https://www.channelfutures.com/wp-content/themes/channelfutures_child/assets/images/logo/footer-new-logo.png
  • Home
  • Technologies
    • Back
    • SDN/SD-WAN
    • Cloud
    • RMM/PSA
    • Security
    • Telephony/UC/Collaboration
    • Cable
    • Mobility & Wireless
    • Fiber/Ethernet
    • Data Centers
    • Backup & Disaster Recovery
    • IoT
    • Desktop
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Analytics
  • Strategy
    • Back
    • Mergers and Acquisitions
    • Channel Research
    • Business Models
    • Distribution
    • Technology Solutions Brokerages
    • Sales & Marketing
    • Best Practices
    • Vertical Markets
    • Regulation & Compliance
  • MSP 501
    • Back
    • 2022 MSP 501 Rankings
    • 2022 NextGen 101 Rankings
  • Intelligence
    • Back
    • Galleries
    • Podcasts
    • From the Industry
    • Reports/Digital Issues
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
  • Channel Futures TV
  • EMEA
  • Channel Chatter
    • Back
    • People on the Move
    • New/Changing Channel Programs
    • New Products & Services
    • Industry Honors
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Advisory Boards
    • Industry Organizations
    • Our Sponsors
    • Advertise
    • 2022 Editorial Calendar
  • Awards
    • Back
    • 2022 MSP 501
    • Channel Influencers
    • Circle of Excellence
    • DE&I 101
    • Channel Partners 101 (CP 101)
  • Events
    • Back
    • CP Conference & Expo
    • MSP Summit
    • Channel Partners Europe
    • Channel Partners Event Coverage
    • Webinars
    • Industry Events
  • About Us
  • DE&I
Channel Futures
  • NEWSLETTER
  • Home
  • Technologies
    • Back
    • SDN/SD-WAN
    • Cloud
    • RMM/PSA
    • Security
    • Telephony/UC/Collaboration
    • Cable
    • Mobility & Wireless
    • Fiber/Ethernet
    • Data Centers
    • Backup & Disaster Recovery
    • IoT
    • Desktop
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Analytics
  • Strategy
    • Back
    • Mergers and Acquisitions
    • Channel Research
    • Business Models
    • Distribution
    • Technology Solutions Brokerages
    • Sales & Marketing
    • Best Practices
    • Vertical Markets
    • Regulation & Compliance
  • MSP 501
    • Back
    • 2022 MSP 501 Rankings
    • 2022 NextGen 101 Rankings
  • Intelligence
    • Back
    • Galleries
    • Podcasts
    • From the Industry
    • Reports/Digital Issues
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
  • Channel Futures TV
  • EMEA
  • Channel Chatter
    • Back
    • People on the Move
    • New/Changing Channel Programs
    • New Products & Services
    • Industry Honors
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Advisory Boards
    • Industry Organizations
    • Our Sponsors
    • Advertise
    • 2022 Editorial Calendar
  • Awards
    • Back
    • 2022 MSP 501
    • Channel Influencers
    • Circle of Excellence
    • DE&I 101
    • Channel Partners 101 (CP 101)
  • Events
    • Back
    • CP Conference & Expo
    • MSP Summit
    • Channel Partners Europe
    • Channel Partners Event Coverage
    • Webinars
    • Industry Events
  • About Us
  • DE&I
    • Newsletter
  • REGISTER
  • MSPs
  • VARs / SIs
  • Agents
  • Cloud Service Providers
  • Channel Partners Events
 Channel Futures

Telephony/UC/Collaboration


Back to Zero

  • Written by Channel
  • October 31, 1999

Posted: 11/1999

Soap Box

Back to Zero
By Ernie Kelly

Don’t look now, but they are at it again. The incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs)
have rounded up their supporters in Washington for one final charge up Capitol Hill in a
last-ditch effort to perpetuate their market dominance. Having failed to stem the tide of
competition through a variety of legal, regulatory, operational and political efforts, and
having failed to convince state and/or federal regulators over the past three years that
half-baked efforts to open up their networks should qualify them for interLATA (local
access and transport area) relief under Section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
the regional Bell operating companies (RBOCs) and GTE Corp., Stamford, Conn., have come
full circle and now are desperately seeking legislative relief.

