<i>&gt; AT&amp;T is much</i>
<i>&gt;more vulnerable, as is AOL or CI$ to governmental rulesmanship than</i>
<i>&gt;would be Joe's Internet Provider and Car Wash, Inc.</i>
Perhaps, but I believe it is just as likely that the opposite will happen.
The telco's are common carriers-- they must carry whatever traffic comes
their way. While the *users* of their services may break the law, the phone
companies are not held responsible. AT&amp;T is used to the role of common
carrier. Which raises the question, the current un-regulatory environment
notwithstanding, would Internet users be better off if ISP's were also
designated as common carriers?
Apparently at the present time they, and the online services, come under the
category of "enhanced telephone services providers" and are not subject to
direct FCC regulation because they are "enhancing" the service they are
buying from phone companies which are already common carriers. Still, as
common carriers, phone companies are buying and selling to each other all
the time, so no reason ISP's could not be common carriers and do the same thing.
Under an ISP as common carrier scenario (while there may be many objections
on other issues) the censorship issue may actually be reduced.
Bob Schmidt - Provider Marketing Group
Visit our clients at: <a href="<a href="http://anetweb.com">http://anetweb.com</a>">http://anetweb.com</a>
<a href="<a href="http://imarket.com">http://imarket.com</a>">http://imarket.com</a> http://florida.com
----
The Internet Marketing Discussion List is sponsored this week by:
Decisive makes surveying by e-mail &amp; Internet easy! &lt;<a href="<a href="http://www.decisive.com">http://www.decisive.com</a>">http://www.decisive.com</a>&gt;
Post a message to this group by filling in the form below.