X-no-Archive:yes
Please visit http://korova.com/virus/hoax981220.htm
Kind regards,
Denys. . .
Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP
(800) 323-8863 (281) 288-7438 Fax: (281) 355-6879
denys at hicomp.com www.hicomp.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Charlie Thomas [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, 24 May, 1999 1:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [Fwd: Very Important Message from My Internet Provider]
Personally, I have no idea if there's anything to this, so be aware that all
disclaimers are in place!
If you feel there's merit to this, then please take appropriate action....
-Charlie Thomas
Cardinal Health, Inc.
(all opinions are my own alone...unless you happen to share them!)
---------------------- Forwarded by Charlie Thomas/FOL/CDI/CHI/US on 05/24/99
11:40 AM ---------------------------
Avanti Centrae <[log in to unmask]> on 05/23/99 08:30:45 PM
Please respond to [log in to unmask]
Thought you might want to act today or tomorow on this - long distance
internet would be BAD! Here's a sample letter:
Commissioner Neeper
Public Utility Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: 415/703-2782
Commissioner Duque
Public Utility Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
In reference to agenda item 5 and 5a number A98-11-024 Pacific Bell,
I support the recent Administrative Law Judge Mattson's ruling upholding
Federal rulings that Internet calls be considered "local" and that
"reciprocal compensation" be paid to "competitive" local phone
companies.
At the very worse, there should be a public
hearing allowed to voice all parties concerns and I feel I was not
allowed due process when only three commissioners are allowing a major
decision to be made that was never heard in public hearings and that
every
other state in the nation has ruled in favor of "local" calls and in
favor
of "competitive" local carriers.
The other point that could be made is that California is unique in
covering
rural and urban areas for the Internet and that I support the fact that
small Internet companies by the hundreds have covered these areas that
the
big Pac Bell and GTE companies would have never covered without the
competitive insight of the new and "deregulated" phone and Internet
companies working together.
Sincerely,
Received: by mail (mbox acentrae) (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31
1998/05/13) Sun May 23 19:32:48 1999)
X-From_: [log in to unmask] Wed May 19 16:49:11 1999
Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from workstation2.cwo.com (office.cwo.com [209.210.78.29]) by
mail.cwo.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA19067; Wed, 19 May 1999 16:40:56
-0700
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 16:40:56 -0700
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
X-Sender: [log in to unmask]
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: [log in to unmask]
From: Coastal Web Internet- Mike Arciero <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Very Important Message from your Internet Provider
Dear Coastal Web and Goldstate net customer:
It is rare that we ever e-mail you, but I beg you to read this all important
message that may impact the price you pay for Internet access in the future
as well as possible "per-minute charges" on your phone bill that use to be
toll free.
It is imperative that you take five minutes to write a letter of concern to
the Public Utility Commission TODAY!
Here are the facts in a nutshell:
The California Public Utility Commission(CPUC) rules on rates for all kinds
of business including water, electricity and telecommunications(phones).
Yes, even the Internet is regulated in some ways.
On May 27th the CPUC will rule for a second time if an Internet phone call
from a home or business is considered "local" or "long distance".
Remember that statement because when the Federal Government, in 1996,
de-regulated phone companies and set the rules for allowing de-regulation in
all 50 states, one of the items they ruled on was to force Pacific Bell and
all of the other existing Telephone companies to allow Internet calls from
homeowners to be "local" calls.
They could have ruled that your calls to Internet Providers would be "long
distance". That would have meant that even though you lived in Santa Rosa,
for example, and called a local number in Santa Rosa, you would have been
charged long distance charges because you might be searching the web in New
York or Italy. As stupid as that might seem, three years later the CPUC may
now overturn that ruling and change the entire structure of the Internet
system only for California residents.
Why do we say only in California? Because, since the 1996 federal
deregulation, every other state's PUC has upheld and ruled in favor of the
federal law. Thirty states have ruled that Internet calls are considered
"local". No other state has ruled against this concept.
Even in California, the CPUC in October of 1998, voted 3 to 2 in favor of
upholding the "local" calls to Internet Providers.