An enormous amount of RBOC/GTE shareholder money now is pouring into an effort to
rewrite the Telecom Act in a way that would advantage the incumbents and disadvantage
competitors. Proponents of the legislation have lined up big-name lobbyists and Washington
political insiders to push a broad-based legislative and public relations battle to get
the bill passed. It is almost exclusively an inside-the-beltway battle, but its
ramifications easily could affect every company trying to do business in the
telecommunications markets of the future.

The effort to free the RBOCs has begun in both the Senate and the House. In the Senate
the principal proponents are Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).
However, the most forceful leadership on behalf of the incumbents has come in the House of
Representatives from Rep. W. J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-La.), who currently is the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications. His primary goal since the onset of
summer has been to aggressively round up co-sponsors for a bill he has introduced.

Tauzin’s bill, The Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act of 1999, would free
the RBOCs to offer interLATA services–so long as they are "broadband"
services–upon passage. But the Telecom Act is only three years old, you say? Why not give
it time to work, you say? We waited 62 years the last time we rewrote the act.

The reasoning behind the need to update the freshly minted law goes like this: When
Congress passed the Telecom Act they forgot to differentiate between plain old
telephone service (POTS) and new digital services. Obviously, no one in their right mind
would want to inhibit the ILECs from providing these much-needed services. So to right
this oversight, we must clarify the act by making sure the provisions restricting
RBOC provision of interLATA services do not extend to high-speed data and Internet access.
Just a minor, little technical change, if you will.

The scope of this perfidy is found in another provision in the bill, which specifically
removes the resale and unbundling obligations of Section 251 for high-speed data services.
So, through this bill, not only do the RBOCs get their de facto 271 authority to offer
interLATA service, but also they no longer have to unbundle and resell anything they wish
to call or claim is "a high-speed data or Internet access service." How sweet it
is!

Of course, voice services already are, and increasingly will be, offered over broadband
facilities. So, what’s to keep the Bells from doing that, essentially bypassing the
requirements of Section 271 to open their networks to competition to enter all interLATA
telecommunications markets, including voice? Well, there is an additional provision added
saying they can’t do that.

Now doesn’t that make you feel comfortable? Everyone knows that there is no practical
way to detect when voice streams are digitized. To enforce this, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) would have another huge definition problem–somewhat akin,
I imagine, to their efforts to define pornography in previous decades–and would have to
have investigative capabilities along the lines of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as
it operated under J. Edgar Hoover. So, we just have to trust the RBOCs to obey the law.

The central purpose of the Telecom Act was to require the incumbents to open their
networks to local competition. But after only three years, momentum is gathering for
legislation that would wipe out the gains we have made by removing the great carrot of 271
authority from the act.

If the bill begins to move, it ultimately will become a huge, nasty public battle. That
will align Tauzin’s supporters with a familiar affiliation (albeit with shrinking numbers)
of telecom monopolists from the RBOC/ILEC camp, against competitive industry foes that are
increasing, rather than diminishing, in political strength. Five years ago, those
corporations matched off against the RBOCs in this debate were a small collection of long
distance carriers and a few industry hangers-on. Today, the list of companies that would
be disadvantaged by the pro-incumbent bill also would include hundreds of competitive LECs
(CLECs) formed since 1996, thousands of Internet service providers (ISPs) and advanced
telecommunications service pro-viders, electric utilities, wireless providers, cable
companies and every other company that provides products and services to the emerging
competitive local service community.

Of course, the public relations campaign behind Tauzin’s bill is a marvel to behold. It
wraps the whole proposal in the American flag with a theme that revolves around the
promise of the Internet for residential customers and rural Americans. The RBOCs claim
they are best positioned to bring the fruits of Internet access to millions of Americans,
but are handcuffed by a law that didn’t even contemplate the digital revolution now upon
us. "Competition is working for everyone except us," one RBOC spokesman was
quoted as saying.

Has anybody checked their stock prices since the passage of the act? Has anyone looked
at their revenues or bottom lines over the past three years? There is no way you can argue
that they have been disadvantaged over the years since the passage of the act. On the
other hand, competitors trying to deal with them have been plenty disadvantaged.

Then there is the pure political drivel that only RBOCs care about those Americans who
the Internet revolution has passed by. This is a particularly irritating argument coming
from companies that, over the years, have sold off rural exchange after rural exchange to
cleanse their portfolio of less profitable properties.

