortions that had grown up over the years. For many years, technological advances had benefited long-distance services more than local services. In order to maintain the stability of local pricing, longdistance prices were allowed to remain well above cost, the difference being used to reduce the cost of local service. MCI s idea exploited this arrangement. It used its own long-distance network and paid Bell only the subsidized price for local access. Bell objected furiously, guided in part by their sense of service and partly by financial considerations, but in a series of FCC and court decisions, Bell was gradually forced to give ground in a number of areas. Terminal equipment telephones, customer switches, etc. was deregulated. Bell had strongly defended its end-to-end service mantra, but a series of FCC decisions (Hush-A-Phone 3 and Carterfone 4 ) weakened its position. It became apparent that customer-owned terminal equipment could be connected to the network without service degradation. The FCC finally adopted a set of interconnection standards and deregulated the provision of terminal equipment. Competition developed quickly, spurring innovation in that market. As a precursor of things to come, controversies quickly developed as to the location of the network interface where equipment was regulated on one side, and deregulated on the other side. 3. The FCC s initial order in the Hush-A-Phone matter is discussed in Hush-a-Phone Corp. v. United States, 238 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1956). 4. Use of the Carterfone Device in Message Toll Telephone Service, Decision, 13 F.C.C.2d 420 (1968).
4 24 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 61 This definition became increasingly difficult as more complex services evolved. AT&T agreed to connect to MCI, and other long-distance carriers (e.g., Sprint). After strenuous complaints by AT&T and several court rulings, the FCC ordered MCI and others to pay the so-called Exchange Network Facilities for Interstate Access (ENFIA) rates for local access. These prices were higher than basic phone rates, but included less than half of the subsidy that AT&T s long-distance services contributed to local service. Other manufacturers began to sell equipment to the Bell telephone companies. AT&T and Western Electric management attempted to suppress this, but some local Bell managers bought equipment from other manufacturers when they thought it superior to Western s. In addition, data communications began to increase in importance. The line between computers and communications became increasingly blurred, but AT&T was prohibited from providing computer services by a 1956 consent decree. 5 The FCC kept trying to draw bright lines between computers and communications without much success. In a series of Computer Inquiries, 6 the FCC attempted to distinguish between basic and enhanced services, regulating the former and deregulating the latter. Despite many years of effort, these definitions were impossible to implement in a workable way. The major result was to prevent Bell from offering services that had enhanced components. III. THE ANTITRUST SUIT In 1973, the Federal government filed a lawsuit alleging that AT&T had: (1) illegally limited the kinds of connections and services MCI and others could get, and (2) illegally prevented other manufacturers from selling equipment to Bell companies. The lawsuit wended its way through the legal system while all of the activities mentioned above were taking place, and finally came to trial in It should be noted that the allegation dealt principally with equipment provision and access for long-distance services, which were deemed competitive. The local exchange monopoly was recognized and accepted. The lawsuit was not intended to change that. In fact, the initial 5. United States v. Western Elec. Co., 1956 Trade Cas. (CCH) para. 68,246 (D.N.J. 1956). 6. Regulatory and Policy Problems Presented by the Interdependence of Computer and Communication Services and Facilities, Final Decision and Order, 28 F.C.C.2d 267 (1970); Amendment of Section of the Commission s Rules and Regulations (Second Computer Inquiry), Order, 77 F.C.C.2d 384 (1980); Amendment of Sections of the Commission s Rules and Regulations (Third Computer Inquiry), Report and Order, 104 F.C.C.2d 958 (1986).
