From MilMayhem@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:16:05 1997
Return-Path: MilMayhem@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16407 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:16:05 -0500
From: MilMayhem@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11179; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:16:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout10.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.25) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011166; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:15:50 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout10.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA25390 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:15:29 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:15:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219111521_1581605171@emout10.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Re: FW: FCC & THE INTERNET 
Content-Length: 242

You should not consider the idea of allowing a phone charge to our internet
use.  If you do so I would be force to not use the internet as much as I need
or all together have to stop using it.  It would be a grave mistake.

Judy Davis-Miller

From mkb@dns.ida.net Wed Feb 19 11:18:38 1997
Return-Path: mkb@dns.ida.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16411 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:18:37 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11266; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:18:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dns.ida.net(204.228.203.1) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011259; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:18:17 -0500
Received: from pmif157.ida.net by dns (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA05828; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:11:47 -0700
Received: by pmif157.ida.net with Microsoft Mail
	id <01BC1E45.A4C54660@pmif157.ida.net>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:16:52 -0700
Message-Id: <01BC1E45.A4C54660@pmif157.ida.net>
From: Keith Branter <mkb@dns.ida.net>
To: "'isp@fcc.gov'" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: Per Minute Charges for Internet Services
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:16:42 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 1073

I understand that my local telephone company has filed a proposal with =
the FCC to impose a per minute charge for my Internet services. They =
contend that my usage has or will hinder the operation of the telephone =
network.

I feel that I am all ready paying the telephone company enough money to =
use my telephone. I have installed a separate telephone line just for my =
computer and FAX machine. I feel that what I am paying for this separate =
telephone line is more then adequate compensation to the telephone =
company for the use of their telephone lines. Maybe the telephone =
companies got caught with their pants down when it came to the Internet =
and they feel as though they are not making enough money on this =
technology. Please take into consideration these comments and do NOT =
allow the telephone companies of the USA to charge the consumer a per =
minute charge for the use of the Internet.

                                                                 =
SINCERELY
                                                               M. K. =
Branter

From billd@darkstar.swsc.k12.ar.us Wed Feb 19 11:21:09 1997
Return-Path: billd@darkstar.swsc.k12.ar.us
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16415 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:08 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11389; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(170.211.19.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011378; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:20:54 -0500
Received: (from billd@localhost) by darkstar.swsc.k12.ar.us (8.6.11/8.6.10) id KAA27353; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:14:50 -0600
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:14:50 -0600 (CST)
From: Bill Dempsey <billd@darkstar.swsc.k12.ar.us>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: time based billing for Internet
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970219100828.25990B-100000@darkstar.swsc.k12.ar.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 690

Dear Sirs:
Please do not bow to the monopolistic interests of the telephone 
companies.  Their desire to charge per minute for Internet use is pure 
and simple greed.  The Internet is a grand and exciting change in the way 
technology is improving our lives.  A per minute charge will kill the 
enthusiasm.  Most people I know use the net, because it does not have a 
time based fee associated with it.  School districts like mine which have 
made large investments in connectivity could not afford these extra 
charges.  Say no to them.

Sincerely,

Bill Dempsey

Bill Dempsey
Director of Technology
Texarkana Arkansas Schools
501-772-3371
fax  501-773-2602
billd@darkstar.swsc.k12.ar.us

From Michael_Boyle@elftech.com Wed Feb 19 11:21:43 1997
Return-Path: Michael_Boyle@elftech.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16419 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:38 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11412; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from safety.worldcom.com(198.64.193.5) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011403; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:21:19 -0500
Received: (from smtp@localhost) by safety.worldcom.com (8.8.5/Hahahahaha) id KAA09654 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:20:12 -0600 (CST)
Received: from worldcom-45.worldcom.com(198.64.193.76) by safety.worldcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma009632; Wed Feb 19 10:20:09 1997
Received: by WORLDCOM-45.worldcom.com.worldcom.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.14/3.3)
	  id AA5669; Wed, 19 Feb 97 10:17:49 -0500
Message-Id: <9702191517.AA5669@WORLDCOM-45.worldcom.com.worldcom.com>
Received: from worldcom with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id  054BBD2599E535268625644300596DBD; Wed, 19 Feb 97 10:17:49 
To: isp <isp@fcc.gov>
From: Michael Boyle <Michael_Boyle@elftech.com>
Date: 18 Feb 97 18:17:21 
Subject: -No Subject-
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain
Content-Length: 954

To whom it may concern,

Please add this letter to the many that feel metered internet access will
be a detriment to everyone.

Just as we do not charge for airplane seats by how much the passenger
weighs, and do not charge per minute on a standard voice telephone call,
there are certain things that should not be metered.

The growth of the internet in this country has been phenomenal, and most of
it is because of easy, affordable access by the masses.  If that is
restrained, then it will affect the entire country across many industries
that are dependent on such growth, such as computer software and hardware
manufacturers, networking equipment manufacturers and installers, not to
mention the ISPs, of which many operate on razor-thin margins.

Please consider how this measure would affect our world leadership in the
internet and telecommunications areas.

Thank you,

Michael Boyle

Manager, Network Operations Center
ELF Technologies, Inc.

From FredSSr@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:22:15 1997
Return-Path: FredSSr@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16423 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:11 -0500
From: FredSSr@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11459; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout17.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.43) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011447; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:22:09 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout17.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA10929;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:16 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:16 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219112116_1248344376@emout17.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov, PeggyTS@aol.com
cc: rcesare@engsyshq.echlin.com, nmathew@echlin.com, sjs5144@siena.edu,
        whitehouse.gov@aol.com
Subject: Fwd: [Fwd: Phone Charges]
Content-Length: 2723

In a message dated 97-02-08 12:10:24 EST, areinh@gte.net (Al Reinhart)
writes:

<<  isp@fcc.gov >>

Dear Sir or Madam:

Charging for Internet phone line service will have a major impact in my and
my families ability to use the Internet.  My children use the Internet as an
educational tool.  If additional service fees are charged, I will find it
necessary to discontinue using the Internet.

As President Clinton stated in his State of the Union address,  the Internet
should be available to all the citizens of the United States including the
schools.  Additional charges and fees will be a major deterrent to accessing
the information highway.  Only the wealthy will have ability to freely
communicate with the world.

Sincerely,

Fred Smith
fredssr@aol.com  
---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:	areinh@gte.net (Al Reinhart)
Reply-to:	areinh@gte.net
To:	dabrazzz@gte.net, TobieB@aol.com, galimski@gte.net, InSea@aol.com,
bluemoon@usa.pipeline.com, Jscott9628@aol.com, fredssr@aol.com,
SpBeau@aol.com, areinh@gte.net
Date: 97-02-08 12:10:24 EST

Received: from main.ismi.net (main.ismi.net [206.31.56.1]) by mail.gte.net
(950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AutoCF) via ESMTP id JAA10942 for
<areinh@gte.net>; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 09:49:44 -0600
Received: from jim---lynda-s (pm3-15.ismi.net [206.31.56.85]) by
main.ismi.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA06773 for <areinh@gte.net>; Sat,
8 Feb 1997 10:47:26 -0500
Message-ID: <32FCA0AC.6CA1@main.ismi.net>
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 10:50:05 -0500
From: Jim Reinhart <jimrein@main.ismi.net>
Reply-To: jimrein@ismi.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: areinh@gte.net
Subject: Phone Charges
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Subject: 
        Phone Charges
  Date: 
        Fri, 7 Feb 1997 15:22:25 -0500
  From: 
        Dave Wordell <DaveW10140@AOL.COM>

Please pass this along to as many as you can.

Your local telephone company has filed a proposal with the FCC to impose
per
minute charges for your internet service.  They contend that your usage
has
or will hinder the operation of the telephone network.

Internet usage will diminish if users were required to pay additional
per
minute charges.  The FCC has created an email box for your comments,
responses must be received by February 13, 1997.  Send your comments to
isp@fcc.gov and tell them what you think.

Every phone company is in on this one, and they are trying to sneak it
in
just under the wire for litagation.  Let everyone you know hear this
one.
 Get the email address to everyone you can think of.

That's  isp@fcc.gov

Please forward this email to all your friends on the internet so all our
voices may be heard.

Dave W
Titletown USA

From cirop36@grove.ufl.EDU Wed Feb 19 11:22:43 1997
Return-Path: cirop36@grove.ufl.EDU
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16427 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:43 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11486; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail1.grove.ufl.edu(128.227.8.81) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011473; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:22:29 -0500
Received: from dogwood.grove.ufl.EDU (cirop36@grove.ufl.edu [128.227.8.12]) by mail1.grove.ufl.EDU (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA14084 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Jose Gonzalez <cirop36@grove.ufl.EDU>
Received: from localhost (cirop36@localhost) by dogwood.grove.ufl.EDU (8.8.5/8.7.3/3) with SMTP id LAA10906 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:21:54 -0500 (EST)
X-Sender: cirop36@dogwood
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Internet tax
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.970219111726.4243A-100000@dogwood>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 399

To Whom it may concern:

It is appauling to think that telelphone companies will now try to take
advantage of the ever growing internet craze.  Their service is to provide
communication to the customer, what he/she decides to do with that service
is not important.  