Another totally specious argument is the notion put forth by the RBOCs that without
relief they are not going to invest in the "off-ramps and on-ramps" necessary to
complete the digital telecommunications highway. This is an absurd suggestion. Carriers
everywhere recognize that all communications eventually will be transmitted over digital
facilities. Everyone is frantically building out, upgrading and extending their digital
capabilities, including all of the incumbents.

Finally, the notion that Congress did not know about the difference between broadband
and POTS services when the act was passed is equally absurd. Of course they understood.
That is specifically why the prohibitions in the act refer to "telecommunications
services." They meant to cover all services, which is precisely what the law does. If
the RBOCs had any confidence they could win such an argument in the courts, they would
have done so by now. Ergo, the only way to get such an interpretation is by changing the
law itself.

In a sense it seems as if we are back in 1995 again. Both sides are lining up war
chests and big-name supporters. A whole lot of money is going to be spent by incumbents
and competitors that could otherwise be invested in these new networks or returned to
their shareholders as dividends.

I have seen a lot of effort with varying degrees of success from the RBOCs to open up
their networks. We are making progress. Why don’t they just do what the act asks them to
do and finish meeting the checklist criteria? It is not, as they claim, a moving target.
Today it is being spelled out in necessary detail in states such as New York (where, at
press time, Bell Atlantic Corp. had refiled with the FCC for long distance entry) and
Texas.

RBOC employees are talented and capable of doing what is required by the act. Instead,
we continue to see the RBOCs try to eat their cake and have it, too. If they had earnestly
followed the prescripts of the act from the get-go, they would be in any interLATA market
they wanted to be in by now. Why does this continue? Because the lawyers and lobbyists are
still running these companies. To me, there is simply no other explanation.

Ernest B. Kelly III Ernest B. Kelly III is president of the Telecommunications Resellers Association
(TRA), the Washington-based trade organization representing resellers of
telecommunications services. He can be reached by phone at +1 202 835 9898.
ROUNDTABLE

On
the FCC’s September UNEs Ruling …

"Unbundled network elements are the basis upon which we built our business plan.
Our entrepreneurial gamble wouldn’t have happened without UNEs. We think the FCC got it
right the first time and further detail [was] uncalled for. If UNEs weren’t available on
an equal basis, our ability to innovate on a fast track would be skewed. The only way to
go from here is further innovation."

–David J. Malfara Sr., president, Z-Tel Network Services Inc.

"There are two other related issues that the FCC did not rule on. A case pending
before the 8th [U.S.] Circuit Court of Appeals focuses on whether the FCC can require
ILECs to combine two UNEs that aren’t already combined in an incumbent’s network. Once
that issue is clarified, we expect the agency to review this issue."

–James H. Henry, analyst, Bear Stearns Inc.

"Facilities-based competitors–both voice and data-oriented–are granted continued
access to all elements necessary to provide basic service. In addition to specifying the
availability of local loops, the FCC’s rules reaffirm competitors’ access to four other
elements that enable them to offer a full set of voice and data services. The FCC’s
decision significantly expands [the] options for competitive broadband providers."

–Daniel Ernst, telecom analyst, Ferris, Baker, Watts Inc.

Tags: Agents Telephony/UC/Collaboration

Most Recent


  • Microsoft Teams on laptop
    Microsoft Targeting Partners to Sell Teams, Windows 365 to SMBs, More
    Microsoft still sees a big opportunity for Teams among SMBs. Windows 365 is also growing in this market.
  • Market research
    Twilio, CM.com, Infobip Rank High in CCaaS, New Study Reveals
    By 2027, industry revenue will reach $15.6 billion.
  • Making Waves
    7 Channel People Making Waves This Week at Microsoft, Rackspace, RingCentral, Avaya
    Hackers targeted one UCaaS firm by impersonating the company's IT department.
  • Mergers acquisitions m&a goldfish crackers
    Latest M&A: IBM, Vonage, Nokia, GoTo, Nitel, Ensono, Huntress, More
    One cybersecurity company's $22 million July acquisition was its largest to date.

