Pulver, FCC Clash on Martin’s VoIP Policies
The FCC lashed back after receiving a scathing critique by Jeff Pulver of Chairman Kevin Martin’s VoIP policies. In a blog post this week, Pulver, the VoIP pioneer and Vonage founder said Martin “has done more harm to the future of the VoIP industry than anyone else.” Tuesday, an FCC spokeswoman said IP-based technologies have “flourished” under Martin. In interviews, other VoIP industry officials took a less incendiary stance, but agreed that change at the FCC probably will help IP-based communications businesses.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Martin “sucked a lot of the air out of the VoIP revolution” by applying “the most burdensome” wireline rules to VoIP, Pulver wrote Sunday. “Time after time Chairman Martin passed on the opportunity to leverage IP based platforms to deliver solutions better than what the PSTN could have offered,” he said. Rather than looking forward, Martin focused on “backward compliance,” he said. Martin spurned Pulver’s VON conference, Pulver added. “If anyone is wondering why the FCC was never seen at any of the VON events since Spring 2005 VON, it was because … Chairman Martin never accepted any of my invitations to speak at VON,” Pulver said. “In fact, there was a time when no one from the FCC was permitted to attend VON under the Martin leadership.”
The FCC disagrees that Martin imposed damaging rules on the VoIP industry, a commission spokeswoman said. “It was VoIP providers themselves who marketed VoIP as a replacement service, so it is then hard to argue they shouldn’t be subject to the same rules and operate on a level playing field,” she said. “The appropriate approach is to achieve regulatory parity, not have different rules for different technologies.”
Providing 911 service isn’t “most burdensome,” the FCC spokeswoman said. “Chairman Martin believes that it was important to provide VoIP consumers with the same public safety 911 capabilities to protect their families as consumers of similar wireline and wireless services,” she said. “In fact, one could argue that the success of VoIP was dependent on the Commission’s efforts to assure VoIP subscribers had public safety capabilities similar to what is offered to wireline subscribers.” The spokeswoman wouldn’t discuss Martin’s policy on the VON conference.
Pulver praised previous chairmen Michael Powell, Bill Kennard and Reed Hundt for their handling of VoIP. In particular, Powell “embraced the nascent VoIP industry and made it a point to come out to the VON conferences and connect directly with our community,” he said. Pulver said he is upbeat on the next administration. “With the right approach to public policy, the new FCC Chairman will be able to put a shot of adrenaline into the arm of the VoIP industry and jump start a new generation of communication innovation,” Pulver said.
Martin’s FCC turned 180 degrees on the innovation- friendly policies of Powell, said VoIP blogger Andy Abramson, in an interview. Martin’s vision was to make consistent rules across multiple communications technologies, he said. As a result, the FCC focused on already widely deployed technology rather than nascent technology for the future. Effectively, Martin’s FCC “slowed down the adoption and the implementation of innovation,” and provided “a path for consolidation,” he said.
Martin’s VoIP policies weren’t entirely unfavorable to the technology, Jason Talley, CEO of VoIP carrier Nuvio, said in an interview. Martin had a different direction than Powell in that he focused more on bringing the big telephone and cable companies into the 21st century -- but that was important for the VoIP providers that wanted to sell bare- bones wireline replacement service, he said. “Pulver wasn’t front and center in that different focus, so that wasn’t as good for him.”
Martin’s FCC didn’t always do exactly what some VoIP providers wanted, but many in the industry support the idea of a level playing field for different technologies, said Sam Shiffman, executive vice president of PointOne, another VoIP provider. When the FCC required VoIP to provide 911 service, for example, the commission didn’t explain at first how to do it, he said. But after legislation in Congress, the commission appropriately “tuned” the order, he said. Pulver may change his mind about Martin when the FCC this month releases an order clarifying whether VoIP carriers must pay access charges for switched-IP traffic, he added.
Regardless of Martin’s performance, VoIP providers should benefit from the Obama administration’s emphasis on increasing broadband deployment, Talley said. Obama “really wants to stimulate broadband growth in the United States, and he believes that there needs to be more than just the cable company and the telephone company providing choice for consumers,” he said. That’s good for VoIP providers, “because Internet access is an absolute critical component in order to use Internet applications.”