AT&T, FreeConferenceCall Executives Spar over Access Charges

AT&T and other big carriers have accused the rural telcos of “traffic pumping” and have challenged their high termination charges. But rural telcos and the free conferencing companies say the big carriers are committing “access theft” by refusing to pay their bills for lawful calls. Industry representatives on both sides expect the FCC to take on the issue soon, given a recent decision by the Iowa Utilities Board and an AT&T letter saying Google Voice is flouting an FCC ban on telco “self-help” by blocking calls to numbers with high access charges (CD Oct 5 p1).

FreeConferenceCall President David Erickson said AT&T is as guilty as Google of engaging in “self-help,” though the companies are doing it in different ways. Google is blocking calls and AT&T refuses to pay for them, he said. “What’s the difference?”

“If someone with jurisdiction resolves our litigation one way or another, then that issue will be resolved,” said AT&T’s Hultquist. “But that issue is not currently resolved.” Erickson countered, “You mean, you guys haven’t changed that law yet to resolve it.” Later, Hultquist returned, “Dave, Dave, Dave, Dave, you ignore the fact that we could lose the litigation. … We could lose. We could be told to pay damages. Those are possible outcomes, so I think your point is really inapposite.”

Erickson said his customers pay for free conferencing as they should, by paying their long-distance bills. Consumers like this arrangement, he said. They aren’t involved in the current policy argument, however, because they don’t understand “Google’s trying to block” or that “AT&T’s trying to take away their free conference calling,” he said. “They're silent because they don’t know what’s happening.”

The policy question has been around a long time, Hultquist said. “Dave suggests consumers would be better off paying more for long distance and less for conferencing,” he said. But the original purpose of access charges wasn’t to subsidize free conferencing, he said.

Before Erickson joined the call, Hultquist and Kelley Drye lawyer Todd Daubert had discussed new Internet principles about nondiscrimination and disclosure proposed last month by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. The commission will vote on opening a rulemaking about network neutrality at its meeting Oct. 22. The FCC decision on Comcast’s network management practices seemed to indicate that a nondiscrimination principle was already considered part of the commission’s Internet policy statement, Hultquist said. Network operators should have “fairly broad discretion” in managing their resources, he added.

Any policy should recognize that the government can’t keep up with the pace of technology, said Daubert, an attorney who often represents competitive carriers. He suggested a process for parties to submit hypothetical questions to the FCC about whether a practice is a reasonable form of network management and for the commission to answer quickly. Hultquist said that might be useful, and the FCC should seek comment on it. But he warned that commission procedures could get in the way. It’s unclear whether a bureau or the eighth floor should provide the response, for example, he said.

Daubert and Hultquist seemed mostly supportive of Genachowski’s proposed sixth principle of transparency. Providing clear disclosures is generally a good thing, Hultquist said. Daubert agreed. But he added that “the devil is in the details.”

Google telecom counsel Rick Whitt was scheduled to speak on the call but canceled. Erickson was a late addition.