5 Number 1] THE BELL SYSTEM DIVESTITURE 25 settlement agreement (referred to as a Modification of Final Judgment, or MFJ 7, which harkened back to the 1956 consent decree) attempted to draw a bright line between monopoly and competitive services, the former of which were to remain regulated, while the latter would be removed from regulatory oversight. AT&T followed standard practice in dealing with the lawsuit, dragging it out with endless filings and hearings. 8 When Judge Harold Greene took over the case, he vowed to move it along, and he did. What were AT&T s alternatives? 1. Fight the case to the end. If AT&T lost any significant part of the suit, it could lead to ruinous private litigation. AT&T initially did fight the case in court, but after comments by Judge Greene in response to a petition for dismissal in the summer of 1981, the company realized it probably could not prevail in court, and began to think about settlement. 2. Agree to some kind of injunctive relief that would have saddled AT&T with significant operational constraints. The injunctive relief scenarios proposed by the Department of Justice were so restrictive that the operations people at AT&T did not think that they could properly operate the business. 3. Give up Western Electric. This involved giving up most of Bell Labs, widely (if incorrectly) viewed as the crown jewel of the empire. Also, this did not solve the problem of MCI and longdistance competition. Finally, this was prominent in the minds of AT&T management, as it did not relieve AT&T of the restrictions from the 1956 consent decree preventing it from entering the computer business. They somehow believed that the computer business was the key to AT&T s future, and that Bell Labs technology would allow them to become a major force in the industry. 4. Split off the monopoly telephone companies from the competitive long-distance and manufacturing businesses (divestiture), with the following implications, some positive and some negative: Telephone service might be severely disrupted, which might take years to sort out and resolve. This loomed large in the minds of management and operations people who had spent their entire careers overseeing an 7. United States v. AT&T Co., 552 F. Supp. 131 (D.D.C. 1982), aff d mem. sub nom. Maryland v. United States, 460 U.S (1983). 8. The Justice Department did its part here, as well, requesting information that required boxcars full of paper to provide.
6 26 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 61 integrated entity, and who placed great importance on service quality; AT&T would be freed from a restrictive consent decree dating from 1956, and would be allowed to enter the computer business; The local telephone companies would be prevented from offering long-distance services, so local and longdistance services could be effectively separated; and AT&T s long-distance services would be deregulated. Obviously, alternative four was chosen. A number of difficult administrative, technical, and operational problems needed to be addressed and resolved. A particularly difficult technical problem was defining the connection point between the long-distance and local companies. As in the case of terminal equipment deregulation, any conceptual line often ran through the middle of a piece of equipment, such as a switch. The long-distance companies wanted to be able to connect their lines to a so-called Class 4 toll office, where their traffic could be concentrated before being delivered to the local telephone switch. AT&T asserted that these Class 4 offices were the heart and soul of the long-distance network, and stripping AT&T of these assets would make it impossible for it to operate a long-distance network. 9 The negotiations over the consent decree almost broke down over this issue, and it was finally resolved in AT&T s favor. The number of regional companies needed to be determined. The MFJ did not specify this. If there were too few, it was feared AT&T would be accused of retaining its monopoly. If too many, the resulting entities might be too small to operate effectively. The balance was struck at seven. In the end it turned out to be too many, since subsequent mergers have reduced it to three. The size and makeup of the local service areas Local Access and Transport Areas (LATAs) had to be determined. If they were too large, insufficient scope was left for the long-distance carriers, including AT&T. If they were too small, the local networks of the telephone companies would be disrupted. Ownership of common switching and transmission systems needed to be determined according to rules that had yet to be developed. Much equipment was shared. It had to be assigned to one company and partially leased to the other, a particularly difficult task if competitive neutrality was to be maintained for long-distance carriers. All parties were very intent on 9. The underlying problem, which the lawyers negotiating the decree did not understand, was that in a fully integrated network, almost every toll switch was in part a Class 4 and provided both toll switching and access to local switches.
