lmg@hoqax.att.com (Lawrence M Geary) (08/19/89)
I recently tried to make a call using 10288 from the Dunes hotel in
Las Vegas. The hotel blocked 10288 access from the room phones. (And
the hotel operator lied about how to reach AT&T, giving me a sequence
that connected me to an AOS called "OSW".) They also denied access to
10288 from PAY telephones located on the premises. I had to leave the
complex and walk down the street to make my call.
Question: Is this legal?
--
lmg@hoqax.att.com Think globally ... Post locally att!hoqax!lmgmjb@uunet.uu.net (Mike Bryan) (08/20/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0310m02@vector.dallas.tx.us> lmg@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (lawrence.m.geary) writes: >I recently tried to make a call using 10288 from the Dunes hotel in >Las Vegas. The hotel blocked 10288 access from the room phones. (And >the hotel operator lied about how to reach AT&T, giving me a sequence >that connected me to an AOS called "OSW".) They also denied access to >10288 from PAY telephones located on the premises. > >Question: Is this legal? I have a couple of articles which were circulated around our company regarding the problems with AOS providers. Both appear to be from a local newspaper, but I can't say for sure. The first article lists in detail the types of problems that are often experienced by users (sometimes unwittingly) of AOS, including high prices and blocked access to major carriers. Regarding blocking of calls, the article says: [reprinted without permission] The AOS may block all access numbers starting with 10, making it impossible to reach AT&T. The FCC has ordered an end to this practice, but four AOS carriers are asking to be excepted. Even on a blocked phone, you can sometimes reach Sprint or MCI by using their 800 or 950 numbers. The second article deals with a pending investigation of AOS by Indiana utility regulators, due to complaints of price gouging and fraud. Relevant quotes from this article: [reprinted without permission] "We are seeking a total ban of AOS providers because what they provide is not in the public interest," Timothy M. Seat of the office of the utility consumer conselor said Wednesday. The consumer office, which represents the public in utility hearings, requested the investigation after hearing that some companies charge extremely high rates, block callers from using cheaper long-distance companies and bill for local calls from pay phones based on the length of a call, which is banned in Indiana. -- Mike Bryan, Applied Computing Devices, 100 N Campus Dr, Terre Haute IN 47802 Phone: 812/232-6051 FAX: 812/231-5280 Home: 812/232-0815 UUCP: uunet!acd4!mjb ARPA: acd4!mjb@uunet.uu.net "Did you make mankind after we made you?" --- XTC, "Dear God"
msmith@topaz.rutgers.edu (Mark Robert Smith) (08/21/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0310m02@vector.dallas.tx.us> lmg@hoqax.att.com (Lawrence M Geary) writes: > I recently tried to make a call using 10288 from the Dunes hotel in > Las Vegas. The hotel blocked 10288 access from the room phones. (And > the hotel operator lied about how to reach AT&T, giving me a sequence > that connected me to an AOS called "OSW".) They also denied access to > 10288 from PAY telephones located on the premises. I had to leave the > complex and walk down the street to make my call. > Question: Is this legal? > lmg@hoqax.att.com Think globally ... Post locally att!hoqax!lmg As I understand the recent FCC ruling, NO. The way I read the ruling, any pay or hotel phone served by an AOS MUST provide a charge-free method of reaching all long-distance carriers that serve that area. Thus, it strikes me as illegal. If you want to do something about, contact the Public Utilities Commission (or equivalent) in Nevada, and remind them of the FCC decision. Mark Smith | "Be careful when looking into the distance, |All Rights 61 Tenafly Road|that you do not miss what is right under your nose."| Reserved Tenafly,NJ 07670-2643|rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!msmith,msmith@topaz.rutgers.edu You may redistribute this article only to those who may freely do likewise.
johnw@gatech.edu (John Wheeler) (08/21/89)
I was early for a movie this weekend, and at a Southern Bell payphone
in the theatre with time on my hands, tried several 10XXX-1-700-555-4141
combinations, all of which led me to "This is the AT&T Telephone Network...
Thank you for..."(you know the rest). I thought the sign on the phone
was supposed to show the default carrier...not the only accessible one!
--
Turner John Wheeler
E N T E R T A I N M E N T ...!gatech!nanovx!techwood!johnw
Networks
Techwood Library * home of Superstation TBS * TNT * TBS Sportspdg@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul Guthrie) (08/28/89)
>>I recently tried to make a call using 10288 from the Dunes hotel in >>Las Vegas. The hotel blocked 10288 access from the room phones. (And >>the hotel operator lied about how to reach AT&T, giving me a sequence >>that connected me to an AOS called "OSW".) They also denied access to >>10288 from PAY telephones located on the premises. OSW is owned by Centel, the local operating company. So naturally, they have the ability to route all assisted calls to OSW. OSW used (before the buyout - I don't know about now) to operate in a strange (and possibly illegal manner). They did not own a switch. Calls were routed to them via dialers dialing up a hunt group. A board in a PC would detect ringing and answer, and provide dial tone. The dialer at the hotel would them outpulse a 5 digit identification code. If it checked out, the PC would then provide dial tone again, and the dialer (generally Mitel Smart-1s) would then outpulse the dialed digits. The PC could make 0+ calls on its own, or bring up the call on the display for the operator to handle. The sneaky part is how they handle the outgoing part of the call. The PC flashes (invoking three way calling), gets dial tone and completes the call. The PC then hangs up, leaving the other two parties still connected and the PC available for another call, i.e. true operator service without a switch, and running on about $3k of hardware per station. The legal problem is that they do not pay access charges for these calls. As far as the legality of them intercepting all 10XXX calls, it is currently legal, but the Nevada PUC is looking into it. -- Paul Guthrie chinet!nsacray!paul