[comp.dcom.telecom] Pac Bell Gets Okay for 900 Audiotex Prefixes

telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (05/23/89)

Californians, not normally a prudish lot, raised so much cain with Pac Bell
and the California Public Utility Commission over the subject of 'dial-a-porn',
that the CPUC has given its blessings to Pac Bell's plan to segregate
allegedly harmful audiotex programs on the specially reserved, blockable
900-303 exchange, for which Pac Bell will *NOT* provide billing services.

The plan is intended to allow Pac Bell to disassociate itself from offensive
programming while simultaneously promoting other 900 services such as
sports scores and horoscope readings that are considered more legitimate.

Previously, Pac Bell subscribers wishing to block any audiotex programs
had to deny service to all programs. Under the new scheme, blocking will
be provided free of charge for any subscribers wishing to limit access to
the 900-303 prefix for sex lines; the 900-505 prefix for random conference
calls; or the 900-844 prefix for the more traditional recorded messages
and entertainment services.

Blocking will in fact be the *default condition* for 900-303 unless the
subscriber specifically requests having it turned on.

Under California's revised penal code, passed last year with support from
Pac Bell, 'harmful' programming is deemed as any matter which appeals to
prurient interests, represents sexual conduct which is patently offensive,
and lacks serious artistic and literary merit. As such, it closely
resembles the federal code for obscene speech.

A Pac Bell spokesman was blunt in his assessment of the matter: "Our goal
is to disconnect 'dial-a-porn'. But until/unless we have the legal authority
to do that, we've designed out 900 service to solve the problems some
consumers have had with 976.

Will this plan work? Maybe not. Several information providers, led by Sable
Commuications of Los Angeles, are challenging a federal statute for 'obscene'
and 'indecent' interstate programming which could well have a bearing
on the California law. Sable also notes they believe it is discriminatory
for Pac Bell to provide billing services for some IP's while declining to
do so for others of whom they disapprove.


Patrick Townson