<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LIRNEasia &#187; Abortion Rights Group</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lirneasia.net/tag/abortion-rights-group/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lirneasia.net</link>
	<description>a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank active across the Asia Pacific</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:38:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>Convergence versus common-carrier principles</title>
		<link>http://lirneasia.net/2007/09/convergence-versus-common-carrier-principles/</link>
		<comments>http://lirneasia.net/2007/09/convergence-versus-common-carrier-principles/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 10:18:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rohan Samarajiva</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abortion Rights Group]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[his/her operator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political tool]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telecom law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lirneasia.net/2007/09/convergence-versus-common-carrier-principles/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It has long been a staple of telecom law that telcos could not decide what went through the tube.&#160;&#160; According to the article below, this principle does not apply to text messages.&#160;&#160; One academic apologist goes as far as claiming that competition will look after the problem.&#160; He misses the point that under present arrangements [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It has long been a staple of telecom law that telcos could not decide what went through the tube.&nbsp;&nbsp; According to the article below, this principle does not apply to text messages.&nbsp;&nbsp; One academic apologist goes as far as claiming that competition will look after the problem.&nbsp; He misses the point that under present arrangements there is only one way to reach a mobile user with a text message, though his/her operator (an equivalent condition does not exist in the Internet).&nbsp; Until that changes, the common-carrier principle must applied, be it for text or voice.&nbsp;&nbsp; </p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html?th&amp;emc=th">Verizon Rejects Messages of Abortion Rights Group &#8211; New York Times</a> <br /> <br />
<blockquote>Text messaging is a growing political tool in the United States and a dominant one abroad, and such sign-up programs are used by many political candidates and advocacy groups to send updates to supporters.</p>
<p>But legal experts said private companies like Verizon probably have the legal right to decide which messages to carry. The laws that forbid common carriers from interfering with voice transmissions on ordinary phone lines do not apply to text messages.</p></blockquote>
<p class="poweredbyperformancing">Powered by <a href="http://scribefire.com/">ScribeFire</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://lirneasia.net/2007/09/convergence-versus-common-carrier-principles/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

