wdegnan@f39.n382.z1.fidonet.org (William Degnan) (02/04/90)
Is anyone familiar with details where a LEC has claimed (with or without success) that state regulators have no juristiction over Gateway Services -- once permission to provide the service has been granted? It was suggested that PacTel had taken the position that it was an interstate service offering and therefore outside CPUC's jurisdiction. Has anybody heard anything like this? What's the story? Regards, Bill Disclaimer: Contents do not constitute "advice" unless we are on the clock William Degnan | wdegnan@mcimail.com !wdegnan@at&tmail.com Communications Network Solutions | William.Degnan@telenet.com P.O. Box 9530, Austin, TX 78766 | voice: 512 323-9383 William Degnan -- via The Q Continuum (FidoNet Node 1:382/31) UUCP: ...!rpp386!tqc!39!wdegnan ARPA: wdegnan@f39.n382.z1.FIDONET.ORG