Thanks to FCC rules, AT&T is obligated pay these fees to the local phone exchanges to connect the calls, primarily to local numbers in Iowa and South Dakota, but in other rural states as well.
intimidating names that begin with t - Share phone numbers for sex chat
A side note to the creepy dudes, you know if you just want pictures of girl’s boobs you can turn off Google safe search and literally anything you type in will bring up boobs. Here are some steps to guide you through your sexting experience. Here’s an actual text a female friend of mine received from a guy WHO GOT HER NUMBER FROM FACEBOOK: There are obviously so many things wrong with this.
Now I know you’re excited and can’t wait to dive into your new world of textual exploration but slow down. The first mistake was hunting down a phone number on Facebook like Joey Greco from Cheaters but that’s a whole other set of issues.
Technically, the dispute is over FCC regulations governing how long-distance and local phone companies pay each other for traffic that passes from national to local networks.
Since Congress deregulated the telecommunications industry in 1996, much of this traffic comprises extremely lucrative sex chat lines, which the national carriers wind up paying for.
AT&T, which has the exclusive right to market Apple's i Phone in the U.
S., which Google Voice will compete against, has argued that Google Voice should also have to connect expensive rural calls.But why all the interest in Google Voice from AT&T, Congress and now the FCC?After all, Google Voice is available by invite only, and only a relative handful of people are using it. And why is AT&T expending so much energy to create roadblocks to its tiny new rival?And for the coup de grace, the local exchanges then split AT&T's fees -- which amount to millions of dollars every month -- with the phone sex companies which then turn around and use that money to advertise their services, completing the self-perpetuating cycle.In 2008, AT&T warned that traffic pumping could force higher rates for phone consumers across the country to offset some 0 million in extra costs due to these fees the previous year."Indeed, if one were to replace 'Google' with 'AT&T,' and call blocking' with 'no pay' in AT&T's [letter to the FCC], Northern Valley and Sancom would have little to add to describe AT&T's unlawful campaign." "Without a hint of irony, AT&T concludes that 'the Commission cannot, through inaction or otherwise, give Google a special privilege to play by its own rules,'" Buntrock added.