Voice over internet protocol (VoIP) development and public policy implications

info

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 3-15

  Meisel, John B ^a   Needles, Michael ^a  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY EDWARDSVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication technologies; Internet; Protocols; Regulation

Indexed keywords

INTERNET; TELECOMMUNICATION;

EID: 18144416610     PISSN: 14636697     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/14636690510596766     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Brough, W., Cox, B., Gattuso, J., McClure, D., Odlyzko, A., Pociask, S., Thierer, A. and Woroch, G. (2004), Free Ride: Deficiencies of the MCI “Layers” Policy Model and the Need for Principles that Encourage Competition in the New IP World, New Millennium Research Council, Washington, DC.
2. BusinessWeek (2004), “More net phone tie-ups”, BusinessWeek, September 13, p. 46.
3. Federal Communications Commission (1998), “Memorandum opinion and order”, In the Matter of GTE Telephone Operating Costs, GTOC Tariff No. 1, GTOC Transmittal No. 1148, CC Docket No. 98-79, October 30, FCC, Washington, DC.
4. Federal Communications Commission (1998), “Stevens Report 1998”, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, FCC, Washington, DC.
5. Federal Communications Commission (2002), “Petition for declaratory ruling”, In the Matter of Petition for Declaratory Ruling that AT&T's Phone-to-phone IP Telephony Services Are Exempt from Access Charges, CC Docket No. 02-261, October 18, FCC, Washington, DC.
6. Federal Communications Commission (2003), “Petition for declaratory ruling”, In the Matter of Petition for Declaratory Ruling that pulver.com's Free World Dialup Is neither Telecommunications nor a Telecommunications Service, CC Docket No. 04-27, February 5, FCC, Washington, DC.
7. Federal Communications Commission (2003), “Petition for declaratory ruling”, In the Matter of Vonage Holdings Corporation's Petition for Declaratory Ruling, CC Docket No. 03-211, September 22, FCC, Washington, DC.
8. Federal Communications Commission (2003), “Petition for forbearance”, In the Matter of Level 3 Communications LLC Petition for Forbearance under 47 USC §160(c) from Enforcement of 47 USC §251(g), Rule 51.701(b)(1), and Rule 69.5(b), CC Docket No. 03-266, December 23, Vol. 23, FCC, Washington, DC.
9. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Petition of SBC Communications Inc. for forbearance”, In the Matter of Petition of SBC Communications Inc For Forbearance from the Application of Title II Common Carrier Regulation to IP Platform Services, CC Docket No. 04-29, February 5, FCC, Washington, DC.
10. Federal Communications Commission (2004), Federal Communications Commission Releases Data on High-speed Services for Internet Access, June 8, FCC, Washington, DC.
11. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Memorandum opinion and order”, In the Matter of Petition for Declaratory Ruling that pulver.com's Free World Dialup Is neither Telecommunications nor a Telecommunications Service, CC Docket No. 04-27, February 12, FCC, Washington, DC.
12. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Order”, In the Matter of Petition for Declaratory Ruling that AT&T's Phone-to-phone IP Telephony Services Are Exempt from Access Charges, CC Docket No. 02-261, April 21, FCC, Washington, DC.
13. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Memorandum opinion and order”, In the Matter of Vonage Holdings Corporation Petition for Declaratory Ruling Concerning an Order of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, CC Docket No. 03-211, November 9, FCC, Washington, DC.
14. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Reply comments of Net2phone, Inc.”, In the Matter of IP-enabled Service, CC Docket No. 04-36, July 14, FCC, Washington, DC.
15. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Reply comments of BellSouth Corporation”, Petition of SBC Communications Inc. for Forbearance from the Application of Title II Common Carrier Regulation to IP Platform Services, CC Docket No. 04-29, July 14, FCC, Washington, DC.
16. Federal Communications Commission (2004), “Reply comments of BellSouth Corporation”, In the Matter of IP-enabled Service, CC Docket No. 04-36, July 14, FCC, Washington, DC.
17. Federal Communications Commission (2004i), “Reply comments of National Cable & Telecommunications Association”, In the Matter of IP-Enabled Service, CC Docket No. 04-36, July 14, FCC, Washington, DC.
18. Federal Communications Commission (2004), New Figures Show Broadband Deployment Accelerating in the US, September 9, FCC, Washington, DC.
19. Hu, J. (2003), “Broadband adoption skyrockets worldwide”, News.com, September 16, available at: http://news.com.com (accessed September 7, 2004).
20. McArdle, D. (2004), “Europe is ‘fixated’ on broadband access”, Electronic News.net, July 15, available at: http://electricnews.net/news.html?code=9543415 (accessed November 19).
21. Meisel, J. and Levin, S. (2003), “The FCC and the internet's challenges to traditional regulatory policy”, info, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 8-16.
22. Pulver, J. (2004), “Transcript of testimony before Congress on bill S.2281, The VoIP Regulatory Freedom Act”, June 16, available at: http://pulverblog.pulver.com/archives/000891.html
23. Sicker, D. (2002), “Applying a layered policy model to IP-based voice services”, 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS ’03), Big Island, HI.
24. Werbach, K. (2002), “A layered model for internet policy”, Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law, draft available at: www.edventure.com/conversation/article.cfm?counter=2414930
25. Whitt, R. (2003), “A horizontal leap forward: formulating a new public policy framework based on the network layers model”, MCI Public Policy Paper, Version 1, December.
26. Yang, C. and Green, H. (2004), “Welcome to broadband city”, BusinessWeek, October 4, p. 40.