Date: 28 Aug 2000 06:15:10 -0400 Message-ID: <20000828101510.27869.qmail@xuxa.iecc.com> From: owner-telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org (Telecom Digest) To: telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org Subject: Telecom Digest V2000 #35 Reply-To: editor@telecom-digest.org Sender: owner-telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org Errors-To: owner-telecom-digest@telecom-digest.org Precedence: bulk X-UIDL: b8af5178ed8e6808953be9b1b85ea507 Status: RO X-Status: Telecom Digest Monday, August 28 2000 Volume 2000 : Number 035 In this issue: Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? legality of automated telphone spam Verizon's sense of humor REALLY sucks Re: legality of automated telphone spam Re: legality of automated telphone spam Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? Re: CWA Operating verizonREALLYsucks Web Site Re: Subject: Re: Wired News : New Toys for Cheating Students Re: legality of automated telphone spam Re: CWA Operating verizonREALLYsucks Web Site US West continues to burn?? Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? Re: Another one of AT&T's contribution to network radio Re: US West continues to burn?? Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? Re: legality of automated telphone spam Re: So now I'm a Telus customer again Re: AT&T's contribution to network radio Re: legality of automated telphone spam Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? [RRE]telecom development ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27 Aug 2000 08:07:30 -0400 From: andrew Subject: Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? John_David_Galt@acm.org wrote: > (Several years ago the FCC ordered 800 number owners to start paying > COCOT owners a fee for each call "for tying up their equipment" for > calls the COCOT couldn't charge the user for. Just to clarify, does this fee apply just to COCOTs, or to all payphones? Andrew - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 09:00:45 -0400 From: Leszek Subject: legality of automated telphone spam I was wondering whether a war-dialing computer that plays a (commercial) recording to the people that pick up the phone could be construed to be illegal under the language of the law that prohibits fax spamming. Probably not, judging by the number of robo-calls I get. Andrew - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 09:27:46 -0400 From: Wlevant@aol.com Subject: Verizon's sense of humor REALLY sucks > http://www.verizonreallysucks.com brings up the Communications Workers of > America web site, with special coverage of their strike against Verizon. IIRC, one of Verizon's lawyers with too much time on her hands sent 2600 a cease-and-desist letter (parenthetical thought : can you cease without desisting?) about verizonreallysucks.com, in response to which 2600 registered verizonshouldspendmoretimefixingitsnetworkandlessmoneyonlawyers.com. No word on whether this generated another c&d letter, but 2600 isn't the only one with this opinion...try doing a "whois" query at whois.networksolutions.com using the phrase "verizons*" or "verizonr*. Verizon is apparently EVERYBODY'S favorite LEC. Bill - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 10:30:55 -0400 From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: legality of automated telphone spam << I was wondering whether a war-dialing computer that plays a (commercial) recording to the people that pick up the phone could be construed to be illegal under the language of the law that prohibits fax spamming. Probably not, judging by the number of robo-calls I get. Andrew >> Yes it would, I believe under some state laws and Federal law there must me a real person to ask if yu want to here the crap they have, and must also allow you to disconnect. I use to get them all the time, but I got a Radio Shack CID box that allows me to place numbers in it that Telephone Co. CID does not block. It plays it little message then hangs up. If you do happen to get CID on any of those you can report them. Me I would just hunt them down and make their lives a living hell!!! Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II and Macintosh 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. http://www.delphi.com/gbbs The only good spammer is a dead one, have you hunted one down today? (c) - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 10:32:16 -0400 From: Dave Garland Subject: Re: legality of automated telphone spam It was a dark and stormy night when Leszek first wrote: >I was wondering whether a war-dialing computer that plays >a (commercial) recording to the people that pick up the >phone could be construed to be illegal under the language >of the law that prohibits fax spamming. Probably not. But in Minnesota it is generally prohibited by state law. Perhaps your state has something similar. 