PolicyBlog

"In other words, the customer should be able to purchase a handset from a carrier and enter into a service agreement with that carrier, thereby giving the carrier 'thousands of dollars over that service agreement for products that are already free on the open access internet, such as voip, email, map services, and internet radio'"

Don't you get it? Your customers do not "enjoy" nor do they "choose" the relationship they have with you. In most cases they don't have any choice at all, or at best, a choice between you and another huge, evil, telecommunication's company.

Gee, Verizon, I for one (as a customer) think this would be a great idea! Open access would mean I would have more options for more carriers, as I am tired of the duopoly (or in many cases monopoly) of services in any specific area, especially if the customer service is horrible. If your customer service wasn't that great, I would seriously consider breaking my contract with you for another competitor. More competition will force other companies to actually begin to treat their customers like human beings, instead of like garbage.

Let's see, your first argument is that there will be a reduction in revenue (to the govt.). That just about sums up your whole argument doesn't it? Contrary to what your company may believe, customers do not 'enjoy' their relationship with a telecom company any more than they enjoy their relationship with the IRS. With limited choices in carriers, it's more a matter of finding the one that offers the least terrible service, and gives me flexibility as a consumer to choose what model phone, features, and network I want, when I want it. The traditional contracts of the wireless service world are completely one-sided in the telecom's favor. We just deal with it because the FCC allows you to do this. I hope this changes soon...

Verizon, we all know that should the standards be opened up, you'll stand to lose a substantial amount the money you charge users for services. You need to adapt to the new circumstances and find better ways to satisfy your customers. We hate you and other cell phone providers and only put up with you because we have to. It's like choosing the lesser of two evils. I for one am looking forward to the day that google releases it's phone. I'll be more than happy to get free service in exchange for viewing ads, and I think most people on the planet can do without crappy services like VCAST. Siraaj

Mr. Fish, What kinda have you been smoking? Do you really believe that garbage you posted? The consumer is waiting, hands tied, between the lesser of two evils waiting for the moment when something will change. We are all tired of paying large fees for contracts that are completely one sided, don't offer any real choices, lock the hardware (my hardware which you have no right to do), and contracts that are the result of one upmanship between the carriers. Thankfully, some brainiac in corporate hasn't decided to make a minimum contract length of three years, as then everyone else would then follow suit. You knew the rules imposed on your purchase when you made it! Quit trying to back out of your agreement. Additionally, the FCC is a branch of the government, which means that it is an extension of the will of people of this country. You made a promise to us, now live up to it and don't expect us to tolerate you breaking that promise and (to add insult to injury) expect us to pay you more for breaking your promise! We support the FCC rules and demand that you live up on them. And if you can't, the spectrum should be taken from you and given to the next highest bidder. Get a life!

how can you argue that this would be better for the customer when EVERY comment is against your position on this? are you saying that we the customer should shut up and do what you tell us to? how dare you.