I am strongly opposed to the attempt of local telephone companies trying
to levy additional taxes.

Sincerely,

Jose a gonzalez

From gothic@themall.net Wed Feb 19 11:22:44 1997
Return-Path: gothic@themall.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16432 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:44 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11488; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail1.themall.net(204.80.99.30) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011476; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:22:30 -0500
Received: from UUnet.themall.net ([208.204.244.3]) by mail.themall.net (8.8.5/8.8.2/IIAM 1.0 (DCH)) with ESMTP id IAA13344 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:19:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199702191619.IAA13344@mail.themall.net>
From: "Lance" <gothic@themall.net>
To: <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: Local telephone access charge for internet access.
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:18:12 -0800
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1160
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 342

I can't believe this.  Of course the Bells like the idea of getting more
money for ISP's.  This makes perfect sense especially when every Bell I
know of is running their own ISP.  Sounds like a conflict of interest to
me.  Just had to vent.

Thank You,
Garey D. Walker, Jr.
Internet In A Mall
Area Manager
San Antonio, TX
spartan@themall.net

From snash@mindspring.com Wed Feb 19 11:22:45 1997
Return-Path: snash@mindspring.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16439 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:45 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11511; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mule1.mindspring.com(204.180.128.167) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011480; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:22:43 -0500
Received: from snash.mindspring.com (user-168-121-105-197.dialup.mindspring.com [168.121.105.197])
          by mule1.mindspring.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id LAA205246 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:17 -0500
Message-Id: <2.2.32.19970219162646.0067671c@mindspring.com>
X-Sender: snash@mindspring.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:26:46 -0500
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: Steve Nash <snash@mindspring.com>
Subject: Internet Usage Fee
Content-Length: 428

I disagree with the phone companies charging for internet access. 
I understand most people do not have all the facts, and neither do I claim
this, but this seems to be an attempt by the phone companies to majoritize
the internet. If their bandwidth is so taxed, why are they trying to be an
internet provider? If they have internet access, then they can undermine the
prices of their competitor with the governments blessing.

From lmorris@orca.esd114.wednet.edu Wed Feb 19 11:22:44 1997
Return-Path: lmorris@orca.esd114.wednet.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16433 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:44 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11484; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from orca.esd114.wednet.edu(164.116.5.5) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011478; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:22:34 -0500
Received: from [168.212.15.193] by orca.esd114.wednet.edu (5.x/SMI-SVR4-Orca1)
	id AA15487; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:17:59 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500af30d91b5a79@[168.212.15.193]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:24:11 -0700
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: lmorris@orca.esd114.wednet.edu (Lorie Morris)
Subject: PER MINUTE RATES/INTERNET
Content-Length: 228

THIS IS RIDICULOUS!!  I HOPE THAT THIS DOES NOT GET PASSED.  IT WOULD BE A
BURDEN TO EVERYBODY WHO USES THE INTERNET, ESPECIALLY THE KIDS WHO USE IT
FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES.  PLEASE PUT A STOP TO THIS

LORIE MORRIS, EDUCATOR

From GRABLUTZL@centocor.com Wed Feb 19 11:24:16 1997
Return-Path: GRABLUTZL@centocor.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16443 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:15 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11555; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(38.253.252.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011546; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:24:00 -0500
Received: from US5D1-Message_Server by centocor.com
	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:50 -0500
Message-Id: <s30ae302.020@centocor.com>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:26:43 -0500
From: Laura Grablutz <GRABLUTZL@centocor.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Proposed Internet phone surcharges
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Length: 1485

I am writing in response to the proposed phone use surcharges for
Internet connect time. First, I believe that this move would discriminate
against deaf people and others with disabilities who use the Internet and
other digital devices for communication purposes. I would caution against
any attempts to interfere with or passively profit from the free speech of
Americans.

It is very likely that the phone companies are less worried about the strain
on their physical equipment, than the threat of losing current and potential
future profits. They have been more than happy to upgrade to digital lines
in the hopes of carrying cable tv and the like, but are probably now
worried that customers will abandon historically overpriced long distance
service. The Internet can offer almost free communications -- even live
voice messaging -- technology that the phone company has been lagging
behind in. 

And more disturbing is the trend for long distance carriers such as AT&T
offering Internet connections. Will they unfairly lure in customers by
offering to waive the connection fees charged by their sister local
companies?

If the phone companies want to profit from the surge in digital
communications, especially through the Internet, let them invest in, offer
fair prices for, and develop the market to make us want to pay for
advancements such as ISDN lines that will further improve global
communications, not inhibit them.

Laura Grablutz
616 Pughtown Rd
Spring City, PA 19475

From cgllc@flash.net Wed Feb 19 11:24:17 1997
Return-Path: cgllc@flash.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16447 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:17 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11578; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from endeavor.flash.net(208.194.223.40) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011549; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:24:15 -0500
Received: from LOCALNAME (pm22-168.flash.net [208.194.194.168]) by endeavor (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA02592 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:21:10 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <330B6187.265E@flash.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:24:39 -0800
From: "Darrell R. Lester" <cgllc@flash.net>
Reply-To: cgllc@flash.net
Organization: The Centra Group, L.L.C.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: CC Docket No 96-263
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1258

I am writing in reference to a proposal by our local telephone company
to impose per minute charges for Internet Service.  I would be opposed
to this change and offer the following reasons.
	1)In my companies use of the Internet we have seen a substantial
decrease in the amount of paperwork.  The Internet will serve to reduce
the volumes of paper used and increase efficiency in Business
Administrative functions.  Applying a per minute charge will render the
Internet useless to Business applications.
	2)We have already made use of many Government locations on the
Internet.  Specifically, the IRS home page has allowed us to download
tax forms and instructions for the preparation of tax returns.  This
alone will save much paper, government printing cost, and mailing cost. 
The per minute charge would render these services useless.
	3)On a personal note, the Internet has allowed children the luxury of
information access as never before.  In my sons case, the quality of his
written research papers has improved threefold.  Per minute charges
would limit this access only to the wealthiest of people.

The above are only some of the reasons I ask this proposal not to be
enacted.

Thank You for your consideration.
Darrell R. Lester
cgllc@flash.net

From hlozekcc@stratos.net Wed Feb 19 11:24:48 1997
Return-Path: hlozekcc@stratos.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16451 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:47 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11590; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from home.stratos.net(207.25.199.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011586; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:24:34 -0500
Received: from 708644668 ([207.25.199.232]) by atlas.stratos.net
          (Netscape Mail Server v1.1) with SMTP id AAA91 for <isp@fcc.gov>;
          Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:22:23 -0500
Message-ID: <330B2923.4170@stratos.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:03 -0500
From: hlozekcc@stratos.net (hlozekcc)
Reply-To: 278@fcc.gov, East@fcc.gov, 150th@fcc.gov, Street@fcc.gov,
        Cleveland@fcc.gov, Ohio@fcc.gov, 44110-1211@fcc.gov
Organization: Hlozek, Inc.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Access Charges
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1221

FCC Webmaster:

I am writing to state my opinion that the telephone companies like
Ameritech, etc. do not need to assess access charges to internet
providers or their customers.

Currently, most of these companies are creating their own internet
services as well as offices and homes now require many extra lines to
accomodate FAX, on-line and telephone services.

In my new home business, I have home, FAX, office and on-line services.
I'm sure that these companies are generating more than enough revenue
from this increase in the number of indidvidual lines for businesses,
etc.  Also, the fees they charge for these additional services are not
inexpensive by any means.

I have just opened a new business which is getting it's foot off the
ground due to the Internet.  I hope you also see that this will cause
alot of middle-class Americans to no longer be able to utilize the WWW
because it will be too costly.

