Regulation Of Voice Over Internet Protocol Services example essay topic

Regulation of Voice over Internet protocol is a sticky issue. Should Voice over Internet Protocol be regulated? The first issue to that has to be resolved is, is Voice over Internet protocol a data service or is it a voice service (Regulatory Issues of VoIP)? The main question in determining if Voice over Internet protocol is a data service or a voice service is what matters more, the type of information that is being transmitted or the technology that performs the transmission. Currently only telecommunications are regulated by the FCC, data networks are not regulated. Access to telecommunications networks are taxed, but access to the Internet has not been taxed since the 1998 Internet Tax Freedom Act (Mark).

State and local governments have a strong financial interest in taxing Internet access. According to the Congressional Budget Office, local governments will loose between eighty and one hundred and twenty million dollars in taxes per year (Sullivan). Another important issue is 911 access, participation in funding 911, and providing accurate location of the 911 caller. One of the main benefits of Voice over Internet protocol phones is the ability to for the end user to relocate the phone and keep the same number, but that the physical location information supplied will not be valid (VoIP Challenges).

Beyond the technical distinctions between data and voice communications, is the way Voice of Internet Protocol services are sold. John Leutza, Director of the California Public Utility Commission Telecommunications Division, notes that Voice of Internet protocol vendors offer their services as a substitute for regular phone service (Big Shoe Drops: California Jumps on Regulation Bandwagon). The courts have not made the issue any clearer. On October 15 2003 Judge Michael J. Davis of the United States District Court of Minnesota, ruled on behalf of Vonage a Voice over Internet protocol provider that the service Vonage provided was not a telecommunications service, but a data service (Auchard).

Yet the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on October 6 2003 ruled that cable broadband companies are telecommunication companies (Hu). The regulation of Voice over Internet protocol services is likely to take several years of twisting and turning before a final decision is made. More than likely the end result will be a decision that will be a compromise between the never ending hunger of state and local governments for tax revenue and businesses desire to operate in an unfettered fashion. Auchard, Eric. Federal Judge Tells State to Lay Off Internet Phones. 26 Oct. 2003 Big Shoe Drops: California Jumps on Regulation Bandwagon.

26 Oct. 2003 Chary, Ben and Evan. Hansen Court hangs up state VoIP rules. 26 Oct. 2003 Hu, Jim. Court rejects FCC cable ruling.

26 Oct. 2003 Mark, Roy. House Approves Permanent Internet Access Tax Ban. 26 Oct. 2003 Regulatory Issues of VoIP. 26 Oct. 2003 Sullivan, Andy.

US senators renew push for Internet access-tax ban. 26 Oct. 2003 VoIP Challenges. 26 Oct. 2003.