Ed’s Telecom Alert

All..

Click to this

TV to PCs

Up couple dozen TV channels will be available on computers.  My first thought and I am very sure most of yours as well is the question:  Will they be captioned?    

Since it will be connected via Internet and thru computer - would these labeled as "Information Service" category?   Does that mean closed captioning laws do not apply?   

It is too bad that captioning laws are written in a such way that the laws apply only to narrow definition of which services are required to provide closed captioning.  New technologies emerge, and then we, visually oriented people, have to prompt, badger, pester, kick, or whatever to the political figures to add still another new language to the regulations to include new technologies the access for persons with visual needs.   I wish they would write laws that would cover ALL possible future technologies; that way, we don’t have to go to Congress or Legislation every time.  

All this shows we are not equal to hearing persons yet; the true functional equivalence in every possible circumstances have yet to happen. 

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed
RT Admin.  

All..

See below my signature; the release of public info by the FCC.   I admit that my knowledge of Rehab 504 is superficial at its best; however, I believe that rehab 504 is same as ADA, except that it applies to government employees who have disabilities whereas ADA applies to public (non-gov’t).

I would imagine that this includes telecommunications access as well.   I’ve already gotten a few feedbacks from various federal and state government employees that they were denied access to VRS or video phone. 

I wonder if this is an oppty for mover and shakers of the disability world to file comments?   Those of you who know rehab 504 inside and out, please feel free to comment to this post.  

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed
RT Admin. 

Released: 03/23/2007. THE CONSUMER & GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS BUREAU SEEKS COMMENT ON THE COMMISSION’S POLICIES AND PRACTICES UNDER SECTION

504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973. (DA No. 07-1396). (Dkt No 03-123). Comments Due: 05/22/2007. CGB. Contact: Diane Mason at (202) 418-7126, TTY: (202) 418-7828, email: Diane.Mason@fcc.gov

<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1396A1.doc>

<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1396A1.pdf>

<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-1396A1.txt>

All..

This definitely falls under "must read" post as it touches everyone who uses Internet.  It is an official Notice of Inquiry by the FCC.  

Basically, the FCC launches inquiry into broadband market practices. 

The FCC sez:

"This Notice of Inquiry seeks information on the behavior of broadband market participants, including:

• How broadband providers are managing Internet traffic on their networks today
• Whether providers charge different prices for different speeds or capacities of service
• Whether our policies should distinguish between content providers that charge end users for access to content and those who do not
• How consumers are affected by these practices"

Unquote.  

Click to this: FCC Inquiry   Note: don’t forget to read down to the Commissioner’s comments.  I particularly like the remarks by Commissioner Copps - note the telecommunications and information categories in his remarks. 

Geez, I hope TDI, NAD, HLAA, and other national organizations will file comments.   These four principles are where I most certainly can see the need for national orgs to file comments on.   

 Why is this important?  Well, I have heard from many of you video users who complain that high speed Internet providers at basic price provide fast download and slow upload speeds speeds; often the slow upload speeds are such that it is not enough to meet the video conferencing.  To get fast upload speed, the video users have to cough up more dough to get that.    The FCC needs to be aware of this. 

Or some of you may want to go for the basic and cheapest "high speed" broadband service only to find that that speed is not enough for the video conference, so to get the next or two higher level of speed, deafies or hoh have to cough up more money.  This is true in some of the remote areas; I recently learned from a person down the Valley of Texas where to get a high speed broadband in areas not serviced by cable, would have to pay $150 up to $300 to get high speed wireless service.  

These are just two examples.    

Since Internet is considered as information service category. This categorizing may produce undesirable results for the persons with telecommunicatively disabilities.  For example, does section 255 of the telecomm act (where it requires telecommunications manufacturers first consider the needs of persons with telecomm disabilities in producing new telecomm products or services) apply to Internet-enabled services or products to meet the needs of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing?  Remember, info service category typically means "hands off, gov’t" - oh, this is not a rigid assumption, but generally, it assumed that.   So section 255 may not apply, if so, then we deafies and hoh are out of luck.      

So it is critical that everyone who may have been impacted do file comments to the FCC on this. 

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed
RT Admin.