The goal of the WWW is to provide information and easy access to it to
all, over the entire world.  Let's not loose sight of this and remember
that everyone has the right to move into the 21st century.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Christopher C. Hlozek
CEO/President, Hlozek Communication, Inc.
www.rnfa.org

From rackem@neuro.wustl.edu Wed Feb 19 11:24:49 1997
Return-Path: rackem@neuro.wustl.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16455 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:48 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11596; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:24:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from neuro.wustl.edu(128.252.197.5) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011582; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:24:34 -0500
Received: from [128.252.151.139] ([128.252.151.139]) by neuro.wustl.edu (8.7.6/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA03550 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:22:20 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <v01510100af30da54ef8a@[128.252.151.139]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:27:50 -0600
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: rackem@neuro.wustl.edu (Michael Racke)
Subject: Fwd: Fwd: URGENT
Content-Length: 1870

>>
>>I am writing in response to the proposal made by telephone providers
>to
>> the FCC.  I do not think it is the best interest of the general
>public,
>>nor is it in the best interest of the economy of the United States.
>The
>>proposed "per-minute" charge scheme would be highly damaging to the
>>fledgling economy developing across the computer networks in this
>>country. It would also be harmful to researchers, students, and
>>government agengies across the country and world-wide.
>>
>>If per-minute charges are allowed to take effect, the effect would be
>a
>>reduction of consumer interest, and a stagnation of academic progress
>and
>>communications.  I urge you to deny the proposal as it would deny many
>>people the right to fast communications, as they would no longer be
>able
>>to afford the charges.  Many non-profit organizations and research
>groups
>>would have a much more restricted access to this indispensable mode of
>>communication.
>>
>>I urge you  to do what is right for the general public of the United
>>States, and for its many invaluable organizations.  Please do not
>grant
>>telephone providers' proposal as it is a monopolistic measure and
>would
>>contribute to the rapid decline of services involved with the
>internet.
>>You should consider how much economic damage this proposal will do to
>>local access providers, major access providers (e.g. AOL), and
>>universities as these groups attempt to develop and improve the
>>communications and services provided on the internet.  They would be
>hard
>>pressed to deal with this new burden.  Thank you for your time and
>>consideration.
>>
>>                                Sincerely,

Michael K. Racke, M.D.

Assistant Professor of Neurology
Washington University School of Medicine
Box 8111
660 South Euclid Avenue
St. Louis, MO. 63110
Phone: 314-362-7968
FAX:   314-747-1345

From sandwood@internetmci.com Wed Feb 19 11:25:20 1997
Return-Path: sandwood@internetmci.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16459 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:25:20 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11620; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:25:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailsrv1.pcy.mci.net(204.71.0.43) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011616; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:25:06 -0500
Received: from usr1-dialup44.Houston.mci.net (usr1-dialup44.Houston.mci.net)
 by MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.0-7 #10044)
 id <01IFLJYSI9YO8WWAKJ@MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET> for isp@fcc.gov; Wed,
 19 Feb 1997 11:25:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from usr1-dialup44.Houston.mci.net (usr1-dialup44.Houston.mci.net)
 by MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.0-7 #10044)
 id <01IFLJYCRQ5O8WWB91@MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET> for isp@fcc.gov; Wed,
 19 Feb 1997 11:24:27 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:20:54 -0600
From: Lynwood and Sandie Kindt <sandwood@internetmci.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Message-id: <01IFLJYDFWEW8WWB91@MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
Content-Length: 458

DEAR FCC,

I'm APPOSED to any proposal by the phone company to charge me by the minute
for Internet service. I installed a second line and I pay for this separate
line specifically for electronic media. 
I have three children close to or in their teens. My kids are on the phone
constantly.  They're usually chat much longer than my computer is online.
The phone company should charge my kids by the minute if they're going to
use this logic.

Lynwood Kindt

From niko@ny.cks.com Wed Feb 19 11:26:51 1997
Return-Path: niko@ny.cks.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16463 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:26:50 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11683; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:26:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ny.cks.com(206.152.45.70) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011676; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:26:48 -0500
Received: from [206.152.45.69] ([206.152.45.69]) by ny (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id LAA24472 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:27 -0500
X-Sender: niko@ny
Message-Id: <v03020900af30d991fd18@[206.152.45.69]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:27:57 -0500
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: Niko Sluzki <niko@ny.cks.com>
Subject: TelCo per minute charges ...
Content-Length: 709

> > I am writing you this to inform you of a very important matter
> > currently under review by the FCC. Your local telephone company has
> > filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your
> > internet service. They contend that your usage has or will hinder the
> > operation of the telephone network.

Please do not allow this to happen. This will dramatically hinder the
miraculous progress the Internet has made in global communication and
education.

Limiting the Internet in this manner would be a travesty.

Best regards,

Niko Sluzki

___________________________________________________________________________
Niko Sluzki
Senior Technologist
CKS Partners, Inc.
New York, NY

From nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov Wed Feb 19 11:27:51 1997
Return-Path: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16467 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:27:51 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11716; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:27:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exodus.content.earthlink.net(206.250.94.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011708; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:27:32 -0500
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by exodus (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id IAA01338 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:27:05 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:27:05 -0800
From: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (SVR4 nobody uid)
Message-Id: <199702191627.IAA01338@exodus>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Form Data from 204.216.57.110
Content-Length: 547

Date: Wed Feb 19 08:27:05 PST 1997

address = 13211 Buena Vista
city = Poway
comments = 
email = 
name = Perry F Collins
regarding =   FCC Docket #96-263 
state = Ca
statement =  I understand the FCC has tentatively concluded that providers of information services (including Internet service providers) should not be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies currently assess on long-distance carriers. I agree that Internet Service Providers should not be subject to the interstate access charges. 
zipcode = 92064

From Jerome_Brock@gcam.com Wed Feb 19 11:28:23 1997
Return-Path: Jerome_Brock@gcam.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16471 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:22 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11747; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail1.noc.netcom.net(204.31.1.150) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011740; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:28:02 -0500
Received: from gcam.com (mail1.gcam.com [207.220.84.24])
	by mail1.noc.netcom.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA03730
	for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:24:05 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 97 13:35:28 CST
Subject: Phone Company Domination
Message-ID: <0000005E.qm@gcam.com>
From: Jerome_Brock@gcam.com (Jerome Brock)
To: isp@fcc.gov (isp)
Organization: Gleason/Calise/Associates Inc.
X-HoloGate: 1.1.8
Lines: 3150
Content-Length: 527

                      Subject:                              Time:  1:07 PM
  OFFICE MEMO         Phone Company Domination              Date:  2/11/97
Please don't let the phone companies tag an extra charge on local calling
internet connections.  We're using a common network with known limitations.  The
difference between voice and data is nominal.   I'm already paying a standard
rate for local phone service.  How I decide to use this service is incidental. 
If you wan't to charge exorbitant fees, upgrade the network...

From tmanley@proaxis.com Wed Feb 19 11:28:24 1997
Return-Path: tmanley@proaxis.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16475 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:24 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11751; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from speedy.proaxis.com(198.68.7.14) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011741; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:28:11 -0500
Received: from cvo12685.ch2m.com ([130.77.3.251]) by speedy.proaxis.com (8.8.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id IAA21332 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:27:41 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199702191627.IAA21332@speedy.proaxis.com>
From: "Tim Manley" <tmanley@proaxis.com>
To: <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: internet per minute use charge
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:25:40 -0800
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 517

This is insane.  If you ever wanted to stop a technology from growing this
is the best way to do it.  Leave the internet and computers alone so that
they can mature into the technology that they were meant to be.  Imagine if
cars were heavily taxed in the beginning.  No one would drive and only
companies would have them.  Interstate commerce and travel would not be
what it is today and many communities would be dead due to no tourism.  We
are overtaxed already.  You need to more taxes away not create new ones.

From nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov Wed Feb 19 11:28:53 1997
Return-Path: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16479 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:52 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11769; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exodus.content.earthlink.net(206.250.94.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011767; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:28:53 -0500
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by exodus (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id IAA01583 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:28:33 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:28:33 -0800
From: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (SVR4 nobody uid)
Message-Id: <199702191628.IAA01583@exodus>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Reply-To: bsewell@northrim.net
Subject: Form Data from 206.206.31.79
Content-Length: 1275

Date: Wed Feb 19 08:28:33 PST 1997

address = PO Box 393
city = Wendell
comments = Any additional charges for Internet Access will likely hinder progress as a whole.  Education is a key element to all progress made in society, and additional charges will prevent the less fortunate from learning, and at the same time, restrict their much needed input from the rest of society.  We must take a step back and review the possible consequences of this action, and consider if it is a worthwhile action which will only benefit certain corporations.  I believe that going against additional charges will benefit these corporations even more in the long run.  I am against any changes that will increase the costs of Internet access to any end user, public or private.

Most Sincerely,
Bob Sewell Jr.
email = bsewell@northrim.net
name = Bob Sewell Jr.
regarding =   FCC Docket #96-263 
state = Idaho
statement =  I understand the FCC has tentatively concluded that providers of information services (including Internet service providers) should not be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies currently assess on long-distance carriers. I agree that Internet Service Providers should not be subject to the interstate access charges. 
zipcode = 83355

From afd138@flash.net Wed Feb 19 11:29:23 1997
Return-Path: afd138@flash.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16483 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:23 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11778; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from centurion.flash.net(206.149.24.19) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011773; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:29:11 -0500
Received: from [1.1.1.1] (wizrealm.com [204.134.71.66]) by flash.net (8.8.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id KAA23510; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:28:54 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:28:54 -0600 (CST)
X-Sender: afd138@pop.flash.net
Message-Id: <v01540b01af3078e7e6a2@[1.1.1.1]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: afd138@flash.net (Netprobe Internet Communications)
Subject: CC Docket No 96-263
Cc: tvinson@flash.net
Content-Length: 895

Dear Sirs, It is totally and inequivically illegal for you to consider
double-billing people for phone use. That is exactly what it is...DOUBLE
BILLING. Please be advised that I will definitely be supporting cable net
in lieu of all the support I have previously given telecommunications. DO
NOT DOUBLE BILL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, PLEASE.

