<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">]>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://saveaccess.org">
<channel>
 <title>Save Access - Bell South</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8/0</link>
 <description></description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>More disturbing numbers for telcos</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/2320</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://telephonyonline.com/broadband/news/disturbing-numbers-telcos-0513/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Telephony Online&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;More disturbing numbers for telcos&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;May 13, 2008 11:02 AM, By Carol Wilson&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Two separate sources this week are offering up more analysis showing the telcos are falling behind the cable companies in the broadband and video battle.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Information Gatekeepers, an analyst firm that once predicted the telcos would overtake cable in broadband penetration, this week issued its High-Speed Access Report for the first quarter of 2008, showing cable is outperforming its forecast and the telcos are under-performing what IGI had forecast in 2006. The latest report is in keeping with what IGI began saying in 2007, when it warned that both AT&amp;amp;T and Verizon were falling behind in implementing high-speed access plans, and thus their data revenues would not make up for lost wireline access income.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/11">Qwest</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/10">Verizon</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 06:55:58 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>There&#039;s Patriotism, But Then There&#039;s Cash</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/2021</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wetmachine.com/totsf/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Wet Machine&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;There&#039;s Patriotism, But Then There&#039;s Cash&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Posted By: Harold Feld&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like many, I have been both appalled at the federal domestic spying program and the subsequent the effort to undermine the Rule of Law by granting the telcos retroactive immunity. Which is why I don&#039;t know whether to laugh or cry at this USA today story reporting that the telcos shut down wiretaps legally authorized under FISA because the FBI failed to make the requisite billing payments.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/50">NSA/Telco Wiretap Scandal</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/10">Verizon</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:39:47 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>FBI&#039;s lapse in paying phone bill snips wiretaps</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/2020</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-10-fbi-probe_N.htm&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; USA Today&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Audit: FBI&#039;s lapse in paying phone bill snips wiretaps&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY Jan. 11, 2008&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON — Telecommunications carriers shut down some covert surveillance lines established by the FBI because the bureau failed to make timely bill payments, a Justice Department review found Thursday.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/50">NSA/Telco Wiretap Scandal</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/10">Verizon</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:36:25 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>FL: BellSouth rings up a $1 million bill for lobbying</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1245</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.miamiherald.com/515/story/109422.html&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Miami Herald&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;THE LEGISLATURE&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;BellSouth rings up a $1 million bill for lobbying&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The price tag for lobbying in the state Capitol is at least $26 million this year -- and could approach $70 million -- as BellSouth leads the way with a million-dollar effort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;BY MARC CAPUTO AND GARY FINEOUT&lt;br /&gt;
mcaputo@MiamiHerald.com&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/21">FLORIDA</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 16:35:35 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Bush administration proposes retroactive immunity for phone companies</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1176</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Note: This raises serious concerns for private citizens using telephone company services - phone, data and video. Telco Triple Play is now a triple wiretap opportunity with no legal privacy protections.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070504-bush-administration-proposes-retroactive-immunity-for-phone-companies.html&quot;&gt;Ars Technica&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h1&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bush administration proposes retroactive immunity for phone companies	&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p class=&quot;Tag Full&quot;&gt;By &lt;a href=&quot;http://arstechnica.com/authors.ars/Nate+Anderson&quot;&gt;Nate Anderson&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
				         | Published: May 04, 2007 - 01:33PM CT
				        &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/50">NSA/Telco Wiretap Scandal</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/10">Verizon</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2007 01:37:56 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>LA: How Video Franchising Works</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/996</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://lafayetteprofiber.com/Blog/2007/04/how-video-franchising-works.html&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Lafayette Pro Fiber&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;How Video Franchising Works&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Friday, April 06, 2007&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They&#039;ve got some experience under their belt with state video franchising in Virgina and, according to an article in the Newport News paper, some of the opponents&#039; worst fears are being realized. Verizon, who is building out a Fiber to the Privileged (FTTP) network (If this is unfamiliar territory drop to the bottom and read up on the background to this story.)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/46">LOUISIANA</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 12:00:23 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The Price of Net Neutrality</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/638</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/specialguests/2007/jan/05/the_price_of_net_neutrality&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt;TPM Cafe&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Price of Net Neutrality&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By Art Brodsky&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Kevin Martin, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, was sold out in the merger of AT&amp;amp;T and BellSouth. He wasn&#039;t undercut by the other commissioners who disagreed with him, even though Martin took out his anger at them. He was sold out by the company for which he had extended his prestige -- AT&amp;amp;T. On top of that, Martin has made life for himself just that much more difficult dealing with Democrats in Congress, even as he accepted the foundation for a more open Internet.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/18">FCC AT&amp;T-BellSouth Merger</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 08:50:02 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The Price of Net Neutrality</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/634</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/778&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Public Knowledge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Price of Net Neutrality&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Submitted by Art Brodsky on January 5, 2007 - 3:46pm.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As Democratic legislators start the process of running the legislative branches of government, it’s worth a moment to take a last look at the unusual statement on the AT&amp;amp;T/BellSouth merger issued by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and his colleague, Deborah Taylor Tate. The merger conditions, approved Dec. 29, enshrined the concept that companies that offer service like AT&amp;amp;T can’t discriminate in how they provide content. That’s the shorthand for Net Neutrality. AT&amp;amp;T agreed not to sell as service that “privileges, degrades or prioritizes” any data transmitted over its network. Martin and Tate didn’t like that condition, among others, and said so in a statement issued when the deal was approved.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/18">FCC AT&amp;T-BellSouth Merger</category>