325E.27 Use of prerecorded or synthesized voice messages. A caller shall not use or connect to a telephone line an automatic dialing-announcing device unless: (1) the subscriber has knowingly or voluntarily requested, consented to, permitted, or authorized receipt of the message; or (2) the message is immediately preceded by a live operator who obtains the subscriber's consent before the message is delivered. This section and section 325E.30 do not apply to (1) messages from school districts to students, parents, or employees, (2) messages to subscribers with whom the caller has a current business or personal relationship, or (3) messages advising employees of work schedules. 325E.30 Time of day limit. A caller shall not use an automatic dialing-announcing device nor make any commercial telephone solicitation before 9:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. - -Dave - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 11:29:32 -0400 From: Phil Earnhardt Subject: Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? On 27 Aug 2000 02:34:06 -0400, John_David_Galt@acm.org wrote: >> Are the owners of COCOTs allowed to charge for calls to 800 >> information? A local pay phone was doing that. Particularly galling >> was that my prepaid calling card wouldn't complete the call either -- >> "because it's free". > >It's against federal law to charge for calls to toll-free numbers. >(Several years ago the FCC ordered 800 number owners to start paying >COCOT owners a fee for each call "for tying up their equipment" for >calls the COCOT couldn't charge the user for. Result: some 800/8xx >numbers now refuse all calls from pay phones. I would have let the >COCOTs charge the price of a local call instead.) I understand this. The COCOT's customer service droid said that they could legally charge for calls to 800 information. Is there a difference in the tariff between 800 information calls and all others? >I assume you'd complain to the FCC. How specifically? Can I e-mail a complaint to someone? Or do I need to send a snail-mail letter? Thanks. - --phil - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 11:56:44 -0400 From: hillary@hillary.net (hillary israeli) Subject: Re: CWA Operating verizonREALLYsucks Web Site On 26 Aug 2000 21:38:59 -0400, wrote: * *But it may not be common knowledge that someone else grabbed the domain *verizonreallysucks.com: You don't think? But doesn't everyone read 2600? - -h. - -- hillary israeli.....................................hillary@netaxs.com "So that's 2 T-1s and a newsfeed....would you like clues with that?" hillary@hillary.net: for debugging your net or deworming your pet Net Access...The NSP for ISPs....The NOC that rocks around the clock. - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 11:57:08 -0400 From: Rob McMillin Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Wired News : New Toys for Cheating Students "Richards, Sandra" wrote: > >Most wireless industry experts, however, predict that someday teachers > >in secondary and higher education will administer tests on PDAs, > >formatting them so that every student has a different set of > >questions. Imagine how upset you'd be if the answer you received from > >your friend corresponded to a completely different question. > > > Oh man ... do you realize this technology may blow the concept of > standardized testing out the window (College Boards, GMAT, LSAT, GRE, > etc) I'm not sure how this could be true. Each year the SAT is different, yet each year it's a benchmark. My point is that if you apply a selected list of 200 questions from a list of 20000, applied in random order, it's still a standardized test, but cheating becomes harder. - -- http://www.pricegrabber.com | Dog is my co-pilot. - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 12:38:05 -0400 From: sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net (Steve Sobol) Subject: Re: legality of automated telphone spam >>From 'Leszek': >I was wondering whether a war-dialing computer that plays >a (commercial) recording to the people that pick up the >phone could be construed to be illegal under the language >of the law that prohibits fax spamming. Could be? Is. It's covered in a separate portion of the same law. - -- North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, BOFH - President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor Linux Instructor, PC/LAN Program, Natl. Institute of Technology, Akron, OH sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net - 888.480.4NET - 216.619.2NET - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 18:36:05 -0400 From: dannyb@panix.com (danny burstein) Subject: Re: CWA Operating verizonREALLYsucks Web Site In hillary@hillary.net (hillary israeli) writes: >*But it