Respectfully,

Susan Parr
Netprobe Internet Communications

---------------------------------------------------------
NETPROBE INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS http://www.netprobe.net
10405 Delicado Place NE    .      Albuquerque, New Mexico 87111
$99/yr Unlimited Internet Access       http://www.netprobe.net
DOMAINS              http://www.netprobe.net/aaaholidaysale.html
Software HELP        http://www.netprobe.net/netsoftware.html
CARD ORDERS SECURE ONLINE                            (505) 271-4722
---------------------------------------------------------

From ellipsis@alliance.net Wed Feb 19 11:29:24 1997
Return-Path: ellipsis@alliance.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16487 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:24 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11780; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from allinux1.alliance.net(198.110.233.10) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011774; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:29:24 -0500
Received: from Alliance Network Inc..alliance.net(really [198.110.233.61]) by alliance.net
	via sendmail with smtp
	id <m0vxEtC-001Np5C@alliance.net>
	for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:02 -0500 (EST)
	(Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #8 built 1996-Nov-8)
Message-ID: <330B2A92.5584@alliance.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:30:10 -0500
From: ellipsis <ellipsis@alliance.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: INFO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 107

Can you please send me some info on the $.03 charge a minute on phone
bills

thanks

ellipsis@alliance.net

From nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov Wed Feb 19 11:29:53 1997
Return-Path: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16491 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:53 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11795; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:29:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exodus.content.earthlink.net(206.250.94.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011789; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:29:37 -0500
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by exodus (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id IAA01711 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:29:17 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:29:17 -0800
From: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (SVR4 nobody uid)
Message-Id: <199702191629.IAA01711@exodus>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Reply-To: bluhart@northrim.net
Subject: Form Data from 206.206.31.81
Content-Length: 473

Date: Wed Feb 19 08:29:17 PST 1997

address = 1121A E 2900 South
city = Hagerman
comments = 
email = bluhart@northrim.net
name = Evelyn Summers
regarding =   FCC Docket #96-263 
state = ID
statement =  I understand the FCC has tentatively concluded that providers of information services (including Internet service providers) should not be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies currently assess on long-distance carriers.
zipcode = 83332

From dpiccini@juno.com Wed Feb 19 11:30:23 1997
Return-Path: dpiccini@juno.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16495 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:30:23 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11825; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:30:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from m8.boston.juno.com(205.231.101.196) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011815; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:30:04 -0500
Received: (from dpiccini@juno.com) by m8.boston.juno.com (queuemail)
	id LcW27622; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:43 EST
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: ISP per minute charges
Message-ID: <19970219.114044.10070.2.dpiccini@juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 1.15
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 3-4,6
From: dpiccini@juno.com (daniel piccini)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:28:43 EST
Content-Length: 324

     I do not think that users of the internet should be charged
additional per minute charges for internet access.  I do not think that
grandmothers should be charged additional per minute charges for talking
to their grand children.

--Dan @ <Dpiccini@JUNO.Com> (via Albany, new york]
*djp:SWAnhTesbRotjMetKeaMopRtlAjfaML

From mgibson@atlantic.net Wed Feb 19 11:31:27 1997
Return-Path: mgibson@atlantic.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16499 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:27 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11889; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from berlin.atlantic.net(204.215.255.12) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011886; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:31:21 -0500
Received: from rio.atlantic.net (root@rio.atlantic.net [204.215.255.3]) by berlin.atlantic.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id LAA29805 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:41:55 -0500
Received: from atlantic.atlantic.net (ppp-gnv-fl-028.atlantic.net [204.215.255.58]) by rio.atlantic.net (8.8.5/8.7.5) with ESMTP id LAA10180 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:35:07 -0500
Message-Id: <199702191635.LAA10180@rio.atlantic.net>
From: "Goldschlager" <mgibson@atlantic.net>
To: <isp@fcc.gov>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:50 -0500
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1157
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 361

Dear FCC,
	I do not wish to pay extra for my internet access. Please vote against the
local telephone companies. I fear the additional charge will bring the
internet to a halt. Just think of all the businesses that primarily sell on
the internet, they will all go under. Please don't kill this new found
media to express ourselves.
Thank you,
Mike S Gibson Jr.

From Panthra_Kar@prodigy.com Wed Feb 19 11:31:58 1997
Return-Path: Panthra_Kar@prodigy.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16504 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:57 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11907; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:32:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pimaia4w.prodigy.com(198.83.18.139) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011898; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:31:36 -0500
Received: from mime2.prodigy.com (mime2.prodigy.com [192.168.253.26]) by pimaia4w.prodigy.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with ESMTP id LAA30370 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:12:58 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost) by mime2.prodigy.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id LAA13968 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:04:59 -0500
Message-Id: <199702191604.LAA13968@mime2.prodigy.com>
X-Mailer: Prodigy Internet GW(v0.9beta) - ae01dm04sc03
From: Panthra_Kar@prodigy.com (MR PATRICK M SCHULZ)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:04:59, -0500
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Internet Phone Charges
Content-Length: 822

To Whom it may concern;

     I am a member of Prodigy, one of the major on-line services in 
the US.  I believe that charging phone rates for Internet usage is 
ludricrious.  It is almost impossible to track usage, as far as I 
know, unless you monitor the access numbers used by the people.  It 
is unfair, to both the users and suppliers of service.  Many people 
who go on-line use it for recreation, shopping, and buisness.  Making 
someone pay above and beyond the charges placed by the service is 
akin to highway robbery.  I think that anything of this nature is 
wrong.  The phone companies already make enough off of long-distance 
calls, why allow them to charge for dialing an access number which is 
local.  What's next, charging for every minute for calling anyone at 
all, even local calls?

Patrick Schulz

From itrica@ix.netcom.com Wed Feb 19 11:31:59 1997
Return-Path: itrica@ix.netcom.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16509 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:58 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11917; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:32:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com(206.214.98.9) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011905; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:31:58 -0500
Received: (from smap@localhost)
          by dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id KAA16958 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:31:37 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199702191631.KAA16958@dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com>
Received: from sjx-ca83-04.ix.netcom.com(207.94.112.100) by dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma016850; Wed Feb 19 10:27:01 1997
From: "itrica" <itrica@ix.netcom.com>
To: <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: Objection of Internet Charge Change
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:28:08 -0800
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1157
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 358

 Dear Sirs:

I was told that the ISP/Telco try to change the charge formula for Internet
service, I think it is a very bad plan to discourage the use of Internet
and stop the pervasiveness of Internet. like the flat telephone service for
home users is already well familiar, the ISP Internet charge shall keep the
same. please consider the above, thanks. 

From BOWEJA@DIANA.HOLLINS.EDU Wed Feb 19 11:31:59 1997
Return-Path: BOWEJA@DIANA.HOLLINS.EDU
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16510 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:58 -0500
From: BOWEJA@DIANA.HOLLINS.EDU
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11909; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:32:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(192.160.94.38) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011897; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:31:36 -0500
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:06:37 -0500 (EST)
To: isp@fcc.gov
Message-Id: <970219110637.3818@DIANA.HOLLINS.EDU>
Subject: Per minute charges.
Content-Length: 187

This is outrageous......   If the problem is with tying up the lines,
make new lines.  we pay the taxes anyway, right?

Jennifer Bowe
204 Campbells Creek Drive 
Charleston, WV 25306-6604

From marbeth@ix.netcom.com Wed Feb 19 11:31:59 1997
Return-Path: marbeth@ix.netcom.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16511 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:31:58 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11911; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:32:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com(206.214.98.8) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011899; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:31:47 -0500
Received: (from smap@localhost)
          by dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id KAA13683 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:31:27 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:31:27 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199702191631.KAA13683@dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com>
Received: from ple-ca9-27.ix.netcom.com(204.31.114.123) by dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma013602; Wed Feb 19 10:31:07 1997
From: marbeth@ix.netcom.com (Martha Beth Lewis)
Subject: internet
To: isp@fcc.gov
Content-Length: 97

Please don't allow the phone companies to do this to us!  thank you
Martha Beth Lewis
California

From hwa@Pacesetter.COM Wed Feb 19 11:32:30 1997
Return-Path: hwa@Pacesetter.COM
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16519 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:32:30 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11940; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:32:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ns.pacesetter.com(150.202.8.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011935; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:32:30 -0500
Received: by gate0; id AA21584; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:32:03 -0800
Received: from lakers(150.202.12.2) by gate0 via smap (V1.3)
	id sma021575; Wed Feb 19 08:31:38 1997
Received: from medusa.Pacesetter.Com by Pacesetter.COM (5.x/master.cf-1.18-3/30/95)
	id AA20145; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:31:33 -0800
Received: from mendocino.Pacesetter.Com by medusa.Pacesetter.Com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id IAA25985; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:31:32 -0800
Received: by mendocino.Pacesetter.Com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4-PI)
	id IAA02442; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:31:31 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:31:31 -0800
From: hwa@Pacesetter.COM (Jen-Gwang Hwang)
Message-Id: <199702191631.IAA02442@mendocino.Pacesetter.Com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: imposing per minute charges
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Content-Length: 196

Dear FCC:

>Our local telephone company has
>filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your
>internet service.

