What is the Law?

[Desertsnowman]

Could someone please expain to me what the law is that prevents companies from going up against telkom?

I know that its illegal to do it, I know that If i had to build a network where people can make "calls" to one another and charge for this service I would be breaking a law and I would get crushed by telkom. But what I ask is what does the actual law say that prohibits me from doing this and make telkom have the monopoly???

please in layman's terms.

 

[dominic]

very difficult to answer quickly and simply

the relevant law is the telecommunications act of 1996 - very basically this was the result of a long policy process which saw a lot of changing views but finally decided that the best way to promote universal access (i.e. telecomms for all) would be to extend telkom's monopoly - the plan was to allow telkom to remain the only party able to transmit signals in exchange for telkom meeting certain universal access rollout obligations

this was a dismal failure and instead of being extended to 2002 the monopoly has effectively been pushed out to now and beyond (there has been some liberalisation - sentech, wbs and the cellcos - but not even close to enough)...we are still awaiting the SNO and most are sceptocal about the price benefits it will bring

so it is simply that the law says no (or the majority of people seem to think so anyway)....imho the blame is to be laid firmly at the door of the policy of "managed liberalisation" and the inability of the government to realise what is needed to give SA a competitive telecomms sector which serves the needs of the majority

 

[R4tt3xx]

That act also does not mention International Access via SAT/SAFE cables which Telkom is using to keep prices as high as possible.

 

[RichardP]

The act also states that you are "Free" to provide your own telephony connections IF Telkom cant provide a service in the area... well thats what I understand it to be.

 

[dominic]

The act also states that you are "Free" to provide your own telephony connections IF Telkom cant provide a service in the area... well thats what I understand it to be.

this comes up in criminal prosecutions (which are few and far between - as far as i know & i have looked - there have been no sucessful prosecutions under the telecomms act) where the prosecution produce an affidavit from telkom to state that it (telkom) was never approached by the Accused asking whether they were going to provide services in a particular area

in other words it is an essential element of the crime of unlawfully providing telecommunications services

/comment: telkom won't touch places that are not economic for them but rarely will state in writing that it is not planning on providing services for those same places

 

[captainwifi]

dominic talking about criminal prosecutions. What would your opinion be on
my take on www.zyxel.com VDSL Dslam devices as described on
http://icasa.blogspot.com (Scroll down for the very first post.)? That is importing the devices like www.communiverse.co.za have done and selling them 'undercover'. Communiverse seems to be out of business. I hope my posts had nothing to with it.

As the law stands Icasa must approve these devices. Telkom has instructed Icasa not to do this. This unreasonable. The police aren't stupid, they wont take action against people using Dslam's because there is nothing unreasonable about using these devices, no matter what the law says.
Do a www.froogle.com search for retailers of VDSL modems and Dslam's
We started of with ADSL, then ADSL2+ and finally we have VDSL.
I have edited www.wikipedia.org Dslam document.

 

[kilos]

dominic talking about criminal prosecutions. What would your opinion be on
my take on www.zyxel.com VDSL Dslam devices as described on
http://icasa.blogspot.com (Scroll down for the very first post.)?
We started of with ADSL, then ADSL2+ and finally we have VDSL.
I have edited www.wikipedia.org Dslam document.

Find your articles on your blog most interesting, but typical where a product is in direct conflict with Telkom they will down slam it.

At least the ADSL Modems are ICASA approved

 

[dominic]

i will have a lookie see

police inaction has little to do with reasonableness and more with (a) a lot of higher priorities & (b) the specialised technical nature of the offence

where did you get the information that telkom leaned on icasa?

 

[captainwifi]

i will have a lookie see
police inaction has little to do with reasonableness and more with (a) a lot of higher priorities & (b) the specialised technical nature of the offence
where did you get the information that telkom leaned on icasa?

I spoke on the phone to somebody who does networking for closed villages. I asked him why doesn't he use Dslam instead of fiber. His answer:"Telkom doesn't allow it". He applied for Vans license, but he was turned down by Icasa. He told me that the Vans license is critical for his business model of reselling Telkom data to these villages. I pressed him a bit for info and he relented that he infact does install Dslam with the fiber, but would prefer not to openly advertise it, hence I am mentioning his name.

 

[RichardP]

Why does ICASA need to stamp the hardware? its not being plugged in to anything public... The Approval was instituted in the old days as to stop people plugging un-authorised phones on to the party lines... If the hardware was from the USA, it caused an impedance mismatch on the public line and the other 4 people on the party line suffered quality losses due to your un-autorised equipment. Thus the PTO (Post and Telecoms Office) had to approve all equipment being plugged on to THEIR plain old telephone system.

Can import and install NTSC TV sets without a SABC license as they are unable to receive SABC ? I think sabc doesnt care what the receiver is... (I think they will enforce a license fee for Crystal diode sales if they could get away with it)

My take is ... its not on a public network, so ICASA and Telkom rules dont hold water..... Crossing a public road with cables is another story...

Richard

dominic talking about criminal prosecutions. What would your opinion be on
my take on www.zyxel.com VDSL Dslam devices as described on
http://icasa.blogspot.com (Scroll down for the very first post.)? That is importing the devices like www.communiverse.co.za have done and selling them 'undercover'. Communiverse seems to be out of business. I hope my posts had nothing to with it.