7 Number 1] THE BELL SYSTEM DIVESTITURE 27 owning as many assets as possible even though in some cases they did not need them all. The local network switches had to be reconfigured to accommodate multiple interexchange carriers. This reconfiguration involved accommodating a different dialing plan, or allowing customers to prespecify their interexchange carrier and routing the calls appropriately. Accomplishing reconfiguration required substantial software modifications to the electronic switches that served eighty percent of Bell s customers. The other twenty percent, still served by older electromechanical switches, could not access other interexchange carriers (except by using the old dialup mode) until the switches were replaced. Billing arrangements needed to be devised so that the local companies could bill AT&T s customers for long-distance services (as they had always done) without competitive disadvantage to other long-distance carriers. Private line provisioning had always been done cooperatively between local telephone companies and AT&T Long Lines. After divestiture, this relationship needed to be formalized. This was the first major failure; it took a year for private line provisioning to return to an acceptable process. The planning took two years, and divestiture may well have cost the $20 billion that AT&T had been saying it would when defending the suit, but by then, who was counting? IV. NEAR-TERM RESULTS The conceptual framework envisioned in the MFJ did not survive the implementation of divestiture for very long. The monopoly/competitive distinction broke down almost immediately. Yellow Pages and cellular telephone service, both competitive businesses, were assigned to the monopoly telephone companies. This happened because the perception in the minds of most people at the time, including Judge Greene, was that AT&T had the better of the deal, and the local companies had been shortchanged. The assignment of Yellow Pages and cellular to the local companies was an attempt to even the scales. AT&T retained its dominant position in the long-distance market, albeit with declining market share. Despite the fact that long distance was now competitive, the FCC retained its jurisdiction and continued to regulate AT&T. Nevertheless, the separation was accomplished successfully. All entities were able to operate and the American telecommunications system still worked, except for private line installations, which took a year to straighten out.
8 28 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 61 The local telephone companies were not content to stay in the local business and began agitating for relief almost immediately. They succeeded with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 10 where they traded their local monopoly for permission to enter the long-distance market. 11 Under the Act, access pricing was to be cost-based, setting the stage for years of controversy as to just what that meant. V. LONGER-TERM RESULTS After the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the FCC struggled mightily to force competition into the local markets by requiring the local Bell companies to lease their lines to others at regulated low prices. This effort ultimately failed, as might have been foreseen. Any arrangement that requires a provider of goods or services to rely on a competitor whose prices are arbitrarily set by a regulator at levels that the competitor believes are below cost is not a recipe that can long survive. AT&T failed in its attempts to enter the computer market. It tried desperately, first by developing its own product, based on controllers that had been designed for telephone switching systems, and then by several illconceived acquisitions. It squandered billions of dollars on these ventures, under the misapprehension that its allegedly superior technology would overcome its lack of understanding of the computer market. New technologies, in the form of digital cable systems and cellular services, ultimately provided effective competition in local markets. Long-distance service was not viable as a stand-alone business. The long-distance carriers were ultimately absorbed by the local telephone companies, which also merged with each other. The original seven Regional Bell Operating Companies combined to form three companies (two large and one small). The manufacturing arm of AT&T was unable to succeed without its captive telephone company market. Part of the reason was that the local telephone companies increasingly viewed AT&T as a competitor (which it was) and were reluctant to buy equipment from it. Finally, the unit was split off as Lucent Technologies. Enormous investments were made, and much money lost, in building excess long-distance transmission capacity using fiber-optic cables. Technological changes made the conventional switching systems manufactured by the giant telecommunications equipment companies obsolete. The result of these forces was that Lucent Technologies and other 10. Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No , 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 47 U.S.C. (2000)). 11. As should have been foreseen, this was a bad deal for them. The crown jewels of the Bell system were not Bell Labs they were the local monopolies.
9 Number 1] THE BELL SYSTEM DIVESTITURE 29 major telecommunications equipment companies found their main businesses disappearing. As of this writing, it is not clear how many, if any, of these companies will survive. VI. CONCLUSIONS The telecommunications environment in the United States has been so transformed by new services and technologies in the past twenty-five years as to be almost unrecognizable. It is, on balance, competitive and many new services have appeared. It is likely, however, that had divestiture never happened, the industry would have landed in much the same place: Terminal equipment, which could clearly be supplied competitively and easily connected to the network, had been deregulated and became competitive before divestiture; Manufacturing has been decimated by competition and technological changes unrelated to divestiture. AT&T, which had retained control of its captive manufacturer, was ultimately obliged to spin it off for business reasons; Long-distance services have become almost free, thanks to lowcost fiber-optic transmission systems; Local competition for basic telephone service is thriving, based on technologies that barely existed in 1982 (digital cellular and voice over IP on cable); Data communications has finally become a significant market, thanks to the Internet; and Video services are no longer separate from telecommunications, and are now fully part of the mix. Every one of these changes happened as a result of technological change, not organizational rearrangement (although some regulatory changes would have been necessary to allow them to develop). Two of the three remaining Bell Operating Companies offer a full range of services, including wireless and high-speed Internet access, and are rapidly deploying equipment that will allow them to provide video services as well, putting them in full competition with the cable companies. Wireless services are also dominated by the two large Bell Operating Companies, now called AT&T and Verizon. The national telecommunications organizational structure now involves more services than wireline telephony (Internet access, wireless, and video) and is essentially a duopoly instead of a monopoly. It has several regional companies on both sides, and manufacturing is not controlled by any of the service providers. The amount of regulation is significantly reduced, as most markets are now thought of as competitive.