Is it true? Please do not allow them to do that.
Thanks.

-Jen

From nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov Wed Feb 19 11:33:03 1997
Return-Path: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16523 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:00 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11959; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exodus.content.earthlink.net(206.250.94.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011952; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:32:59 -0500
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by exodus (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id IAA02405 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:32:38 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:32:38 -0800
From: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (SVR4 nobody uid)
Message-Id: <199702191632.IAA02405@exodus>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Reply-To: scnossen@northrim.net
Subject: Form Data from 206.206.31.74
Content-Length: 571

Date: Wed Feb 19 08:32:38 PST 1997

address = 3451-A South 1800 East
city = Wendell
comments = 
email = scnossen@northrim.net
name = Sam Cnossen
regarding =   FCC Docket #96-263 
state = ID
statement =  I understand the FCC has tentatively concluded that providers of information services (including Internet service providers) should not be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies currently assess on long-distance carriers. I agree that Internet Service Providers should not be subject to the interstate access charges. 
zipcode = 83355

From nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov Wed Feb 19 11:33:30 1997
Return-Path: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16527 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:30 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11974; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exodus.content.earthlink.net(206.250.94.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011953; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:33:00 -0500
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by exodus (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id IAA02401 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:32:38 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:32:38 -0800
From: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (SVR4 nobody uid)
Message-Id: <199702191632.IAA02401@exodus>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Reply-To: bluhart@northrim.net
Subject: Form Data from 206.206.31.81
Content-Length: 465

Date: Wed Feb 19 08:32:38 PST 1997

address = 1121AE 2900 S
city = Hagerman
comments = 
email = bluhart@northrim.net
name = Ron Summers
regarding =   FCC Docket #96-263 
state = ID
statement =  I understand the FCC has tentatively concluded that providers of information services (including Internet service providers) should not be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies currently assess on long-distance carriers.
zipcode = 83332

From bobsta@connecti.com Wed Feb 19 11:33:31 1997
Return-Path: bobsta@connecti.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16533 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:31 -0500
From: bobsta@connecti.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11980; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mercury.connecti.com(206.24.66.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011969; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:33:18 -0500
Received: from ConnectI-253251.ConnectI.com (ConnectI-253251 [207.51.253.251])
          by mercury.ConnectI.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id KAA14957 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:32:03 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:32:03 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199702191632.KAA14957@mercury.ConnectI.com>
X-Sender: bobsta@connecti.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: isp@fcc.gov
Content-Length: 480

greetings,

this is to let you know that i am AGAINST any flat "per minute" fee for use
of the telephone for internet access. everyone pays a fee for local service
and a per-minute fee for long distance as it is. additional fees would be
detrimental to the free flow of ideas and use of the internet, making it
even more difficult for poor people and people in rural areas to gain access
to the information on the 'net.

thank you

R.G. Harloff
2341 FM 1150
Kingsbury TX 78638

From msr@comtel.net Wed Feb 19 11:33:32 1997
Return-Path: msr@comtel.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16532 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:31 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA11983; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(207.137.145.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma011972; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:33:33 -0500
Received: from MSRHOME ([207.137.145.232]) by www.COMTEL.NET
          (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with SMTP id AAA270
          for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:31:21 -0800
Received: by MSRHOME with Microsoft Mail
	id <01BC1E3F.5E6017A0@MSRHOME>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:31:57 -0800
Message-ID: <01BC1E3F.5E6017A0@MSRHOME>
From: msr@comtel.net (ATI Michael S. Rinebold)
To: "'isp@fcc.gov'" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: New regulations
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:29:42 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 472

Please do not allow the phone companies to dictate our usage of the net. =
People of means will continue to use the net if there were usage =
charges. But the people without money will not.=20
The internet has the potential to be a great equalizer in society-but =
only if everyone has it. Charging access would be like converting the =
highways to all toll roads or charging for mail delivery.=20

Please make sure the road stays open!

Sincerely,

Michael S. Rinebold

From mbennett@qualcomm.com Wed Feb 19 11:34:03 1997
Return-Path: mbennett@qualcomm.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16539 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:34:03 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12025; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:34:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frobozz.qualcomm.com(129.46.50.79) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012003; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:34:00 -0500
Received: from [129.46.191.187] (mbennett-mac.qualcomm.com [129.46.191.187]) by frobozz.qualcomm.com (8.8.5/1.4/8.7.2/1.13) with ESMTP id IAA20184 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:33:32 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:33:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender: mbennett@nala.qualcomm.com
Message-Id: <v03007809af306b3776a5@[129.46.191.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: martin bennett <mbennett@qualcomm.com>
Subject: Proposed "per-minute" charge
Content-Length: 1867

I am writing in response to the proposal made by telephone providers to

the FCC.  I do not think it is in the best interest of the general

public,

nor is it in the best interest of the economy of the United States.  The

proposed "per-minute" charge scheme would be highly damaging to the

fledgling economy developing across the computer networks in this
country.

It would also be harmful to researchers, students, and government
agengies

across the country and world-wide.  If per-minute charges are allowed to

be initiated, the effect would be a reduction of consumer interest, and a

stagnation of academic progress and communications.

I urge you to deny the proposal as it would deny many people the right to

fast communications, as they would no longer be able to afford the

charges. Many non-profit organizations and research groups would have a

much more restricted access to this indispensable mode of communication.

I urge you to do what is right for the general public of the United

States, and for its many invaluable organizations.  Please do not grant

telephone providers' proposal as it is a monopolistic measure and would

contribute to the rapid decline of services involved with the internet.

You should consider how much economic damage this proposal will do to

local access providers, major access providers (e.g. AOL), and

universities as these groups attempt to develop and improve the

communications and services provided on the internet.  They would be hard

pressed to deal with this new burden.  Thank you for your time and

consideration.

                                Sincerely,

Martin Bennett                     Office: M280E
Qualcomm Inc.                      Direct: (619) 658-2564
5525 Morehouse Road                Fax:    (619) 658-1584
San Diego, CA 92121-2779           mbennett@qualcomm.com

From majumder@rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu Wed Feb 19 11:36:05 1997
Return-Path: majumder@rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16543 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:36:05 -0500
From: majumder@rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12091; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:36:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from relay7.uu.net(192.48.96.17) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012085; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:36:07 -0500
Received: from names by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP 
	(peer crosschecked as: names.wvu.edu [157.182.140.2])
	id QQcdpa14616; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:35:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu by names (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.0:JLF-19970113)
	id LAA08464; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:02 -0500
Received: from WVURTC/SpoolDir by rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu (Mercury 1.12);
    Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:38:04 EST5EDT
Received: from SpoolDir by WVURTC (Mercury 1.12); Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:37:49 EST5EDT
Organization: Intl Center for Disability Info
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:37:45 EST
Subject: new rules on internet access
Return-receipt-to: <majumder@rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu>
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.50)
Message-ID: <30A52054BA@rtc1.icdi.wvu.edu>
Content-Length: 484

I feel the purpose of improved information exchange will be defeated 
by imposing additional charge by the telephone company for internet 
use. I hope you avoid this disincentive to use internet service.

Thank you.

Ranjit Majumder
Director & Professor
WVRRTC/ICDI
West Virginia University
806 Allen Hall
Morgantown, WV 26506-6122, USA
Phone 304-293-5313 (VOICE/TDD)
Fax   304-293-6661
MAJUMDER@RTC1.ICDI.WVU.EDU

*********************

Seasons Greetings  !

*********************

From wwachtel@cascade.net Wed Feb 19 11:36:38 1997
Return-Path: wwachtel@cascade.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16547 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:36:34 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12102; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:36:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cascade.cascade.net(204.57.138.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012083; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:36:03 -0500
Received: from LOCALNAME (ppp5.cascade.net [204.57.138.55])
	by cascade.cascade.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA16861
	for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:33:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <330B2C35.68CA@cascade.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:37:09 -0800
From: "William M. Wachtel" <wwachtel@cascade.net>
Reply-To: wwachtel@cascade.net
Organization: none
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Phone rates
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 313

Gentlemen:

As an Internet user, I am concerned about the desire on the part of the
telephone companies to charge higher fees for Internet access.  I
believe that higher fees would severely hinder the development and use
of this marvellous and valuable means of communication!

