roundtable: Telecom Post #9

roundtable: Telecom Post #9

Telecom Post #9

CWHITCOM@bentley.edu
Tue, 18 Jul 1995 23:45:54 -0400 (EDT) 

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 23:45:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: CWHITCOM@bentley.edu
Subject: Telecom Post #9
To: roundtable@cni.org
Message-Id: <01HT189EMZOI001NZI@bentley.edu>


====================================================
################                   #############
################                   ##          #   
   ##                              #############    
   ## ### #   ### ###  #  #    #   ##   #  ### ###
   ## #   #   #   #   # # #    #   ##  # # #    #    
   ## ##  #   ##  #   # # ##  ##   ##  # # ###  #
   ## #   #   #   #   # # # ## #   ##  # #   #  #
   ## ### ### ### ###  #  #    #   ##   #  ###  # 
====================================================
               Free Speech Media, LLC
                    July 18, 1995
                      Number 9
                       4 pages
====================================================
Compiled, written, and edited by Coralee Whitcomb
Please direct comments and inquiries to cwhitcom@bentley.edu
====================================================
The Telecom Post is posted to several distribution lists and is also available
from the CPSR listserv.  To subscribe, send to LISTSERV@CPSR.ORG with the 
message SUBSCRIBE TELECOM-POST YOUR NAME.
The Telecom Post will be published weekly while the U.S. Congress works on
a comprehensive overhaul of the U.S information delivery systems.
=====================================================
          TOPICS

     1.  Microsoft and Windows '95 - A Retraction and Apology
     2.  Regulatory Reform
     3.  HR 1555 - Sticking Points
     4.  Media Concentration
     5.  RBOC Overcharging Tendencies
     6.  ISDN for the Rest of Us
     7.  OTA at Risk Again
     8.  New Resource for Telecom Policy Information


My apologies to Telecom Post readers and to Microsoft for the
perpetuation of a set of untrue rumors regarding Windows '95 and
its "Registration Wizard".  These rumors found the light of day
in a late May issue of Information Week and were retracted in
the subsequent issue.  Last week stories in the San Jose Mercury
News and the Wall Street Journal reported on their persistence
in net lore.  I would sincerely appreciate it if any of you who
might have passed issue #8 on to others, would also pass along
this issue so the true facts get the same coverage.  The
National Consumers League, a nonprofit located in Washington,
D.C., distributed a sign-on letter to Bill Gates expressing
their concern over the bundling of Microsoft Networks with
Windows '95.  It did not make the claims I reported.  A board
member of the National Consumers League, however, works for
Issue Dynamics, a public relations firm engaged in this issue.
The fact sheet describing the alleged offensive features of
Windows '95 were bundled with the National Consumers League
material.  It did not include an identifying letterhead and,
therefore, erroneously appeared to be from the nonprofit.


The purpose of the "Wizard" is to offer an electronic version of
the paper-based registration card that comes with all Microsoft
products..  The user must volunteer to upload that information
and can limit it to name and address.  All information gathered
in this process is archived in the REGINFO.TXT file in the
Windows directory of the local computer.  There is no automatic
collection of serial numbers or product registration information
involved.  


The new Windows '95 user will be invited to load MSN just once -
upon installation.  If the user declines, an icon on the desktop
will read "Install MSN" but no further invitations will appear. 
Current beta version do not allow that icon to be removed from
the desktop, however, the icons of other service providers can
be dragged onto the desktop to join it.  These icons will be
found in the same location of the cascading menus that one would
expect.


This experience has given me much food for thought over the
power and reach of net communications.  As one contributor
commented, we must all adopt traditional Fifth Estate principles
of publication, otherwise the net will loose much of its
credibility and therefore, power.  Again, my apologies to you
all.



REGULATORY REFORM - KEEP UP THE PRESSURE
Thanks to public pressure, the actions of the Citizens for
Sensible Safeguards, and strong opposition by the White House,
S343, the Dole/Johnston regulatory reform bill has hit strong
resistance by Senate members.  Two votes for cloture (the
limitation of debate) put forth by Dole, have gone down to
defeat.  A third cloture motion might come up as early as
Thursday.  A substitute bill sponsored by Sen. Glenn and Sen.
Chafee, which would handle regulatory reform in a more sensible
fashion, narrowly lost by a vote of 48-52.  This tight vote will
force some degree of rewrite of S343.  The House has already
passed their version of regulatory reform.  That bill, while
different, has ominous provisions as well.   Vice President Gore
issued a press release on July 13 declaring that S343 "costs too
much, creates too much bureaucracy and gives too many lawyers
too many ways to file too many lawsuits."  President Clinton
used his weekly radio address on July 15 to report that "In the
last six months, we've seen these so-called regulatory reform
bills actually being written by lobbyists for the regulated
industries.  The Congress even brought the lobbyists in to the
hearings to explain what the bills did.  After all they had to;
the lobbyists had written the bills."


