Ed’s Telecom Alert

All..

In the world of Internet Relay and VRS, there is a ferocious lobbying by several companies that offered proposals how numbering system should be done for VRS and Internet Relay Service.    I’ve listed three. 

Neustar Proposal

HOVRS/ATT Proposal

CSDVRS Proposal

What is the central purpose of this?   To have relay users of VRS and Internet Relay have their own phone number where emergency dispatchers can readily identify and route to correct emergency locations. 

The side benefits of such numbering system is, get this, to make it possible for any VRS users call other VRS users by whatever video phone they have; in other words, Sorenson VP user can call Viable user just by using phone number instead of IP address.

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed

All..

 I am sure many of you already got Sorenson’s newsletter - Messenger.  

Article on Training by SVRS

I particularly want to call your attention to the Sorenson’s focus on Interpreting Issues. 

EXACTLY - that is what ALL VRS providers should be doing.  Focus on interpreters and quality of Video Interpreters with various workshops, training, etc.   All this has to improve the quality of VRS.   

A few VRS provider get ahead by selective qualification and contract with reputable interpreting service providers - for example HOVRS.   One unique VRS provider contracts with independent VRS centers and each of these independent VRS centers typically are by highly qualified persons who want to keep contract by ensuring high quality interpreters are the ones chosen.  

As I have said many times before, VRS industry is still growing and the growing is still painful, but lately less so for consumers.  We are not there yet, and still ways to go, but I believe and sincerely hope that the path the VRS providers have undertaken is the right way to go.  Based on the poll vote last time, it is the quality of video interpreting that gets people to choose particular VRS provider. 

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed

All..

I’ve been asked by a few folks about vPAD from Viable and whether the vPAD actually belongs to Viable or not.  I got the answer from Viable - see the following text. 

"Viable designed and joint developed vPad with its South Korean manufacturing partner, SBNTech. Viable holds the intellectual property rights to the design of the product and has the worlwide exclusive rights to the deaf and hard of hearing market. Viable and SBNTech will jointly market vPad and its derivative products to other commercial markets."