Respectfully,

William M. Wachtel

From csm@desoto.net Wed Feb 19 11:39:10 1997
Return-Path: csm@desoto.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16551 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:09 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12212; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www.desoto.net(207.30.189.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012205; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:39:05 -0500
Received: from [207.30.189.190] by desoto.net id 5c600.wrk; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:35:02 EDT
Message-ID: <330B2BEC.1CDC@desoto.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:35:56 -0500
From: Chris and Sonja Meyer <csm@desoto.net>
Reply-To: csm@desoto.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ISP@fcc.gov
CC: csm@desoto.net
Subject: CC Docket No. 96-263
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 566

This letter is to protest the proposed additional per minute charges
requested by the telephone companies.  The only benefits of such a
proposal will be for the telephone companies and will cause a definite
harm to individuals, small businesses and schools if such a proposal was
accepted.  Please protect us, the consumers, the people, by refusing to
give the telephone companies the rights to charge us more money for
usage of telephone lines that we are already paying for.

Thank you very much!

Sincerely,
Sonja L. Meyer
2129 N.E. Bishop St.
Arcadia, Fl. 34266

From BHilbert1@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:39:40 1997
Return-Path: BHilbert1@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16555 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:40 -0500
From: BHilbert1@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12249; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout01.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.92) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012235; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:39:30 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout01.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA06980 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:10 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:10 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219113908_-972121267@emout01.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Surcharges
Content-Length: 181

The ideas of phone companies surcharging for internet or other computer usage
will definitely affect how much I use online services.  Their income will be
decreased.

Brian Hilbert

From KRAUSEDE@saber.udayton.edu Wed Feb 19 11:40:12 1997
Return-Path: KRAUSEDE@saber.udayton.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16559 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:40:12 -0500
From: KRAUSEDE@saber.udayton.edu
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12287; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:40:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from saber.udayton.edu(131.238.1.15) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012264; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:39:47 -0500
Received: from saber.udayton.edu by saber.udayton.edu (PMDF V5.0-6 #16468)
 id <01IFLJQULPGW0011BM@saber.udayton.edu> for isp@fcc.gov; Wed,
 19 Feb 1997 11:41:07 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:41:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: reponse to proposal of per minute charges for internet service.
To: isp@fcc.gov
Message-id: <01IFLJQULT8I0011BM@saber.udayton.edu>
X-VMS-To: IN%"isp@fcc.gov"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-Length: 2041

This letter is in response to the proposal to impose per minute charges
on internet service.

I am a student at the University of Dayton, and my primary use of the
internet is as a refesernce source for general information or as a
means of communication with the graduate schools to which I am applying.

As a student, I know there are many productive ways of using the web.  
Granted some people may and have found ways to abuse the new technology,
but I believe the benefits of internet usage far outway the costs.  As
a student, I can contact professors in other departments or specialists
and professional organizations with far greater ease and receive positive
feedback and information.  If internet usage has a price tag attached to
it, my usage and the usage of other responsible students like myself will
decrease because of the price factor.  Internet usage is a wonderful
means for responsible referencing and communication, perhaps precisely
because it has no price tag attached... with the exception of the price
that may be attached to the computers themselves (which can be a concern
in itself for elementary and secondary education).

I am a physics major planning to pursue an E-11 teaching certification.
I hope when I teach physics and the other sciences to high school students
that I am able to access the internet for new ideas to stimulate my students
learning and that they are able as well, to use the internet to see the vast
realm of possibilities and potential for the sciences from the sites that
can be found on the web.  In my current geology class, we have used the web to
find pictures of fossils, erupting volcanos etc. to see sites and realize the
importance of geology.  The internet helps create a world view and I beleive
that denying equal access to the internet by retricting usage for those with
the money to pay per minute charges would be a grave mistake in a country that
is striving for equality.

			Debra E. Krause
				krausede@saber.udayton.edu
			413 Irving Avenue
			Dayton,  Ohio   45409

From RozRN2@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:40:47 1997
Return-Path: RozRN2@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16563 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:40:47 -0500
From: RozRN2@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12360; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:40:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout02.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.93) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012323; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:40:31 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout02.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA29987 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:40:11 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:40:11 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219114010_-1709016494@emout02.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Internet surcharges
Content-Length: 395

I believe this idea came from people who are trying to find ways to make even
more money.  Greed will be your downfall in the end.  How much is enough?
 How much do you want to take away from people who cannot afford it?  For
many of us, the Internet is our basic connection to the outside world, and we
are on disability, or otherwise limited incomes.  Why would you want to take
that from us?

From sarah.coffin@arch.gatech.edu Wed Feb 19 11:41:21 1997
Return-Path: sarah.coffin@arch.gatech.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16567 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:41:21 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12412; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:41:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from murmur.arch.gatech.edu(130.207.85.142) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012381; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:41:00 -0500
Received: from murmur.arch.gatech.edu ([127.0.0.1])
          by murmur.arch.gatech.edu (Netscape Mail Server v2.0) with SMTP
          id AAA12717 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:36 -0400
Subject: local phone charges for internet usage
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:39:35 -0500 (EST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: sarah.coffin@arch.gatech.edu (Sarah Coffin)
Message-ID: <19970219163936.AAA12717@murmur.arch.gatech.edu>
Content-Length: 1000

I am responding to a disturbing message I received from a friend regarding
local phone company attempts to extort yet more money out of their
customers.  Since when did internet usage interfere with phone service?
I'm under the impression that what is affecting phone service is the
numbers of calls being routed, not the length of time each call takes.
How are internet calls any different cell phone calls or regular phone
calls. It is still a phone call.  I'm sure phone companies have figured
out clever arguments to the contrary.

I see this move as a sly way for the greedy phone companies to find yet
another legal way to suck more money from their customer's ever dwindling
monthly income.  I protest such usery!!!  I thought monopolistic behavior
was illegal in this country.  If the phone companies continue on this
path...what's next?  Will they figure out a way to bill us for our mere
ability to pick up the phone?

Sincerely,

Sarah L. Coffin
Atlanta, GA  
sarah.coffin@arch.gatech.edu

From DebLouLaw@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:43:22 1997
Return-Path: DebLouLaw@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16571 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:22 -0500
From: DebLouLaw@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12496; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout16.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.42) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012483; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:43:06 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout16.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA21384 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:42:47 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219114246_1348393294@emout16.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Per minute charges for internet service
Content-Length: 849

To whom it may concern:

While I can understand local companies concerns over the usage of the
internet creating a hardship on the telephone network I do not believe that
imposing a per minute charge on my internet usage is the answer.  It is a new
technology and should not be discouraged by placing this burden on the users.
  The reasons that I use the internet are to communicate with others that are
far from me without worrying about the time I am on the line and to obtain
information that is not otherwise availble.   A charge based on time on line
would defeat the first purpose and severly hinder the second.  I ask you to
continue the situation as is as far as charges.  If they feel like they are
overburdened then maybe they need to let someone else take over that can
provide the service===after all it is free interprise.  Thank you.

From Preston.Wertheimer@jwalter.com Wed Feb 19 11:43:23 1997
Return-Path: Preston.Wertheimer@jwalter.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16575 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:23 -0500
From: Preston.Wertheimer@jwalter.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12500; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from jwtna.jwalter.com(206.230.98.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012484; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:43:15 -0500
Received: from ccMail by jwtna.jwalter.com
  (IMA Internet Exchange 2.1 (Gold Candidate) Enterprise) id 0002682F; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:42:22 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:35:05 -0500
Message-ID: <0002682F.3034@jwalter.com>
Subject: INTERNET USE FEES
To: isp@fcc.gov
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
Content-Length: 159

Local phone companies should not be allowed to charge per-minute user fees for
local phone calls to internet service providers.  End of discussion.

Thank you

From AFIOURIS@allstate.com Wed Feb 19 11:43:24 1997
Return-Path: AFIOURIS@allstate.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16579 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:24 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12515; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from relay.allstate.com(167.127.242.253) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012487; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:43:23 -0500
Received: from mail.allstate.com by relay.allstate.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
          id AA40432; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:43:02 -0600
Received: from Allstate-Message_Server by allstate.com
	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:42:59 -0600
Message-Id: <s30ad933.024@allstate.com>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:42:28 -0600
From: Andreas Fiouris <AFIOURIS@allstate.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: per minute charges...
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Length: 216

I would like to register my extreme
disapproval of the proposed scheme to allow
the phone companies to impose per minute
charges when their customers use the
internet.

Sincerely,

Andreas Fiouris - fiouris@ibm.net

From WongJan@excel.net Wed Feb 19 11:43:53 1997
Return-Path: WongJan@excel.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16583 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:53 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12524; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:43:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from excel.net(156.46.156.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012520; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:43:40 -0500
Received: from ply012.excel.net (ply012.excel.net [156.46.161.77]) by excel.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA16083 for <ISP@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:43:30 -0600
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:43:30 -0600
Message-Id: <199702191643.KAA16083@excel.net>
X-Sender: jwong@excel.net (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: ISP@fcc.gov
From: WongJan@excel.net (Jane Wong)
Subject: CC Docket No. 96-263
Content-Length: 987

    This letter is to protest the proposed additional per minute
    charges requested by the telephone companies

    I would not be able to use the internet because of the extra telephone
costs.