Key senators that need continuing public pressure are Nunn,
Specter, Feinstein, Robb, Rockefeller, Bryan, Cohen, Conrad,
Exon, Bob Graham, Mikulski, Snowe, Baucus, Reid and Bob Kerrey.  


S343 would require that every major rule (those with an economic
impact of over $50m) undergo a cost/benefit analysis and risk
assessment.  All existing rules would require review as well as
any new rules.  If this process is not completed in a specified
amount of time, the rule, new or old, would be discarded. 
Judicial review would be made available inviting endless
litigation.  Floor debate has exempted toxic waste cleanup
projects and federal standards for mammogram tests. Other
amendments for exemptions have been offered.  Regardless of the
tweaking, this bill threatens to strip away many of the public
safeguards built for worker safety, public health, and the
environment.



HR 1555, STICKING POINTS
Delay appears to be in the cards for the House Communications
Act of 1995.  A major snag is centered around a checklist item
requiring that "facilities-based competition" exist that is
"comparable in price, features and scope" to that of the local
Bell company.  And that this competition would have to exist in
both the residential and commercial markets.  The removal or
revision of this language is largely in the hands of Commerce
Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley (R-VA).  The long distance
industry is pressing hard to keep it while, naturally, the Bells
are pushing for removal.  "Comparable" and "scope" are under
scrutiny as they would appear to eliminate the claim that
providers such as MFS, Teleport Communications Group, or
Cellular One would qualify as competition and, therefore, allow
Bell entry into long distance.  


Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde (R-IL) is standing by
his bill HR1528 that would allow Justice a regulatory role in
determining competitive readiness for Bell entry into long
distance markets.  He had originally hoped that his bill would
become an amendment to HR 1555.  


Meanwhile time is running short for several Bell companies as
contract negotiations with the Communications Workers of America
(CWA) are coming up.  The distraction may substantially
interfere with their ongoing quest for early entry into long
distance.  The Washington Telecom Week reports that these issues
could push floor debate back to September.



MEDIA CONCENTRATION
A letter by Ralph Nader and the Consumer Project on Technology
does a beautiful job of bulleting the specific items in both
S652 and HR1555 that would serve to undermine the "competitive"
goals of both pieces of legislation.  Both bills lift most of
the ownership restrictions that now protect the "diversity of
voices" we, as Americans, assume as a national value.  Since
many of these issues have been covered previously, I encourage
you to contact James Love at 202-387-8030 or me,
cwhitcom@bentley.edu for a copy of the letter.


RBOC OVERCHARGING TENDENCIES 
The Washington Telecom Week of July 14 reports on a study done
by the New Networks Institute (a New York-based market research
firm) that claims an $85 billion overcharge of Bell customers
since 1984.  This overcharge can be traced to the bundling of
some local exchange services and the deregulation of certain
Bell services.  Bruce Kushnick, founder of the NNI, predicts
that "The telecom legislative proposals now being considered by
Congress will --if passed--only make matters worse for
consumers."  "What the Senate and House bills would do is
unleash the Bell-owned monopoly local exchange carriers on an
unsuspecting public -- all in he name of deregulation and a free
market."  He predicts that in the long run the market will
consist of a few large corporations marching "in lockstep when
they price their services."



ISDN FOR THE REST OF US
The Center for Responsive Law has mounted a campaign to lower
ISDN charges in order to provide citizens high speed access to
the Internet and other networks using the existing telephone
infrastructure until such time as competition actually serves to
lower prices.  Current pricing mechanisms allow ISDN prices to
far exceed the actual cost of providing the service. 



In order to expedite the entry of the general public onto the
information superhighway, they propose that 

     A common carrier providing local exchange telephone service
     that is the dominant carrier and that provides ISDN service 
     to residential subscribers and small businesses shall make 
     such a service available to the public for the price of a 
     voice grade line plus no more than the incremental cost of 
     providing the ISDN service.  This requirement shall expire when
     the Commission (FCC) determines that the common carrier 
     faces actual substantial competition for local exchange 
     services in the residential market.

More information can be had from the Center for Study of
Responsive Law, 202-387-8030



OTA AT RISK AGAIN
Last month the Office of Technology Assessment narrowly survived
an attempt in the House to ax its funding.  Now the Senate
Appropriations Subcommittee has zeroed out the budget again. 
The full committee was due to meet today.  Both Senator Stevens
and Senator Hollings are interested in rescuing the OTA and may
work on a joint amendment to that affect.



ALL YOU EVER WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT TELECOMMUNICATION REFORM
The Minnesota Citizens Online is assembling a online source of
Internet resources regarding these complex issues.  They are
soliciting references to WWW sites and Internet electronic mail
lists.  This collection can be found at http://www.mtn.org/mco/
and Mick Souder, the pagekeeper, is available from the page for
additions and comments.











[CNI Home Page]