Comments on: FCC moves 911 VoIP deadline http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6064 p2pnet.net - reader powered Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:23:46 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6064/comment-page-1#comment-19408 Reader's Write Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:24:58 +0000 #comment-19408 At the beginnings of VoIP, the FCC should have mandated an either/or service level - BASIC VoIP with no 911 at all - and ENHANCED VoIP with full e911 capabilities. The market would decide what service level they wanted. The misunderstandings, lawsuits, and deadlines we now see today are a direct result of the FCC allowing a confusing and variable "middle-ground" to exist in 911 calling. And so far, I've not seen anyone suggest that someone should punish the FCC for this. But on the deadlines, I just have one comment. Some VoIP providers are already e911 compliant (ie., Comcast). And compliance issues affect many businesses, not just VoIP. So why should VoIP be treated any differently than any other business? The capitalist in me says that the strong businesses should survive while the inferior businesses fall by the wayside. The wisest thing the FCC could do now is mandate the "no middle-ground" either/or service level ... that after November 29th, companies either offer 911 (as the meaning of the term is traditionally understood) or they don't offer 911. Companies that don't should be required to say so in plain English on their websites and in their advertising. Companies that do won't need a requirement. They'll be crowing about it to attract the home consumer. Point is, that allows VoIP companies to survive as long as they want to ... and lets market pressure (not mandates) determine how soon the companies without 911 would roll it out (if ever). Bottom line? Consumers wouldn't have shut-off deadlines looming over their shoulders. They'd instead have "options" to choose from. At the beginnings of VoIP, the FCC should have mandated an either/or service level – BASIC VoIP with no 911 at all – and ENHANCED VoIP with full e911 capabilities. The market would decide what service level they wanted. The misunderstandings, lawsuits, and deadlines we now see today are a direct result of the FCC allowing a confusing and variable “middle-ground” to exist in 911 calling. And so far, I’ve not seen anyone suggest that someone should punish the FCC for this.

But on the deadlines, I just have one comment. Some VoIP providers are already e911 compliant (ie., Comcast). And compliance issues affect many businesses, not just VoIP. So why should VoIP be treated any differently than any other business? The capitalist in me says that the strong businesses should survive while the inferior businesses fall by the wayside. The wisest thing the FCC could do now is mandate the “no middle-ground” either/or service level … that after November 29th, companies either offer 911 (as the meaning of the term is traditionally understood) or they don’t offer 911. Companies that don’t should be required to say so in plain English on their websites and in their advertising. Companies that do won’t need a requirement. They’ll be crowing about it to attract the home consumer. Point is, that allows VoIP companies to survive as long as they want to … and lets market pressure (not mandates) determine how soon the companies without 911 would roll it out (if ever).

Bottom line? Consumers wouldn’t have shut-off deadlines looming over their shoulders. They’d instead have “options” to choose from.

]]>