    It is my belief  that Internet usage will diminish if users were required to
    pay additional per minute charges.

    Your agency is supposed to protect consumers,  not the telephone company. 

    It could hurt or destroy many small business. 

    Schools will not be able to permit students to use the internet because
of the
    additional costs.

    It will hurt all Americans.

    The only beneficiaries would be the  telephone companies.

Jane Wong
WongJan@excel.net

       _o      \o_            __|      \ /      |__          o_     o/    \o/
     __|-   __/     \__/o    \o       |     o/     o/__    /\     /|       |
        >     >       /  \       ( \    /o\    / )     |  (\      /|   < \
/ \

+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*

From AVANTGUARD@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:44:54 1997
Return-Path: AVANTGUARD@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16588 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:53 -0500
From: AVANTGUARD@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12538; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout03.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.94) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012536; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:44:53 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout03.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA07858 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:33 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:33 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219114432_-1675598513@emout03.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Re: Phone Co. Surcharges for Net Use
Content-Length: 1642

To whom it may concern:

I have just been advised, and have reacted with some alarm, to a proposal the
phone companies have made.  They would like a per minute surcharge for
customers who use the internet.  I am opposed to such surcharges.

The phone companies use the rationale that, because of increasing internet
use, their networks are becoming overloaded with use.  They may have to
install new equipment and cables.  However, we are already paying for local
phone service.  We are charged for the installation of the lines as well.  We
are also paying the ISP's for their service.  Between them these companies
are making profits that would boggle the mind of the average citizen.  Surely
they can find a way to avoid passing the cost to the already over-burdened
consumer.

Allowing a per minute surcharge would create a strong disincentive for
internet use.  Please remember that many of the people who use the internet
are college students who are already financially strapped.  Also, the young
people need access to the internet to gain skills that will allow them to be
competitive in our ever more fast-paced world.  A per minute surcharge would
put the internet out of reach for a large number of our students and
children.  This disincentive is in direct conflict with the public policy of
the White House which has stated that it wants to see internet access in
every home!

I know you will give a lot of thought to this proposal and, in the end, I am
sure you will decide to do the right thing and decide not to permit this
surcharge.  Thank you for your time and attention.

Sincerely, 

Jason D. Fields, AVANTGUARD@aol.com

From cgh3rd@stlnet.com Wed Feb 19 11:44:54 1997
Return-Path: cgh3rd@stlnet.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16589 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:53 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12540; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from home.stlnet.com(204.233.136.5) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012535; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:44:53 -0500
Received: from smdksbcr (Dialin4-52.stlnet.com [206.52.7.162]) by home.stlnet.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA20395 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:44:31 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199702191644.KAA20395@home.stlnet.com>
From: "Chuck Hill" <cgh3rd@stlnet.com>
To: <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: Phone Companies are trying to scam you!!!
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:42:06 -0600
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 364

Leave the Internet alone!!!  The Phone Companies don't seem to have any
problem creating their own online services to help "bog" down the system
more.  It is all about them making more money.  I guess customers adding
more phone lines, and joining their ISPs is not enough for them.  Please
listen to us!!!

Chuck Hill
4359 Southview Way Dr.
St. Louis, MO.  63129

From KEYS@tenn.gw.utk.edu Wed Feb 19 11:45:40 1997
Return-Path: KEYS@tenn.gw.utk.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16595 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:24 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12559; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from gw.utk.edu(198.78.220.15) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012550; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:45:20 -0500
Received: from HUB4-Message_Server by gw.utk.edu
	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:44:08 -0500
Message-Id: <s30ae787.057@gw.utk.edu>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:33:19 -0500
From: Steve Keys <KEYS@tenn.gw.utk.edu>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject:  Internet Usage Charge Proposal
Content-Length: 1267

As the manager of an ever expanding voice network I can see the
reasoning behind the proposal from the LEC's in wanting to add the
additional charge. Internet usage has caused the voice network to
have to double in capacity without a way to recoup there costs.
Eventually either the persons using the access will have pay for usage
or everyone as a whole will have increased communications bills
whether we use the Internet or not. I have never objected to paying for
the services that I use, however, I do not think that paying an extra
fee so that others can spends hours tying up the voice network is in
the best interest for consumers. 

The Internet can no longer be considered a free resource for
everything. The Local and Inter Exchange carries have built and
expanded this service. Without the Telephone Companies there would
be no Internet. I do not believe the charges that are proposed should
be outrageous, however, I do believe these companies should be
allowed to see a return on the massive investments. Therefore I would
support a charge for the access. The Internet has been billed as the
next Industrial Revolution, if we could not have charged for the goods
and services provided there would never have been a first one.

Thank You for your time.

From toddh@primenet.com Wed Feb 19 11:45:54 1997
Return-Path: toddh@primenet.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16599 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:54 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12584; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.5.108) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012575; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:45:44 -0500
Received: from primenet.com (root@mailhost01.primenet.com [206.165.5.52])
	by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA26596
	for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:45:24 -0700 (MST)
Received: from 204.245.21.81 (ip21-081.phx.primenet.com [204.245.21.81])
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA07622
	for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:45:17 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <330ACC7A.693C@primenet.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:48:43 +0000
From: * <toddh@primenet.com>
Reply-To: toddh@primenet.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: NO Keep ISP's flat rate
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 533

C'mon! 
	Aren't the phone companies making enough money?
If you allow them to charge Internet Service Providers on a pay by
minute rate, you will pave the road for the internet and it's
information and entertainment and small and large business to become a
thing for the upper echelon only, thus beginning a life as serfs for a
lot of us out here who are just trying to make it. 
	I know I sound a little dramatic here, but I really want you to think
of me, also, and if it weren't for the 'net my life wouldn't work.

Thanks,
	Todd

From E111416@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:45:56 1997
Return-Path: E111416@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16603 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:55 -0500
From: E111416@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12586; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout17.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.43) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012577; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:45:47 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout17.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA00420;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:45:21 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219114519_1514544720@emout17.mail.aol.com>
To: ACCESS@fcc.gov
cc: Hugh_B3@ix.netcom.com, WTownsend@prodigy.com, mall@ix.netcom.com,
        letters@link.freedom.com, letters@latimes.com, chukabee@tso.cin.ix.net,
        tnews@link.freedom.com, ad973@freenet.uchsc.edu, david_janes@fws.gov,
        JunghansMT@aol.com, rmoberly@ionet.net, David.Haldane@latimes.com,
        saharmon@uci.edu, isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Additional INTERNET Charges - Docket No.96-262
Content-Length: 621

STOP this insane request by local phone companies for more monies !  They are
are allready adequately compensated as allowed by the CA State Utilities
Com-mission.  On top of that, they are installing more wiring and are keeping
ahead of load; all paid for by the user.
 NOW !, tell us why Pac Bell charges $3.50/mo for "Charges Imposed by the
Federal Communications Commission: Access For Interstate Calling"; when the
"modem dial" is to local numbers, NEVER an "Interstate #".  I am sure that
the AOL's pay adequate taxes, where this charge to us smacks of "double
taxation"
Chris E EMA, Santa Ana CA   E111416@aol.com

From EricDiD@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:46:56 1997
Return-Path: EricDiD@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16607 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:46:56 -0500
From: EricDiD@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12631; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:47:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout01.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.92) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012621; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:46:44 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout01.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA12243 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:46:24 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:46:24 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219114622_378766927@emout01.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Docket No. 96-263, The Best Things In Life Are Still FREE
Content-Length: 1324

February _18, 1997

 Eric DiDomenico
 14401 Northslope Street
 Centreville, VA 20120-4150
 
 Federal Communications Commission
 
 Re:  Docket No. 96-263
         Proposed On-line Access Fees
 
 Dear Commissioners;
 
 I am AGAINST allowing the Local Exchange Carriers to charge metered rates
for
 on-line internet access.
 
Once again, the greedy monopolies have gotten you to do their bidding for
them.
The per-minute fees requested by several of the regional phone companies
would simply generate windfall profits for those carriers, and once again
reward poorly managed monopolies at the expense of the consuming public.
Most of the better managed regional telephone companies maintain systems
with adequate capacity to handle additional local traffic accountable to
internet usage.  But, fairness is hardly ever an issue.  The comfortable
bureaucracy seems too anxious to permit additional rates, taxes, and fees.
 Perhaps if we keep penalizing americans for their creativity, we can stiffle
even the internet.
 
The individual consumer is already paying for unlimited local services
through their local telephone companies.  It should not make any difference
to the regional carriers, if this service is being used for extensive voice
communication, or for internet data transmissions.

Respectfully,

Eric DiDomenico

From MMeloney68@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:47:57 1997
Return-Path: MMeloney68@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16611 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:47:56 -0500
From: MMeloney68@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12664; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:48:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout01.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.92) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012653; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:47:32 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout01.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA12824 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:47:12 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:47:12 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219114711_-1742568241@emout01.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Internet charges by telephone companies
Content-Length: 815

I have been informed that telephone companies nationwide are attempting to
collect a fee from internet users on a per minute basis, in addition to the
fee we currently pay to have access to the internet.  

