Why Google doesn't like its phone bill

Some tiny phone companies can charge higher access fees, and Google Voice isn't happy with what can result.
(From The New York Times)

The story "Why Google doesn't like its phone bill" published November 1, 2009 at 6:55 PM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.

[gerrrg]

I am suspicious of the intent of AT&T, going back to their complaint against the merger of WiMax-related assets between Clearwire and Sprint. AT&T is merely looking after AT&T; while there's nothing wrong with that, anything that comes out of their legal department is certainly tinged with self-preservation over the benefit of the consumer.

I have no reason to place trust in whatever AT&T says.

The reality is, AT&T pays directly to these rural exchanges but AT&T also charges you for the service they provide, whereas Google does not charge for their service, and it's not requisite to use their GV for calling - one can merely use it to transcribe voicemail. Could the FCC force Google to connect and therefore either pay out of pocket or charge the end users? Sure, but think about it; this is a service that lies on top of existing phone service. If you can't connect for free using GV, you'd just use your existing service.

Therein lies the question...does AT&T get to force Google to connect these calls and pay, for what is essentially being provided for free?

[gfsdfge]

This article is about minor skirmish in the struggle for survival. The big telecoms are in a desperate situation. They are rapidly becoming outdated. In the next decade or two, old copper wire companies will go the way of the horse buggy whip companies. Communications systems are advancing rapidly and leaving copper behind. When GoogleDollars, MicroMoney, or Indian Business Machines perfect cloud computing (or whatever it will be called by then), the copper companies will be lost. Wireless and satellite will reign supreme for next five decades at least. Can the copper companies become the wireless/satellite companies? Yes, they are trying to do so now. It just takes ten years or more for them to move their big battleships in that direction. In the mean time they have to continually fight off/delay/discredit and just annoy the fast little outfits that threaten to get there first. So, they have to move in that direction and hope they have enough cash left in a few years to buy the market shares back from the entrepreneurs and hope one of them doesn?t turn into a competitor. Remember, American monopoly laws say ?There can be only three?.

[pentest]

The telcoms don't use copper, they use fiber to move its traffic.

Wireless is a red herring since nearly all wireless traffic goes across hard wire at some point.

[pentest]

More evidence that all infrastructure should be legitimate not for profit organizations. That includes power, phone, banks,and insurance companies.