may not be common knowledge that someone else grabbed the domain >*verizonreallysucks.com: Which is NOT run by the CWA, but sometimes points to it. see the spoiler at the end >You don't think? But doesn't everyone read 2600? (And yet another person grabbed "2600reallysucks.com") Or listen to "off the hook" on WBAI, 99.5 FM NYC Tuesdays 20:00 (or via RealAudio on the website) danny 'does "2600" have any telco history meaning?' burstein spoiler: There's a long-standing magazine called "2600, the Hacker's Quarterly" (formerly monthly), published by Emmanuel Goldstein. Among other annoyances to people with no sense of humo[u]r, the 2600 folk posted the DeCCus code on their website, and then, once a TRO was issued against them, added in links to other places that did. A couple of weeks ago Emmanuel's group lost the lawsuit about this. Appeals are underway. Anyway, he (like many other people in the NY area) has no love for NY Tel/BA/Verizon. So.. he tried registering the domain "verizonsucks.com" but discovered they had alrady done so. Then.. he registered "verizonreallysucks.com". Shortly afterwards, he received a most annoying "cease and desist" letter from Verizon. At which point he registered "verizonshouldspendmoremoneyonitsnetworkandlessonlawyers.com" In a show of something or another, people have registered just about any permuatation of Verizon possible.. further info: http://www.2600.com - -- _____________________________________________________ Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com [to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded] - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 21:10:54 -0400 From: John De Hoog Subject: US West continues to burn?? ClariNet news service today ran a story on the wildfires raging in the Western US, under the title, "Thirteen new fires as US west continues to burn". Someone, or some computer program, mistakenly posted the article in the news groups clari.tw.telecom.misc, clari.tw.telecom.phone_service, and clari.tw.telecom. I imagine it caused some concern for a moment or two among those who believed it really was a telecom story. - -- John De Hoog http://dehoog.org - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 22:05:38 -0400 From: "Green, Andrew" Subject: Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? >> Are the owners of COCOTs allowed to charge for calls to 800 >> information? A local pay phone was doing that. > > It's against federal law to charge for calls to toll-free > numbers. Er, by anyone? Hyatt Hotels will ding you a dollar for calling a toll-free access line from your hotel room. Interestingly, other toll-free numbers are no charge... - -- Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. 101 N. Wacker, Ste. 1800 http://www.datalogics.com Chicago, IL 60606-7301 - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 22:15:05 -0400 From: "Green, Andrew" Subject: Re: Another one of AT&T's contribution to network radio >> Whereas formerly there was a big RCA on top of the building >> (known then as the RCA building) there is now a very >> uninteresting looking pair of letters G E on top of the >> building now. (BTW, those are very uninteresting to me... >> why didn't they use the "scripted" GE that the company has >> used for year?)" You mean this? http://www.ge.com/images/mastlogo.gif I'm told that's known (fondly) inside the company as The Meatball. :-) > Probably because the script would be harder to read at a > distance. If memory serves, they do have it backlit on the outside of at least one of their offices in Cincinnati, and it's quite legible. Looks a lot classier than the "G E" they stuck up in New York, too. - -- Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. 101 N. Wacker, Ste. 1800 http://www.datalogics.com Chicago, IL 60606-7301 - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 21:23:54 -0500 From: Daniel Seagraves Subject: Re: US West continues to burn?? On 27 Aug 2000, John De Hoog wrote: > ClariNet news service today ran a story on the wildfires raging in > the Western US, under the title, "Thirteen new fires as US west > continues to burn". > > Someone, or some computer program, mistakenly posted the article in > the news groups clari.tw.telecom.misc, clari.tw.telecom.phone_service, > and clari.tw.telecom. I imagine it caused some concern for a moment > or two among those who believed it really was a telecom story. Well, I doubt the fires are any good for the COs in the area... ^_^ "Confuse, annoy, and DEE-STROY!" -- Jet Wolf | "Nothing Happens." -- ADVENT "You'd be surprised what you can live through..." -- Anonymous "...A man can pass his family and his name down through his sons, but it's his honour that gets passed through his daughters. He can see the best and worst of life in his girls. A daughter is something far too