10 30 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 61 The penetration of high-speed Internet access, although still growing, lags behind a number of other countries. For all that, an enormous amount of money and effort was spent: operationally, on modifying the telephone network; administratively, on lawyers and consultants in regulatory proceedings and lawsuits; and financially, in investments that ultimately failed to deliver a return. All of this for little long term benefit. Perhaps, as a nation, we should think long and hard before imposing government-sponsored restructuring on major industries, even for apparently laudable objectives.
AT&T: A Natural Monopoly Worth Preserving or Destroying? The saga of the rise and fall of AT&T in America is a story of ever adjusting social and political attitudes toward the economic and social benefits
14.23 Government Regulation of Industry Class 9: Dynamic Issues in Natural Monopoly Regulation MIT & University of Cambridge 1 Outline When is a natural monopoly no longer a natural monopoly? Telecom regulation
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Statement of JOEL I. KLEIN Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division U.S. Department of Justice Before the House Committee on the Judiciary Concerning Consolidation in the Telecommunications
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1764 Vonage Holdings Corp.; Vonage Network, Inc., Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. Nebraska Public Service Commission; Rod Johnson, in his official
TUNISIA BUSINESS REFORM AND COMPETITIVENESS PROJECT Workshop sur le Service Universel L Expérience Américaine Kelly Cameron +1(301) 768-7263 firstname.lastname@example.org +216 95 320 650 26 janvier 2015
An Oligopoly Analysis of AT&T s Performance in the Wireline Long- Distance Markets After Divestiture Paul W. MacAvoy* Having been present at the creation of divestiture, as the next witness for the defense
Voice and Delivery Data Networks Chapter 11 Learning Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to: Identify the basic elements of a telephone system Describe the composition of the telephone
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION In the Matter of: JOINT APPLICATION OF BELL ATLANTIC ) CORPORATION AND GTE CORPORATION ) CASE NO. 99-296 FOR ORDER AUTHORIZING TRANSFER ) OF
May 3, 1995 Statement of Anne K. Bingaman Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division Department of Justice Before the Senate Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Telecommunications on S.652 The Telecommunications
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 ) In the Matter of ) ) Petition for Declaratory Ruling of ) American Electric Power Service ) Corporation et al. Regarding the ) Rate
Analysis and Recommendations FairPoint Communications, LLC Report Required By Act 53 of the 2011-12 Legislative Session Department of Public Service January 10, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary...1
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of Technologies Transitions Policy Task Force GN Docket No. 13-5 COMMENTS OF THE AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION ON PUBLIC NOTICE
January 2011 FCC Adopts Controversial Net Neutrality Rules Governing Broadband Internet Access Services BY CARL W. NORTHROP, MICHAEL LAZARUS & DAVID DARWIN The Federal Communications Commission (the FCC
Privacy Year in Review: Privacy and VoIP Technology JOHN B. MORRIS, JR. ABSTRACT Voice over internet protocol ( VoIP ) technology is increasingly being used throughout the nation. VoIP technology provides
No. 13-1269 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States WORLDCOM, INC., Petitioner, v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Respondent. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
Before the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WISCONSIN Madison Wisconsin Investigation of Voice over ) Case No. 5-TI-2071 Internet Protocol in Wisconsin ) Public Comments of Communications Workers of America
Choosing the Right Telephone Provider and Service Options The Choice is Yours This brochure helps answer these questions: How do you know which providers offer local and long distance service in your area?
