Consumers love the thought of voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) being able to call just about anywhere for pennies. However, long distance providers aren't happy to see a major cash cow turned into a hamburger, and those long distance providers are often providing Internet access, so it results in a less-profitable division doing the cannibalizing of a much more profitable one. That split has led to some legal challenges in the VoIP market, and though some recent cases have gone subscribers' way, this may ultimately hurt subscribers as well.
The ruling against Guyana Telephone and Telegraph (GT&T) goes back to 2009, and was finally settled in the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) back in late July. Essentially, it held that GT&T was in breach of contract when it suspended the digital subscriber line (DSL) service of James Samuels, a GT&T customer, for using said connection to make and receive calls via the Vonage (News - Alert) service. The CCJ, meanwhile, dismissed GT&T's cross-appeal, and also set aside a Court of Appeal decision for GT&T to produce this result. Though GT&T reportedly pointed out that such a use was contrary to its contract with Samuels, the case's trial judge, Justice Rishi Persaud, countered that GT&T didn't provide enough notice of the terms, which were only noted after Samuels had been disconnected.
While the judgment is still being studied, some like Digicel (News - Alert) are convinced that these kinds of rulings are demonstrating clearly why there needs to be further regulation in over-the-top (OTT) services like VoIP. Digicel offered some comment around the decision in an email, saying “Digicel's view remains that there ought to be a level playing field. We have invested over the years and continue to invest billions in a robust network in order to provide the best service to our customers.... The unregulated OTT operators, on the other hand, utilize our network but do not bear the burden of regulatory fees nor do they pay taxes to the Government.”
It's a difficult proposition that Internet service providers (ISPs) and telecommunications firms have had to deal with on some level for some time. The Internet is, essentially, making certain services obsolete. We're seeing that in this case with VoIP taking over for long-distance phone service, and we've also seen as much with streaming video becoming a viable replacement for cable television service. Worse, since many ISPs and telecom firms offer all these services, such firms are essentially seeing one part of the business hurt sales for another part. This in turn leads to things like the GT&T suit we've seen here, as well as growing damage to cable service. But what's the best response? Lawsuits like GT&T? Or a change in service provision like Sling TV? If companies start working with the environment instead of expecting protection from it, there may be more profitable ventures to be had elsewhere.
Still, we likely have a long way to go before solutions in all this become clear. There's plenty of value to be had in this field, but it's all a matter of how to extract it. Some changes to business plans might well be in order as cases like this boil down to a conclusion.
Edited by Dominick Sorrentino