 <pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 01:06:49 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>2006 Top Ten: Big IPTV Moments</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/629</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=113740&amp;amp;print=true&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Light Reading&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2006 Top Ten: Big IPTV Moments&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;JANUARY 05, 2007&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Most people will probably look back at 2006 as (another) &quot;warm-up year&quot; for IPTV. Here at Light Reading we like to think of IPTV as a toddler -- just out of diapers, and about to break a heap load of stuff as part of its &quot;learning process.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/10">Verizon</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 12:38:43 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Ma Bell is back. Should you be afraid?</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/628</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Friendly Giants in an age of deregulation?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.slate.com/id/2156918/pagenum/all/#page_start&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Slate&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Bellwether: Ma Bell is back. Should you be afraid?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
By Tim Wu&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Posted Thursday, Jan. 4, 2007, at 5:47 PM ET&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ma Bell is back. Blown into eight pieces by an antitrust court in 1984, AT&amp;amp;T, like a self-repairing robot, has slowly put itself back together. Last Friday, the Federal Communications Commission, demanding net neutrality and other conditions, approved AT&amp;amp;T&#039;s acquisition of BellSouth. That will make AT&amp;amp;T—once again—the world&#039;s largest technology company. And don&#039;t just think big. Think Goliath, with about $110 billion in annual revenue, more than 300,000 employees, and 90 million paying accounts. Google, by way of comparison, brings in about $9 billion a year. Even Microsoft, at $45 billion, is a mere elephant compared to the AT&amp;amp;T mammoth.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 12:31:45 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Can AT$T Just Ignore New Concessions?</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/626</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/80673&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt;Broadband Reports&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Can AT&amp;amp;T Just Ignore New Concessions?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Neutrality advocates cheer, ignore fine print...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Posted on 2007-01-02 16:25:46 by Karl &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While AT&amp;amp;T did offer some additional concessions to squeeze through the AT&amp;amp;T BellSouth merger, Kevin Webach (via Techdirt) points out that the post-merger statements by Republican commissioners hint that they may not require the company to actually adhere to them. According to the statement, Tate and Martin believe that &quot;while the Democrat Commissioners may have extracted concessions from AT&amp;amp;T, they in no way bind future Commission action. Thus, to the extent that AT&amp;amp;T has, as a business matter, determined to take certain actions, they are allowed to do so.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 12:08:11 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>AT$T&#039;s Net Neutrality Offer is Just Hot Air</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/625</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.isp-planet.com/cplanet/tech/2007/prime_letter_070104.html&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; ISP Planet&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;DSL Prime: AT&amp;amp;T&#039;s Net Neutrality Offer is Just Hot Air&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AT&amp;amp;T promises to deliver bits without traffic shaping, but the agreement excludes the parts of the network it can control.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;by Dave Burstein&lt;br /&gt;
of DSL Prime and Future of TV&lt;br /&gt;
[January 4, 2007]	&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;I call them the black ninjas. They work by night and are very, very good.&quot; &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 12:04:10 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>FCC boss: We can throw away the AT$T net neutrality agreement</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/624</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/4281&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; ComputerWorld&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FCC boss: We can throw away the AT&amp;amp;T net neutrality agreement&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By Preston Gralla on Thu, 01/04/2007 - 2:34pm&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The groundbreaking AT&amp;amp;T pledge to agree to net neutrality provisions in return for being allowed to buy out BellSouth carries absolutely no weight with FCC honcho Kevin Martin. In fact, Martin has said that the FCC &quot;will oppose such policies going forward.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 12:02:23 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>AT$T Closes BellSouth Deal by Making Only Small Concessions</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/623</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;a technology consultant firm predicting business as usual&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gartner.com/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Gartner&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AT&amp;amp;T Closes BellSouth Deal by Making Only Small Concessions&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4 January 2007&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Jay E. Pultz   Kathie Hackler   Phillip Redman  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AT&amp;amp;T made several minor concessions to win FCC approval of this deal. Now larger and with a wholly owned wireless capability, AT&amp;amp;T is strengthened as a global telecom leader. But enterprises shouldn&#039;t overlook alternatives.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2007 11:55:15 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>GA: Telephone Giant Looks to Move in on Cable Service</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/543</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;From Morris News Service, November 26, 2006&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Telephone Giant Looks to Move in on Cable Service&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;By Vicky Eckenrode&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Competition could help lower bills and improve service for television owners across the state, said officials from BellSouth, which wants to launch its own video service in Georgia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But before the telecommunications company takes on cable providers, it wants state lawmakers to overhaul how local contracts are handled on the local level.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/8">Bell South</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/22">GEORGIA</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:26:23 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