WIRELESS DEVELOPMENT March 2005 Keller and Heckman LLP Serving Business through Law and Science Regulatory Predictions for BPL Broadband over Power Line ( BPL ) technology is justifiably receiving a great
BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of THE PROVISION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE VIA "CABLE INTERNET" UNITED STATES INTERNET INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION ("USIIA"),
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of AT&T Petition to Launch a Proceeding Concerning the TDM-to-IP Transition GN Docket No. 12-353 Petition of the National
BEFORE THE HOUSE CONSUMER AFFAIRS COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS Representative William F. Adolph, Jr., Subcommittee Chairman Testimony of SONNY POPOWSKY CONSUMER ADVOCATE Regarding Chapter
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) AT&T Petition for Declaratory ) WC Docket No. 02-361 Ruling that AT&T s Phone-to-Phone ) IP Telephony Services are
BEFORE THE SENATE COMMUNICATIONS AND HIGH TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE Senator Jake Corman, Chairman Testimony of SONNY POPOWSKY CONSUMER ADVOCATE Regarding Chapter 30 of the Public Utility Code State College,
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION OF OREGON INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE DATE: January 7, 2009 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Bryan Conway Celeste Hari Competitive Providers Report to Legislature ORS 759.050(9) requires the
KANSAS CORPORATION COMMISSION IP-to-IP Interconnection Report 2014 REPORT ON IP- TO- IP INTERCONNECTION A Summary of Status of the FCC s Internet Protocol- to- Internet Protocol Interconnection Proceeding
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Vermont Telephone Company Petition for Declaratory Ruling Whether Voice Over Internet Protocol Services Are Entitled
A Free Market Think Tank For Maryland Because Ideas Matter Testimony of Randolph J. May President before the Senate Finance Committee and the House Economic Matters Committee of the Maryland General Assembly
PO Box 620308 Littleton, Colorado 80162-0308 (303) 948-2200 REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE Joseph P. Benkert, P.C. offers clients a rare breadth and depth of experience in telecommunications, corporate, transactional,
BALANCING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WITH THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF A DIGITAL ECONOMY INTRODUCTION The World Wide Web and advances in broadband technology have presented enormous opportunities for economic
CHAPTER 15 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS ARTICLE 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS 37-15-101. Short title; sunset. (a) This chapter shall be known as the "Wyoming Telecommunications Act." (b) This chapter is repealed effective
VoIP the New Voice of the Lightwave By Clifford R. Holliday B & C Consulting Services Abstracted from the author s Report Voice on the Lightwave VoIP; How Will VoIP Impact the Telecom Market? Available
Remarks of Ruth Milkman, Chief of Staff Federal Communications Commission Progressive Policy Institute May 27, 2014 Thank you, Hal for inviting me here today, and for organizing a great group of speakers
NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Hoover v. Hi Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc. Case No. EDCV 13 00097 JGB (OPx) If you purchased a product manufactured by Hi Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc., called Nasal Ease
Box 6-2 continued By June 2003, this had grown to 88 percent. A recent study indicates that the introduction of satellite TV led to substantial gains for consumers. However, ongoing antitrust oversight
ORLANDO COMMUNICATIONS LLC, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION Plaintiff, v. Case No: 6:14-cv-1022-Orl-22KRS SPRINT SPECTRUM, L.P. and SPRINT CORPORATION, Defendants.