precious, and he'll do anything to protect her." -- Reichsfuehrer Siegfried Koenig, _Matrose_Mond_, David Oliver ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 22:20:38 -0400 From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? << Er, by anyone? Hyatt Hotels will ding you a dollar for calling a toll-free access line from your hotel room. Interestingly, other toll-free numbers are no charge... >> A few years ago a Best Western In Ojai, Calif. Hit me with charges for 800 calls, local calls, and for having a phone in my room. I took them to task with my credit card company over the charges which showed up after I had checked out, that got no real reply, so I went farther; to the PUC after they said it was PacBell charging, Both answered the complaint and the charges were removed, still don't understand, but I do know at the time they were not allowed to charge for 800 calls, that was per the PUC. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II and Macintosh 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. http://www.delphi.com/gbbs The only good spammer is a dead one, have you hunted one down today? (c) - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 23:39:57 -0400 From: djb0x7736d717@scream.org (Dan) Subject: Re: legality of automated telphone spam Steven Lichter wrote: > > I was wondering whether a war-dialing computer that plays a (commercial) > > recording to the people that pick up the phone could be construed to be > > illegal under the language of the law that prohibits fax spamming. > > > > Probably not, judging by the number of robo-calls I get. > > Yes it would, I believe under some state laws and Federal law there must > [be] a real person to ask if [you] want to [hear] the crap they have, and > must also allow you to disconnect. The new trend, strangely, is devices that hang up if a live person answers, and leave their commercial on your answering machine/voicemail if they get that instead. Quite annoying. I've got one such message saved right now - it included the sender's name and phone number in its spiel about a great home business opportunity. Once I get a chance to research the applicable laws, I hope to launch a tacnuke LART. I'm not sure whether the law applies to residential lines, business ones, or both, though. - -Dan - -- Dan Birchall - Palolo Valley, Honolulu HI - http://dan.scream.org Post your reviews; get paid: http://epinions.scream.org/join.html Free web-based e-mail: http://www.themail.com/ref.htm?ref=1163079 My address expires - take out the hex stamp if your reply bounces - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 27 Aug 2000 23:45:25 -0400 From: langlo6@ibm.net Subject: Re: So now I'm a Telus customer again Joey: You asked: >What gives? And why on earth is the CRTC approving this nonsense? I'm not an apologist for the Commission, but I think if you go back and look at their Telecom decisions, Letter Decisions and Public Notices issued since 1995 that there is a trend to a "hands off" attitude about the industry. This is definitely the case with the Broadcasting Decisions since just about everything to do with CanCon has been removed from Conditions of License for several years now. I even overheard one of the staff say that the Canadian Telecom industry was headed towards two players. Regards, David Langlois - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 2000 00:02:11 -0400 From: "Ed Ellers" Subject: Re: AT&T's contribution to network radio Dale Neiburg wrote: "That procedure had fallen by the wayside when I joined NPR in the '70s, when we used telco land lines for program distribution, but we had our own variant. During off-hours, we fed country & western music down the lines. That was the telco test board techs' preferred genre, and they were careful to keep our lines sounding good!" ABC Radio still feeds music over its satellite channels between programs, both on its own networks and feeds it does for others (such as Rush Limbaugh, who also rents an ABC studio). "And, in fact, they did so well that slipups stand out in my memory as distinctly rare events! (But there was the morning that NPR got swapped with CBS-TV, so that people tuning in to Morning Edition heard Captain Kangaroo, and kids turning on the TV to watch the Captain heard him speaking with the voice of Bob Edwards....)" I remember one incident during a snowstorm in late fall 1966 where all three TV networks were going to the wrong affiliates in Louisville for a while -- the NBC affiliate got ABC (showing Batman), the ABC affiliate got CBS and the CBS affiliate got NBC. My father, knowing just that "the phone company" was somehow involved, went outside to see if any wires were down. - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 2000 00:20:00 -0400 From: stevenl11@aol.com (Steven Lichter) Subject: