|
 As
the popularity of VoIP grows, and PSTN users switch to VoIP in
increasing numbers, governments are becoming more interested in
regulating VoIP in a manner similar to PSTN services.
In the U.S., the Federal Communications Commission now requires all
VoIP operators who don't support Enhanced 911 to attach a sticker
warning that traditional 911 services aren't available. The FCC
recently required VoIP operators to support CALEA wiretap
functionality [1]. The Telecommunications Act of 2005 proposes adding
more traditional PSTN regulations, such as local number portability
and universal service fees. Other future legal issues include
wiretapping and network neutrality.
Some Latin American countries, fearful for their state owned telephone
services, have placed restrictions on the use of VoIP, including in
Panama where VoIP is taxed, while in Mexico it is illegal to sell VoIP
or equipment exclusively used to obtain VoIP [citation needed]. In
Ethiopia, where the telecommunication service is monopolized by a
single service provider, it is a criminal offence to give services in
VoIP. The country has installed firewalls to prevent international
calls being made using VoIP. These measures were taken after a
popularity in VoIP reduced the income generated by the
telecommunication company.
In the European Union, the treatment of VoIP service providers is a
decision for each Member State's national telecoms regulator, which
must use competition law theory to define relevant national markets
and then determine whether any service provider on those national
markets has "significant market power" (and so should be subject to
certain obligations). A general distinction is usually made between
VoIP services that function over managed networks (via broadband
connections) and VoIP services that function over unmanaged networks (essentially,
the Internet): - the former are often considered to be a viable
substitute for PSTN telephone services (despite the problems of power
outages and lack of geographical information); as a result, major
operators that provide these services (in practice, incumbent
operators) may find themselves bound by obligations of price control
or accounting separation; - the latter are often considered to be too
poor in quality to be a viable substitute for PSTN services; as a
result, they may be provided without any specific obligations, even if
a service provider has "significant market power". As concerns
obligations which can exist independently of market power (e.g. the
obligation to offer access to emergency calls), the relevant EU
Directive is unfortunately terribly drafted and it is impossible to
say definitely whether VoIP service providers of either type are bound
by them. A review of the EU Directive is under way and should be
complete by 2007. |
|