Fire Alarm Notebook by Dean K. Wilson. P.E. Page 1 question: Phone Company or Phony Company? Part 2 by Dean K. Wilson, P.E. In the March/April 2008 edition of, I attempted to answer the following Question:
Regulation of Interconnection he nation s telecommunications industry consists of many independently operated networks. In order to create a seamless infrastructure, these networks must interconnect. The
Unclassified DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2013)49 DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2013)49 Unclassified Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 11-Feb-2013 English
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Petition for Declaratory Ruling That tw telecom inc. Has The Right To Direct IP-to-IP Interconnection Pursuant To Section
RULES OF TENNESSEE REGULATORY AUTHORITY CHAPTER 1220-04-11 TELEPHONE SOLICITATION REGULATIONS - DO NOT CALL REGISTER TABLE OF CONTENTS 1220-04-11-.01 Definitions 1220-04-11-.06 Public Education about the
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington D.C. 20544 Ameren Missouri Petition for Declaratory ) Ruling Pursuant to Section 1.2(a) of ) WC Docket No. 13-307 the Commission's Rules ) OPPOSITION
United States District Court for the Northern District of California IF YOU RECEIVED A NON-EMERGENCY MORTGAGE OR CREDIT CARD DEFAULT SERVICING CALL OR TEXT ON YOUR CELLULAR TELEPHONE FROM BANK OF AMERICA
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW M. POLKA PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON REGULATORY REFORM, COMMERCIAL AND ANTITRUST LAW COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED
Cable Television Update 2015 A Look at Federal Regulatory Developments NATOA s 35 th Annual Conference San Diego, CA September 8-11, 2015 Presented by: Brian T. Grogan, Esq 1 Jan. 21, 2015 FCC 621 Order
NEW UNBUNDLING RULES: WILL THE FCC FINALLY OPEN UP CABLE BROADBAND? This ibrief discusses a recent Court of Appeals decision remanding FCC rules on the unbundling of Internet services by telephone exchange
COMPUTER SCIENCE CPSC S186 01 INTERNET and TELECOMMUNICATIONS LAW (Preliminary) 2016 SYLLABUS Instructor: Frederick A. Polner, Esq. Mr. Polner is a communications lawyer who has been practicing in this
Second Regular Session Sixty-eighth General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED LLS NO. 1-00.0 Duane Gall x SENATE BILL 1-1 SENATE SPONSORSHIP Scheffel and Tochtrop, HOUSE SPONSORSHIP Williams A. and
Unclassified DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2005)3 DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2005)3 Unclassified Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 12-Jan-2005 English
Overview of Communication Network Evolution Toshiki Tanaka, D.E. Minoru Inayoshi Noboru Mizuhara ABSTRACT: The shifts in social paradigm can trigger diversified communication services. Therefore, technical
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Joint Petition for Rulemaking to Resolve ) RM-10865 Various Outstanding Issues Concerning the ) Implementation of
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 ) In the Matter of ) ) VONAGE HOLDINGS ) CORPORATION ) ) Petition for Declaratory Ruling ) WC Docket No. 03-211 Concerning an Order of
TESTIMONY OF THE VOICE ON THE NET COALITION BEFORE THE SENATE JOBS, AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE HEARING ON S.F. No. 895 FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Good afternoon Chairman Sparks, Vice Chair Schmit
SECOND ANNUAL MEETING of the LATIN AMERICAN COMPETITION FORUM June 14-15, 2004 Inter-American Development Bank Andrés Bello Auditorium Washington, D.C., United States TRINIDAD AND TOBBAGO: Institutional
BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20544 In the Matter of Petition of Nebraska Public Service Commission and Kansas Corporation Commission for Declaratory Ruling or, in the Alternative,
- ' '..:,- ':)CeC \ir i \;- ; L!LED IDAHO pub~i~~:i~~~e OMMISgWi'fEB -6 1"- ~;i'i 9: 58 In the Matter of the Petition for Approval of an Amendment to an Interconnection Agreement Between Verizon Northwest
BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554 In the matter of ) ) Reexamination of Roaming Obligations of Commercial ) WT Docket No. 05-265 Mobile Radio Service Providers and Other
Subject to FirstNet Board Review and Approval SPECTRUM MANAGER LEASE AGREEMENT I. PARTIES AND PURPOSE BETWEEN THE FIRST RESPONDER NETWORK AUTHORITY AND THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO This non-exclusive Spectrum
NEWS Federal Communications Commission 445 12 th Street, S.W. Washington, D. C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 This is an unofficial announcement
R How Competitive Are California's Local Phone Markets? Walter S. Baer DRU-2009-RC December 1998 This draft presents preliminary results of RAND research, which have not been reviewed or edited. The views