Re: legality of automated telphone spam djb0x7736d717 << The new trend, strangely, is devices that hang up if a live person answers, and leave their commercial on your answering machine/voicemail if they get that instead. Quite annoying. I've got one such message saved right now - it included the sender's name and phone number in its spiel about a great home business opportunity. Once I get a chance to research the applicable laws, I hope to launch a tacnuke LART. I'm not sure whether the law applies to residential lines, business ones, or both, though. >> What is worse then that is the trend to calling Cell phones. I was getting at least 2 calls a day and more on my voice mail. I tracked the source down and made a little trouble for them. I have heard that the FCC and the California PUC are looking into complaints since the Called party pays for the call, at least it does here. I have plenty of minutes but it adds up. Should it cut into my calls will do more then just make things hard. I'll hunt them down. Apple Elite II 909-359-5338. Home of GBBS/LLUCE, support for the Apple II and Macintosh 24 hours 2400/14.4. An OggNet Server. http://www.delphi.com/gbbs The only good spammer is a dead one, have you hunted one down today? (c) - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 2000 00:40:05 -0400 From: quonk@my-deja.com Subject: Re: COCOTs charging for 800 information? > I understand this. The COCOT's customer service droid said that they > could legally charge for calls to 800 information. Is there a > difference in the tariff between 800 information calls and all others? > > >I assume you'd complain to the FCC. > > How specifically? Can I e-mail a complaint to someone? Or do I need to > send a snail-mail letter? > > http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/enforce/complaints.html And I seriously doubt that very many COCOT owners have filed tariffs, by the way. Which leads to an interesting question. Is AT&T really paying 28 cents per call they get to 800-555-1212 from a payphone? Are they charging this back to the person whose listing was asked for? No wonder they want to get out of the business. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ Date: 28 Aug 2000 01:06:50 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: [RRE]telecom development Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 06:49:48 -0700 From: Phil Agre Subject: [RRE]telecom development [I won't send these summaries of Telecommunications Policy regularly, but you can subscribe to them at . I've reformatted this message to 70 columns.] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" option. For information about RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, see http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/rre.html =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 19:58:10 +0200 From: "Bruce Girard" Subject: telecom development - theme of TP 24 8/9 The editorial, abstracts, a book review and two articles from Telecommunications Policy 24-8 & 9 (September, October 2000) are now online at http://tpeditor.com . This theme of the issue is "Telecom Development", and it takes a timely look at the policies and institutional reforms associated with attempts to deal with the well-documented "digital divides"; between developed and developing countries, and between rural and urban areas within individual countries. In his editorial, William Melody writes: "Telecom Development used to be a special problem only for developing countries. It was essentially expanding fixed line voice telephone networks toward a universal national coverage, as defined by particular national governments. The causal relation between access to telephone service and economic and social development was unclear. The spread of telephone service was not seen by most policymakers and investors as a priority, or even a significant factor in promoting development. It could not compete with the needs for access to food, water, roads, health, education, electricity and other essential infrastructure resources. It was generally believed that telephones came after a certain level of development was achieved, and then facilitated the achievement of more advanced levels of development. Universal telephone service typically was seen more as a product of advanced development than an essential resource for development. "Over the past two decades the situation has changed dramatically. The changing role of telecom services in all economies, and an expanding research literature documenting the barriers, restrictions, costs and penalties of inadequate telecom service for participation in economic and social life in all countries has brought the issue of telecom development to the forefront of policy and investment analysis. Access to basic telecom services makes