MichiganTelephone
@anonymizer.com
 from:
robscullion 
|  reply to Noah Vail
Sarcasm aside, think about the legal liability
Before anyone in any U.S. telecom or cable companies start thinking this may be a good idea, they need to consider the possibility that someone may have a heart attack and use their FCC-mandated e911 over VoIP in an attempt to summon help. If your company is deliberately degrading the call and the 911 operator can't understand what is being said and the person dies, heaven help you when the jury gets through with you (and if I were the lawyer, I'd go after the scalp of whatever executive bastard thought this was a good idea, and make sure that he or she was personally named in the lawsuit, in addition to the company providing the broadband service).
Of course companies could possibly absolve themselves of some liability by admitting up front to customers that they deliberately degrade VoIP services not their own, but then that might discourage some customers from signing up for that company's service in the first place. The whole point of degrading service is to be sneaky, so the customer doesn't realize that you're deliberately interfering with the service he thinks he's paying for. But by being sneaky and hiding the fact that you do this, you paint a big old target on your company in case anyone's life, health, or property is put in jeopardy because you deliberately impeded their access to 911 via their VoIP connection, simply because you or your company are greedy bastards.
That is why I think this will never happen in the U.S. - we have too many lawyers that would give up their Rolexes (if not their firstborn) to have a case like this, with a large communications corporation (with VERY deep pockets) that many people (including some that would undoubtedly wind up on any jury hearing the case) inherently dislike as a defendendant, and evidence of deliberate interference with the lawful use of the service the customer is paying for (that is, Internet connectivity), which resulted in death or serious injury - particularly since the FCC has already in effect put their stamp of approval on the use of VoIP to provide e911 service. Then again, it may happen because some corporate executives are so arrogant that they think that no law applies to them and that they can just buy their way out of any trouble that they might get into, but as certain Enron executives found out, real courtrooms dispense real punishments, even to high-powered corporate executives (and while I am not a lawyer, if it were ever revealed which executive made the decision to implement the blocking, I would at least want to see that person put on trial for manslaughter, or something similar that is an appropriate charge under the circumstances).
I just hope nothing tragic has to happen for this sort of deliberate interference to be outlawed by the federal government. But if the unfortunate should happen, I hope it gets at least as much publicity as when that guy got shot in Texas and his family couldn't use 911 on their VoIP service to summon help, because the guy had neglected to activate the 911 service on his line by giving his address information (this was what started all the furor over lack of 911 service on VoIP). And I hope that whatever corporation is responsible for the deliberate degradation is named in the press, and held to account for their actions. |
·