Leave a comment Cancel reply

-or-

Log in with your Channel Futures account

Alternatively, post a comment by completing the form below:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Content

  • Woman with questions
    Should We Just Call Master Agents Distributors?
  • Cisco Webex Screen Shot
    Cisco Targets Hybrid Work with Revamped, Newly Branded Webex Suite
  • Cloud Computing diagram for Microsoft gallery
    Avaya Cloud Office by RingCentral Adds Capabilities for Global Businesses
  • Call Center Contact Center
    Avant Analytics: Expect Big CCaaS Adoption, Fueled by AI, Through 2021

Upcoming Events

View all

MSP Summit

September 13, 2022 - September 16, 2022

Channel Partners Conference & Expo

May 1, 2023 - May 4, 2023

Galleries

View all

Lumen Channel Leaders Talk Program Evolution, C-Suite Sponsorship, TSD Consolidation

August 15, 2022

Kaseya’s Auto-Renewal Changes Bring Glimmer of Hope to Partners Amid Turmoil

August 15, 2022

Analysts React to Rackspace Earnings with Downgrades

August 15, 2022

Industry Perspectives

View all

How to Take Shared Responsibility for Securing Cloud

August 11, 2022

Seize the Application Modernization Opportunity

August 2, 2022

A Growth Mindset: Your Organization’s Strategic Differentiator

August 1, 2022

Webinars

View all

Outsmarting RaaS: Implementation Strategies To Help Your Clients Before, During, and After a Ransomware Attack

August 23, 2022

Why it is Important to Upgrade Aging Servers and How to use Live Optics to Upgrade Efficiently

August 25, 2022

Executives at Home are Not Alright: An Intro to Digital Executive Protection

September 8, 2022

White Papers

View all

Work Goes Remote – (and Other Top ITOps Trends)

May 25, 2022

The New Bottom Line: How MSPs Can Meet the Healthcare Crisis While Evolving Their Businesses

April 19, 2022

How to build a Security Operations Center (on a budget)

April 4, 2022

Channel Futures TV

View all

ThreatLocker Preaches Zero Trust, Addresses Industry Competition

Microsoft Targeting Partners to Sell Teams, Windows 365 to SMBs, More

August 15, 2022

ScienceLogic Debuts New Partner Portal

August 9, 2022

Vonage a ‘Single Communications Stack Provider’ for Partners, Customers

June 27, 2022

Twitter

ChannelFutures

.@LumenCPP partner leaders say private equity investment in the advisory channel is validating the space to Lumen l… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

August 15, 2022
ChannelFutures

.@KaseyaCorp's auto-renewal changes bring glimmer of hope to partners amidst turmoil. Some of our #MSP501 and… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

August 15, 2022
ChannelFutures

.@AuCyble research shows #criticalinfrastructure at risk from exposed VNC endpoints. dlvr.it/SWhGhJ https://t.co/oMhiYxCT9L

August 15, 2022
ChannelFutures

Investment analysts are responding to @Rackspace’s Q2 earnings with downgrades, new price objectives.… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

August 15, 2022
ChannelFutures

In a new @juniperresearch study, @twilio ranked No. 1 for its flexible CCaaS product offering. Which companies plac… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

August 15, 2022
ChannelFutures

A few more booths left! Join an industry-leading lineup of 100+ suppliers at THE channel event of the fall. Partner… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

August 15, 2022
ChannelFutures

.@splunk vet Bill Hustad named @Okta's new #channelchief. dlvr.it/SWXmws https://t.co/ILQesul0Cz

August 12, 2022
ChannelFutures

The Gately Report: #BHUSA edition with @Hacker0x01, @Cisco, @SaltSecurity, @CISAgov, @ExtraHop, @IBMSecurity, more.… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

August 12, 2022

MSP 501

The industry's largest and most comprehensive partner awards program.

Newsletters and Updates

Sign up for The Channel Report, Channel Futures Update, MSP 501 Newsletter and more.

Live Channel Events

Get the latest information on the next industry-leading Channel Partners event.

Galleries

Educational slide shows and images from live events.

Media Kit And Advertising

Want to reach our audience? Access our media kit.

DISCOVER MORE FROM INFORMA TECH

  • Channel Partners Events
  • Telecoms.com
  • MSP 501
  • Black Hat
  • IoT World Today
  • Omdia

WORKING WITH US

  • Contact
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • Newsletter

FOLLOW Channel Futures ON SOCIAL

  • Privacy
  • CCPA: “Do Not Sell My Data”
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms
Copyright © 2022 Informa PLC. Informa PLC is registered in England and Wales with company number 8860726 whose registered and Head office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG.
This website uses cookies, including third party ones, to allow for analysis of how people use our website in order to improve your experience and our services. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the use of such cookies. Click here for more information on our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
X