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, ) 325 7th Street, N.W., Suite 300 ) Washington,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS If You Were Sent a Text Message from The Western Union Company, You May Be Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action Settlement. A federal
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Request for Review by InterCall, Inc. of Decision of Universal Service Administrator CC Docket No. 96-45 ORDER Adopted:
Note: This information was prepared by the Federal Trade Commission in cooperation with numerous regulatory agencies, consumer groups, and providers of telecommunication services. Shopping In The New Telecommunications
Regulatory Reclassification of Broadband Internet Access Service is the Unsurprising Result of ISPs Inexplicable Challenges to FCC Authority An Open Internet has long been a bipartisan goal in the United
139.195 Definitions for KRS 139.105, 139.200, 139.215, and 139.775. As used in KRS 139.105, 139.200, 139.215, and 139.775: (1) "Ancillary services" means services that are associated with or incidental
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Implementation of Section 621(a)(1) of the ) MB Docket No. 05-311 Cable Communication Policy Act of 1984 ) as amended
STATE OF MARYLAND OFFICE OF PEOPLE S COUNSEL Paula M. Carmody, People s Counsel 6 St. Paul Street, Suite 2102 Baltimore, Maryland 21202 410-767-8150; 800-207-4055 www.opc.state.md.us BILL NO.: House Bill
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of Empowering Consumers to Prevent and Detect Billing for Unauthorized Charges ( Cramming CG Docket No. 11-116 Consumer Information
Implications of the Verizon - Vonage Patent Infringement Judgment Overview The Complaint, Result and Next Steps in the litigation Scope of the Patents Implications of the decision and of various patents
Page 1 THE BUSINESS EDGE GROUP, INC., Appellant, v. CHAMPION MORTGAGE COM- PANY, INC., No. 07-1059 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 519 F.3d 150; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 5158 January 3,
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC GN Docket No. 14-28 In the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet The Telecom Act of 1996 Requires the FCC to Classify Commercial
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------------X THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, Attorney
Florida Public Service Commission White Paper on Internet Pricing: Regulatory Implications and Future Issues September 25, 2000 Prepared By: Division of Policy Analysis & Intergovernmental Liaison Andrew
Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Westfax, Inc. Petition for Consideration and Clarification Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer
THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Application of Laws of 2012, Chapter 177 (Senate Bill 48 to VoIP and IP-Enabled Services Docket No. DT 12-308 BRIEF OF AT&T CORP. AND VERIZON
BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON D.C. 20554 In the Matter of: ) ) Petition for Declaratory Ruling that AT&T s ) Phone-to-Phone IP Telephony Services Are ) WC Docket No. 02-361 Exempt
JUSTICE COURT # 2 GRAHAM COUNTY STATE OF ARIZONA P.O. BOX 1159, 136 WEST CENTER STREET, PIMA AZ 85543 PHONE (928) 485-2771 FAX (928) 485-9961 SMALL CLAIMS INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING ***EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1,
Case :-cv-0-dms-blm Document Filed /0/ Page of 0 STUART F. DELERY Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice ALAN J. PHELPS Trial Attorney Consumer Protection Branch U.S.
Case 1:06-cv-01892-CKK Document 30 Filed 05/20/08 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COVAD COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 06 1892 (CKK) REVONET,
Cars, Broadband, Internet: And why the road to innovation may go through Washington DC Jon M. Peha Carnegie Mellon University www.ece.cmu.edu/~peha/bio.html Keynote for IEEE CCNC / Consumer Electronics
The new market situation The impact of the Internet and web driving data growth more rapid than what the telcos predicted New data-oriented network technologies cheaper than SONET Optical networks Gigabit
Effects of Deregulation on the Big Three of Long-Distance By: Karen Miller Economics 320 April 17, 1997 Effects of deregulation on the Big Three of Long-Distance Introduction The competition for long distance
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 Before the Copyright Office, Library of Congress Washington, D. C. In re Satellite Carrier Compulsory License; Definition of Unserved
Avvo Legal Services and The Rules of Professional Conduct Avvo Legal Services are designed to solve a simple yet vexing problem: how to make it easier for consumers and small businesses to get access to
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 ) CG Docket No. 02-278 ) ) COMMENTS
23 rd Voorburg Group Meeting Aguascalientes, Mexico September 22 nd to September 26 th 2008 Mini Presentation on Turnover/Output Telecommunications in Canada Fred Barzyk 1. Definition of the service being
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.