Bring on the ‘big bang’

I hope the courts realise how much of a waste of their time and taxpayers money this is - we should be so much further down the road. I wish every starving squatter could just realise that their government wastes the huge sums the working class invests in the form of SARS payments instead of making a better life for all...
The more money wasted on this, the fewer jobs created and funds for the needy.
 
don't know what is taking ICASA so long DoC tell them what to do and Telkom writes it up - was Paris in a meeting or hiding under the table
 
Not to be a killjoy or anything, but while the idea to challenge the government and ICASA on their performance is great, is this really, in all honesty and sincerity, a viable option?

For data alone, it'd probably be ok I guess, but what about voice? How would the number ranges be assigned and controlled. Add to that all the interconnection requirements and regulation of those. And then add the general overseeing of industry/sector and the management and dispute resolution that goes with it. All that is currently ICASA's job right? If they're too overloaded now to do a decent job, how would this help the situation?

I do not think that the court would be likely to declare any such order as it would be interfering where it has no jurisdiction. An order such as this would be tantamount to a policy/regulation decision, which is in the hands of ICASA/DoC, not the Court of Law, afaik. Much like ICASA can not sentence someone to prison, only lay the charges and provide evidence.

If the regulations on this point are still vague, then I'd agree something needs to be stated one way or the other, and the case could be successful in getting that. And I would more likely see some kind of case to recover funds being successful; for loss of capital and loss of income (in the event of a policy decision against). I agree that ICASA and the DoC have done a crap ass job, but the only way to have much control over them is supposed to be with your vote.
 
Hellburn said:
Not to be a killjoy or anything, but while the idea to challenge the government and ICASA on their performance is great, is this really, in all honesty and sincerity, a viable option?

For data alone, it'd probably be ok I guess, but what about voice? How would the number ranges be assigned and controlled. Add to that all the interconnection requirements and regulation of those. And then add the general overseeing of industry/sector and the management and dispute resolution that goes with it. All that is currently ICASA's job right? If they're too overloaded now to do a decent job, how would this help the situation?

I do not think that the court would be likely to declare any such order as it would be interfering where it has no jurisdiction. An order such as this would be tantamount to a policy/regulation decision, which is in the hands of ICASA/DoC, not the Court of Law, afaik. Much like ICASA can not sentence someone to prison, only lay the charges and provide evidence.

If the regulations on this point are still vague, then I'd agree something needs to be stated one way or the other, and the case could be successful in getting that. And I would more likely see some kind of case to recover funds being successful; for loss of capital and loss of income (in the event of a policy decision against). I agree that ICASA and the DoC have done a crap ass job, but the only way to have much control over them is supposed to be with your vote.
Click to expand...


The vans will go for voip so data is the main stream
 
well this is just the start, next will be why - and once you have the did not know what we were doing is out the way - then you get down to ' show me the money ' - the courts are full of cases that are drawn out by Government, just the other day a Premier was held personally responsibe for a case
 
Hellburn said:
Not to be a killjoy or anything, but while the idea to challenge the government and ICASA on their performance is great, is this really, in all honesty and sincerity, a viable option?

For data alone, it'd probably be ok I guess, but what about voice? How would the number ranges be assigned and controlled.
Click to expand...
what swim said

Add to that all the interconnection requirements and regulation of those. And then add the general overseeing of industry/sector and the management and dispute resolution that goes with it. All that is currently ICASA's job right? If they're too overloaded now to do a decent job, how would this help the situation?
Click to expand...

an ineffective regulator is a poor reason to hold back proper competition

I do not think that the court would be likely to declare any such order as it would be interfering where it has no jurisdiction. An order such as this would be tantamount to a policy/regulation decision, which is in the hands of ICASA/DoC, not the Court of Law, afaik. Much like ICASA can not sentence someone to prison, only lay the charges and provide evidence.

If the regulations on this point are still vague, then I'd agree something needs to be stated one way or the other, and the case could be successful in getting that. And I would more likely see some kind of case to recover funds being successful; for loss of capital and loss of income (in the event of a policy decision against). I agree that ICASA and the DoC have done a crap ass job, but the only way to have much control over them is supposed to be with your vote.
Click to expand...
the case very simply is about the interpretation of a law, being the Telecommunications Act & the court certainly does have jurisdiction

an action for any kind of damages or compensation if the court rules in WAPA's favour is highly unlikely to succeed
 
VoIP... still issues

swim said:
The vans will go for voip so data is the main stream
Click to expand...

VoIP is all well and good, but you still need some sort of end point identifier.

If the VoIP numbers were only capable of dialing numbers on the same VANS, then it'd be fine, as the numbers would be under the VANS control. That wouldn't be very useful for the general public though. It could be for intra/inter office phone calls though within a multi-site company.

If the VoIP numbers could cross between VANS, then it would be much more useful, but in order for one provider's VoIP customer to call another's, there needs to be a common, agreed upon, numbering/routing convention. That on it's own would be a pain to manage, and agree on, and would fall under ICASA as it becomes industry regulation.

If the VoIP numbers want to be able to phone conventional numbers, you can have a gateway system similar to Skype's SkypeOut, but that only works to make calls. You can't receive calls from conventional numbers. I say conventional numbers because it covers both landline and cell phone. Landline penetration may not be much, but cellphone is huge. And not being able to call, or be called from, cell phones would be a major issue in this country.

In order for that to happen, the numbers need to fit into the current phone number system. Admittedly this is exactly why there was the migration to 10 digit dialing, but it'd still be a hell of a lot of management overhead on a regulator that is already doing a crap job. It'd just become a royal (maybe should be re-branded presidential?) mess... and would again require interconnection regulation/management etc.

I think we'd be better off with getting a decent regulator that can do their current job properly first. Then we can look at throwing a few more competitors in the mix. I still don't think that the full 50 to 100 would be a good idea. Maybe just the biggest 5, or have them bid for 5 licenses, and allow them to form partnerships prior to the bidding so that a group can together bid for one license. That could allow a number of smaller effective operators who are servicing local communities to join together to form one (hopefully) effective larger scale operator, without unnecessary buyouts and the like.
 
they tried to speak to ivy? tsk tsk, maybe lure her out with a tasty treat, or a loaded wallet?
 
Tns said:
they tried to speak to ivy? tsk tsk, maybe lure her out with a tasty treat, or a loaded wallet?
Click to expand...

Ironic that one can never seem to be able to communicate with the minister of communications.
 
while i am no lawyer, i have worked in an industry that deals with law for long enough to know that the court has no jurisdiction with regards to changing laws, however they can provide clarity with regards to the interpretation of a law.

on another note. if the vans just provide data access and it is up to the user to buy and maintain their own voip software and connection then that resolves the problem, so it is up to the user to get skype etc. then that negates the need for the regulator to do any work and as such icasa should have no problems as they can still have 7 hour lunch breaks in their 8 hour days (the other hour is made up of 2 x 30 minute tea breaks).

doing things that way means less revenue for the vans as they not earning the nice voip cash but it does mean they can set up their own networks and have a slice of the lovely data pie.

just my humble opinion but i think the wapa actually might have a chance. it has been a while since i read the act but from what i remember i didnt see anything prohibiting a van from self providing.

Piggy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X