it much more feasible and efficient to establish and maintain access to food, water, health, education, etc., in the poor countries. Access to higher speed Internet services is essential for many small towns in the rich countries if they are to keep their businesses from moving elsewhere." On the tpeditor.com website you will find the issue's editorial, table of contents, abstracts as well as book reviews, links to some authors' pre-publication versions of their articles, and the complete Current Statistics article, "Investment and Growth of the Information Infrastructure: Summary Results of a Global Survey" by Bjorn Wellenius, Senior Telecommunications Adviser, the World Bank Carlos Alberto Primo Braga, infoDev, the World Bank and Christine Zhen-Wei Qiang, Economist, CITPO, the World Bank. See the table of contents below for more information on the issue, or visit the website at http://www.tpeditor.com - - - - Telecommunications Policy Volume 24, No. 8/9 (September/October 2000) Theme: Telecom Development TABLE OF CONTENTS FROM THE EDITOR -- William H. Melody CURRENT STATISTICS Investment and Growth of the Information Infrastructure: Summary Results of a Global Survey -- Bjorn Wellenius, Senior Telecommunications Adviser, the World Bank Carlos Alberto Primo Braga, infoDev, the World Bank and Christine Zhen-Wei Qiang, Economist, CITPO, the World Bank - Full article Online CASE STUDIES Institutional Roots of Post-Privatisation Regulatory Outcomes -- Manuel Abdala, LECG Consulting, Argentina Network Decompensation and Regional Imbalances in Rate Reform Processes: A Case Study in South America -- DarÌo Goussal and MarÌa Sandra UdrÌzar Lezcano, Rural Telecommunications Research Group (GTR-UNNE) Northeastern University at Resistencia - School of Engineering, Argentina FULL LENGTH ARTICLES Rohan Samarajiva, Visiting Professor, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands and School of Journalism & Communication, The Ohio State University, Columbus OH -- The Role of Competition in Institutional Reform of Telecommunications: Lessons from Sri Lanka Ping Gao and Kalle Lyytinen, University of Jyvaskyla, Faculty of Technology, Finland -- Transformation of China's Telecommunications Sector: A Macro Perspective Milton Mueller, Syracuse University School of Information Studies, USA and Peter Lovelock, Telecommunications Research Project, Hong Kong University, China -- The WTO and China's Ban on Foreign Investment in Telecommunication Services: A Game-Theoretic Analysis C. Ann Hollifield, The University of Georgia, Dept. of Telecommunications and Joseph Donnemeyer, Gwen H. Wolford and Robert Agunga, The Ohio State University, USA -- The Effects of Rural Telecommunications Self-Development Projects on Local Adoption of New Technologies G. C. Pentzaropoulos and D. I. Giokas, University of Athens, Department of Economics, Greece -- Evaluating the Productive Efficiency of Regionally-Structured Telecommunications Networks: Evidence from Greece BOOK REVIEWS Are Poor Countries Losing the Information Revolution? By Francisco Rodriguez and Ernest J. Wilson, III, infoDev Working Paper, The World Bank, Washington DC, May, 2000 (Heather E. Hudson, McLaren School of Business, University of San Francisco) - Book Review Online Are Poor Countries Losing the Information Revolution? By Francisco Rodriguez and Ernest J. Wilson, III, infoDev Working Paper, The World Bank, Washington DC, May, 2000 (Professor Nick von Tunzelmann, SPRU -- Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex) - Book Review Online All Connected. Universal Service in Telecommunications by Bruce Langtry (Jill Hills, School of Communication, Design and Media, UK) TP Book Review Online - - - - Telecommunications Policy is concerned with the changing roles of telecommunications in the economy and society. It provides a forum for research and debate amongst academics, policymakers, regulators, industry managers, consultants and other professionals. Its orientation is multidisciplinary and international, encompassing issues of both theory and practice. Its scope includes issues of telecom reform at national, regional and international levels, including issues confronting both developed and developing countries. It pays particular attention to the implications of convergence for knowledge infrastructure development, management and regulation. - - info@tpeditor.com http://tpeditor.com - - - - Bruce Girard - bgirard@comunica.org or bruceg@sepa.tudelft.nl TU Delft: +(31-15) 278.8548 - Fax: +(31-20) 882.6517 Home office: +(31-15) 213.3830 - Mobile: +(31-6) 2039.6958 Kloksteeg 17b, 2611 BL Delft, The Netherlands - -- The Telecom Digest is currently robomoderated. Please mail messages to editor@telecom-digest.org. ------------------------------ End of Telecom Digest V2000 #35 *******************************