As the law stands Icasa must approve these devices. Telkom has instructed Icasa not to do this. This unreasonable. The police aren't stupid, they wont take action against people using Dslam's because there is nothing unreasonable about using these devices, no matter what the law says.
Do a www.froogle.com search for retailers of VDSL modems and Dslam's
We started of with ADSL, then ADSL2+ and finally we have VDSL.
I have edited www.wikipedia.org Dslam document.

 

[dominic]

interesting that one of the licence-exempt categories under the new convergence/electronic communications act (to replace the telecomms act) is for not-for-profit activities

 

[captainwifi]

Find your articles on your blog most interesting, but typical where a product is in direct conflict with Telkom they will down slam it.
At least the ADSL Modems are ICASA approved

kilos the technical specs on Dslam's I gave there on some of the posts are
utterly wrong, just ignore it and view the blog more as an attempt to convince people that we can send data across the street using any legal medium:copper,fiber,smoke signals, ISM bands. I will have to edit everything there, just can't get to it now.

Some of the ideas there are not realistic. Just view it as a brainstorming session, I am just trying generate ideas, to the
amusement of some and chagrin of others. Obviously cutting through multiple gardens will never work, people would rather be shot dead in their driveway then allow somebody to lay a fiber cable through his property, it's just the mentality South-African's have.

Why is cutting through roads such a bid deal? We have got to stop assuming what can and can't be done. Has anybody got the number of the roads division in PTA, so I can phone them and ask them myself if they will allow this?

 

[RichardP]

Telkom has the rights to carry "Voice" and provide "last mile" infrastructure. The old legislation did not differentiate from Voip or analog voice carrier - THUS Voip was outlawed as Telkom wasnt the carrier. (or didnt profit from the transaction)

I will still slap up Linksys AP connected to a Asterisk server, FXO cards and deploy some Wifi-Voip points so that there still is a "Telephone" experience.

Richard

Could someone please expain to me what the law is that prevents companies from going up against telkom?

I know that its illegal to do it, I know that If i had to build a network where people can make "calls" to one another and charge for this service I would be breaking a law and I would get crushed by telkom. But what I ask is what does the actual law say that prohibits me from doing this and make telkom have the monopoly???

please in layman's terms.

 

[kilos]

CaptainWifi it certainly is an interesting idea and one that is worth pursuing
just the technical details need to be sorted but very interesting, get in Internet Solutions Uncapped, unshapped, Business 1024k ADSL (R2700/month) account (starters) with ADSL <-> Asterisk PBX(external IP) <-> Firewall <-> DSLAM <---> ADSL modem running at least a 60 pair underground cable to each of the 60 houses.
* No unsightly grid antennaes
* No need to install an Intercom system (* PBX)
* Not crossing any public roads if you are in a complex.

Ideal for a new complex that is going to be built, no gardens to be dugup ;-) part of the building project

 

[Desertsnowman]

Thanks for all the info on this.

What I have been intending on doing is setting up a internet net work for my housing complex. and plan to extend such networks to others around town.

I was afraid of running into telkom issues I think I'll take a long think on this an make plans at a later stage.

 

[dominic]

Thanks for all the info on this.

What I have been intending on doing is setting up a internet net work for my housing complex. and plan to extend such networks to others around town.

I was afraid of running into telkom issues I think I'll take a long think on this an make plans at a later stage.

odds are that at the moment there will indeed be telkom issues - telkom have an internal department dedicated to "normalising" what they interpret to be illegal developments

it looks likely however that the position with regard to developments will become far more unstructured when the convergence bill becomes law - should not be more than 6 months away so maybe look at it then

 

[captainwifi]

One option is to partner with a Vans license holder when you cut through
the road or send data across the street via any means Dslam/wi-fi/copper/fiber. I discussed this on the Wisp international satellite companies thread. If you read my posts there you will notice that my core
argument has still not been answered by a single Vans license holder.
Since most VAns license holders send data across the street via Wi-fi, will
they allow us to partner with them and send data across the street via
other transmission media ie. dslam/copper/fiber ?
You can find a list of VAns license holder on Icasa's site. Phone them and
simply ask them yourself. They are refusing to give an answer on this forum.
One can only wonder why. I suspect it is the fact that once the fixed wired
infrastructure has been laid, if you don't pay them a fee, they can't exactly
go and dig up the wires again. They have no legal right to enter your property. Telkom ofcourse has this right. Webintact,Uninet are license holders, ask them. And telling me that it is 'illegal' to send data across the street is not an acceptable answer! A vans license holder's first priority is not to provide you with the most effective data transmission network. No, his first priority is to have a sustainable business model. Would such a venture really be in the vans license holder's commercial interest?

 

[captainwifi]

interesting that one of the licence-exempt categories under the new convergence/electronic communications act (to replace the telecomms act) is for not-for-profit activities

http://www.internet.org.za has an old copy of the draft Convergence Bill.
Where can I find the most recent draft? Or perhaps you could just quote
the relevent section in context.

And non-profit activities would be CCTV over fiber crossing roads ?