Tad.Cook@cs.washington.edu (04/04/91)
No !!! NOT AGAIN !!! In article <telecom11.266.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? You're KIDDING, right? Is this urban computer legend coming back to haunt us AGAIN? Well, there never was a modem tax ... but just like with the phoney rumor that the FCC is about to ban religous broadcasting, the FCC receives LOTS of mail on it. Funny thing ... the folks promoting this rumor can never supply me with and NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) number! Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP
Ken Abrams <kabra437@pallas.athenanet.com> (04/05/91)
In article <telecom11.266.5@eecs.nwu.edu> SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? I assume that this YET ANOTHER re-hash of the proposal that died about four years ago. At that time, a file was being passed around on all the major nets. It usually began something like "I heard this on radio station WXYZ in Los Angeles yesterday.....". Things like this seem to NEVER die since the originator didn't put a date in the file. Some well meaning user stumbles across the thing years later and starts passing it around again. I even saw the Craig Shergold (cards to a dying boy) story crop up again last month. A plea to the original poster: Please provide us a little more detail on the situation you are asking about. If it does turn out to be the old story making the rounds again, please get back to your source and try to stop it. Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965 [Moderator's Note: And my thanks to everyone who wrote to debunk this old UL (Urban Legend) *hopefully* one last time. No modem tax, no surcharge, nothing. Please! Post these messages far and wide, and help bring a halt to this story. PAT]
oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov (04/05/91)
In article <telecom11.266.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? This one just won't die. Back a year or so ago the FCC considered an increase on rates charged for X.25 lines used by Compuserve, Tymenet and other data carriers. This class of service gets a VERY favorable rate. While the proposal was dropped fairly quickly, several news stories talked about an FCC proposal to raise the rates on phone lines used for data. Many readers (who wouldn't know about what X.25 was even if the news story used the term) assumed that this meant modems. An urban legend was born! Now someone sees some reference to that proposal and the whole thing starts again. I see lots of postings on a wide variety of newsgroups about every six months. If you doubt this, call the FCC. They do have a listed number. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman@icdc.llnl.gov (415) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything.
"Robert E. Novak" <rnovak@mips.com> (04/05/91)
In article <telecom11.266.5@eecs.nwu.edu> SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? I only have negative information. I tried the FCC Docket Information section (202-632-7535) and asked for any docket concerning modems. After about a ten minute wait, they said that thier database search came up empty. I then contacted the Common Carrier Office (202-632-6910). The woman I spoke to there said that they had nothing concerning modems in any proposed Common Carrier Tariffs. Robert E. Novak Mail Stop 5-10, MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!rnovak 950 DeGuigne Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 rnovak@mips.COM (rnovak%mips.COM@ames.arc.nasa.gov) +1 408 524-7183
"Fred R. Goldstein" <goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com> (04/06/91)
In article <telecom11.266.5@eecs.nwu.edu>, SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes... > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? That's one of the worst "chain letters" in telecom. PLEASE IGNORE IT! To summarize: Around 1987, the Reagan FCC proposed a change in telco billing practices that would have cost on-line services about $5/hour. The idea drew huge protest and was dropped under strong congressional pressure. The Bush FCC, to the best of my knowledge, disavowed the whole mess. The idea keeps popping up because old messages get forwarded and people don't keep track of the age, and 1987's news loses its date and looks new. That's a problem with E-mail; dates can get edited out. Fred R. Goldstein Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 486 7388 Do you think anyone else on the planet would share my opinions, let alone a multi-billion dollar corporation?