Mark C wrote:
Steve Totaro wrote:
A hardware provider and a service provider are two completely
different animals.
It is legal (in Maryland anyways) to sell products such drug
paraphernalia, it only becomes a problem when it is used.
Thanks
Steve
This is not entirely true. A product manufactured with the intent for
illegal use or specifically used to facility illegal activity is an
illegal item. When it involves interstate commerce then its a federal
issue. If you don't believe me then go ask Tommy Chong. The only
exception to this are firearms which are protected in the US
Constitution. I don't care to debate the points of state law as they
don't apply here.
Maybe it was not a great analogy but you get the point.
What concerns me more is the curiously absence of Cisco Systems. It
is my understanding that Vonage is largely a Cisco house (if not then
substitute appropriate vendor). These patents involve using equipment
in their "Designed & Intended" use thus making the hardware
manufacturer liable on some points. A company like Cisco has the
"Guns & Ammo" (Lawyers & Money) to engage in a fight of this nature
without a major impact to their bottom line. Vonage on the other hand
has to draw finance from other areas (e.g. marketing, system
development, etc.) for the duration thus slowing their growth unless
they can come up with additional capital for the fight.
Probably so. Who knows what is going on behind the scenes? Verizon
might be in bed with Cisco. Maybe they are saving the fight for another
day. Not sure why it "concerns" you since it is totally logical that
going after a high profile target that has become a household word but
with small pockets (compared to Cisco) would be the way to go. You get
to cut the legs off of the largest and most successful residential VoIP
provider and leave all of their customer's dangling and putting a bad
taste in everyone's mouth about VoIP in general.
Two simple questions to ask yourself.
Go after Cisco, even if you win after all the expense, what does that do
for the bottom line?
Go after Vonage and win, what does that do for the bottom line?
Vonage must be spending hundreds of millions on advertising, they can
divert funds for a bit. Maybe then I won't have to hear "oooh ooooh
ooooooooohh ooooooooh oooooh" at every commercial break. A couple times
a day would be sufficient.
I see a greater threat to Comcast, XO, Global Crossing and any of the
larger VoIP players. Comcast is quickly catching up to Vonage in the
household market and is a mortal enemy of Verizon.
XO and Global Crossing are grabbing up business customers which equates
to big money.
What about this situation? I have a T3 with Global Crossing's IP
product, in this case they terminate with a TDM DS3 but at the core it
is all IP right?
Maybe this will remind Vonage that they are more like the small
players then the "Big Telcos" and start "playing nice" with the
community that they grew from.
Kinda how Microsoft evolved from the primordial ooze?
I bet Vonage will come out victorious for the simple fact that anyone in
this day and age would come up with the same concepts and applications.
The patents include nothing ground breaking and only cover what is
natural progression. Sure they were were granted but will deemed to be
unenforceable.
Just my opinion, feel free to differ...
Mark Coccimiglio
IS Manager
Payroll Services Hawaii, Inc.
http://www.psh-inc.com
FWD: 293625
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