Well guess what friends. Two of the five CPUC commissioners have retired
since October, leaving 3 commissioners to rule on all issues. And yes, the
two that ruled against "local" calls DID NOT retire and are going to vote on
the issue again, on May 27th. That's only 7 days away from now. The vote
will be item #5 and 5a on their agenda AND it is the only item that they
have refused to take comments on by the public. The two vacancies have not
been filled. The vote will be 2 to 1 in favor of making Internet calls "long
distance".
What does this mean if the CPUC rules in favor of Pacific Bell and allows
them to be able to say that Internet calls to local numbers are, in fact,
not local but long distance?
The answer is simple. Internet Provider and local "competitive" phone
companies, that have built their entire business systems on getting rural
and remote areas of the state on the Internet, will have to eliminate those
areas from their system leaving the consumer high and dry without any
"local" phone number to call out to. And, millions of Californians who have
hundreds of choices when they decide on what Internet Provider to choose
from, will simply not be able to choose, because they will not be able to
serve you if they have to charge you on a "per minute" basis.
Coastal Web has spent significant dollars in providing areas such as Rancho
Murieta, Hayfork, Truckee, Colfax, Placerville, McFarland, Bishop, Lake
Arrowhead, and 400 other small towns with Internet Service that eliminates
any toll costs. Over 600 other Internet Providers have done the same thing
in town after town in the state. We all based our business plans and
limited funds on the fact that the Federal regulations allowed us to set up
these areas of the state and serve the population, because the BIG telephone
companies Pacific Bell, GTE, Roseville Telephone and Citizens Utilities
refused to do so. It is these phone companies that now want the rules
reversed because they finally see that they can push out the small
independent Internet Provider and take over and eventually raise rates by
eliminating competition.
Competition is what allows your Internet service to stay inexpensive with
good personal service. If you start getting charged per minute for Internet
calls at home, you will simply not use the Internet. Pacific Bell wants to
keep the monopoly they have had for 70 years. They forget that the money to
build the telephone system in this nation came from the fact that it was a
monopoly that the government mandated a profit so that the system was built.
This monopoly is no longer needed with all the fiber and cable installed
from many companies and rates need to be competitive.
I could go on and on about what is happening but you need to act today. The
public needs to be heard! This same CPUC recently ruled that Pacific Bell
eliminate the very special "school ISDN telephone rates" that Coastal Web,
school districts and other Internet Providers fought so hard for during the
last five years.
Please take five more minutes and send a postal mail to the two
commissioners that will vote against "local" calls. It must be done today.
Myself and five other Internet providers went to the CPUC in San Francisco
last week. We were told to our face that they would not even look at their
e-mail messages from any consumer and would simply "delete" the messages.
They also ruled that the agenda item would be closed to the public, even
after knowing that all the other agenda items would be open for comment.
Last week, Ohio PUC voted a third time in favor of the "local" call issue
and demanded that Ameritech Telephone Company, immediately make compensation
to local competitive phone companies. California will be the only state
that rules against "local" calls.
Please send two simple hand or typed sentences to the commissioners saying
in your words that:
In reference to agenda item 5 and 5a number A98-11-024 Pacific Bell,
"I support the recent Administrative Law Judge Mattson's ruling upholding
Federal rulings that Internet calls be considered "local" and that
"reciprocal compensation" be paid to "competitive" local phone companies.
You should also mention that at the very worse, there should be a public
hearing allowed to voice all parties concerns and that you feel you were not
allowed due process when only three commissioners are allowing a major
decision to be made that was never heard in public hearings and that every
other state in the nation has ruled in favor of "local" calls and in favor
of "competitive" local carriers.
The other point that could be made is that California is unique in covering
rural and urban areas for the Internet and that you support the fact that
small Internet companies by the hundreds have covered these areas that the
big Pac Bell and GTE companies would have never covered without the
competitive insight of the new and "deregulated" phone and Internet
companies working together.
The commissioner's names and addresses are:
Commissioner Neeper
Public Utility Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: 415/703-2782
Commissioner Duque
Public Utility Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: 415/703-2782
Thanks, and remember, tomorrow may be too late.
Mike Arciero
Coastal Web Online
Integrity, Service, Performance
|