I STRONGLY OPPOSE their attempt and suggest to you that, if this were to
happen, the internet would become another tool accessible by only those who
are fortunate enough to be able to afford the bill.  And, once again, the
poor in this country who could not afford to pay the bill would suffer the
consequences.  The poor or lower-middle class who may have received a used
computer which had been donated, would find the door slammed in their faces
again because of the high fees which would be incurred as a result of using
the computer.  

Thank you for your interest.

Melissa K. Scott
MMeloney68@aol.com

From yvette-joe@juno.com Wed Feb 19 11:48:27 1997
Return-Path: yvette-joe@juno.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16615 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:48:26 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12683; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:48:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from m10.boston.juno.com(205.231.101.195) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012676; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:48:12 -0500
Received: (from yvette-joe@juno.com) by m10.boston.juno.com (queuemail)
	id LzA03750; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:47:03 EST
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: cc Docket No 96-263
Message-ID: <19970219.115051.6934.1.Yvette-Joe@juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 1.15
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-3,5-6,16
From: yvette-joe@juno.com (Yvette M Frusciante)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:47:03 EST
Content-Length: 871

FROM:  Yvette Frusciante
               401 S Sunset Drive
                Winston-Salem, NC  27103

RE:  Local telephone companies filing proposal with the FCC to impose per
minute charges for internet service.

My vote is a big fat NO!!  I'm just geting ready to go on line & the only
reason I can afford it is because there IS NOT a per minute usage.  If
this were imposed it would limit the usage to only those with an
unlimited budget.  Why should technology only be available to those who
CAN afford it & forget about the rest of us.  There's already enough of a
division of classes as is.  Should the children suffer.  Should they not
all have equal opportunity to be exposed to all the internet has to
offer.  If the internet service is local then it shouldn't cost anymore
than what I pay to have a phone line in my house.  Isn't it just about
the same thing???

From WenzA@SourceSvc.com Wed Feb 19 11:48:57 1997
Return-Path: WenzA@SourceSvc.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16619 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:48:57 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12714; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:49:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from intex.intex.net(204.255.96.10) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012703; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:48:43 -0500
Received: from SSCIMC.intex.net ([204.255.102.66]) by intex.intex.net (8.8.3/4.1.4) with SMTP id KAA09180 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:48:21 -0600 (CST)
Received: by SSCIMC.intex.net with Microsoft Exchange (IMC 4.0.838.14)
	id <01BC1E52.AF9DD7C0@SSCIMC.intex.net>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:50:14 -0600
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=Source_Services_%l=CORPORATE/EXCHPO/00030FAB@SSCIMC.intex.net>
From: "Wenz, Alex" <WenzA@SourceSvc.com>
To: "'smtp:isp@fcc.gov'" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: Per minute charges
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:50:00 -0600
X-Mailer:  Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.838.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 276

I am totally against the phone companies changing their rates. It never
ceases to amaze me that the minute an organization realizes that the
consumer is using a service as it was intended (local calls for an
unlimited time) the consumer gets screwed.

Alex Wenz
619-552-0300 

From johnson_phil@msmail.muohio.edu Wed Feb 19 11:52:59 1997
Return-Path: <@MIAMIU.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU:johnson_phil@msmail.muohio.edu>
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16625 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:52:59 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12858; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:53:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from miamiu.acs.muohio.edu(134.53.7.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012849; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:52:46 -0500
Received: from msmail.muohio.edu by MIAMIU.ACS.MUOHIO.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with TCP; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:51:51 EST
Message-ID: <n1355768953.15545@msmail.muohio.edu>
Date: 19 Feb 1997 11:37:30 -0500
From: "Johnson Phil" <johnson_phil@msmail.muohio.edu>
Return-Receipt-To: "Johnson Phil" <johnson_phil@msmail.muohio.edu>
Subject: CC Docket No. 96-263
To: isp@fcc.gov
X-Mailer: Mail*Link SMTP-MS 3.0.2
Content-Length: 541

This letter is to protest the proposed additional per minute
    charges requested by the telephone companies. It is my belief
    that Internet usage will diminish if users were required to
    pay additional per minute charges. Your agency is supposed to
    protect consumers not the telephone company. It could hurt or
    destroy many small business' as  well as children in schools
    it will hurt all Americans the only beneficiaries would be the
    telephone companies."

Signed,
Phillip J. Johnson
158 Kelly Dr.
Oxford, OH 45056

From JRHORN2@monsanto.com Wed Feb 19 11:53:00 1997
Return-Path: JRHORN2@monsanto.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16623 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:52:58 -0500
From: JRHORN2@monsanto.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12856; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:53:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from gatekeeper2.monsanto.com(199.89.234.124) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012850; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:52:45 -0500
Received: by monsanto.com; id KAA23608; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:55:13 -0600
Received: from tin.monsanto.com(164.144.230.51) by gatekeeper2.monsanto.com via smap (3.2)
	id xma022701; Wed, 19 Feb 97 10:53:52 -0600
Received: from monlms.monsanto.com by tin (5.65/Monsanto1.11)
	id AA00819; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:50:51 -0600
X400-Originator: JRHORN2@MONSANTO.COM
X400-Recipients: isp@fcc.gov
X400-Mts-Identifier: [/PRMD=MONSANTO/ADMD=MCI/C=US/;0030400002607969000002]
X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 (22)
Message-Id: <0030400002607969000002*@MHS>
To: "isp(a)fcc.gov" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: CC Docket No 96-263
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:50:45 -0600
Content-Length: 2876

---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes ---------------------------
From: JAMES RYAN HORN
Date: 2/19/97 7:39AM
To: JAMES RYAN HORN
Subject: FCC Internet Access Charge Reform
---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes ---------------------------
From: horn@pop.flash.net at INTERNET
Date: 2/18/97 8:04PM
To: JAMES RYAN HORN at MONCHB01
Subject: FCC Internet Access Charge Reform
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Per-minute charges is not the way to go, FCC!

     We are in the middle of a revolution, do not stifle the growth. Supply
     and demand will create the infrastructure necessary for both phone and
     internet service to co-exist.

     I would much rather have my flat rate increased as opposed to a
     per-minute charge assessed. The internet is trending towards a
     "constant connection" technology. The per-minute initiative will do
     nothing but hurt this development and delay progress to this
     information revolution that will affect every one of us.

     James Ryan Horn
     jrhorn2@ccmail.monsanto.com
     horn@flash.net
     8181 Fannin, #1021
     Houston, TX 77054

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: FCC Internet Access Charge Reform
Author:  JAMES RYAN HORN at MONCHB01
Date:    2/19/97 7:39 AM

     Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 17:00:00 -0600
     From: FlashNet Communications
     Organization: FlashNet Communications
     Subject: FCC Internet Access Charge Reform

     Dear FlashNet customer,

     We are writing you this to inform you of a very important matter currently
     under review by the FCC.  Your local telephone company has filed a proposal
     with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your internet service. They
     contend that your usage has or will hinder the operation of the telephone
     network.

     It is our belief that internet usage will diminish if users were required
     to pay additional per minute charges.  The FCC has created an email box
     for your comments; responses must be received by February 13, 1997.  Send
     your comments to isp@fcc.gov and tell them what you think.

     Alert everyone in your addressbook, and most importantly the subject line
     should have "CC Docket No 96-263". FULL NAME AND ADDRESS SHOULD
     ACCOMPANY THE EMAIL otherwise it will be deleted. Again, the email to FCC
     is isp@fcc.gov

     More information can be found at the FCC website:
     http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html

     Please forward this email to all your friends on the internet so all our
     voices may be heard.

     Thanks for your time.

     ****************************************** M. Scott Leslie
     President - FlashNet Communications
     a division of WebSite Management Co., Inc.
     ******************************************

From Dustin.Gilbert@mailbox.leusd.k12.ca.us Wed Feb 19 11:57:01 1997
Return-Path: Dustin.Gilbert@mailbox.leusd.k12.ca.us
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16631 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:57:00 -0500
From: Dustin.Gilbert@mailbox.leusd.k12.ca.us
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12974; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:57:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199702191657.LAA12974@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov>
Received: from rcoe.rcoe.k12.ca.us(158.61.157.132) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012949; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:56:37 -0500
Received: from mailbox.leusd.k12.ca.us ([158.61.152.152]) by rcoe.rcoe.k12.ca.us with SMTP
	(1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA280300971; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:49:31 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:53:56 -0500
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: more charges
Content-Length: 269

now I just started on this internet thing and well I have been having a lot 
of fun talking to my cousins and that type of stuff.  I think that it is 
bull if we have to pay more money for something that we are already paying 
enough money for.  Thanks for listening.

From RedRster@aol.com Wed Feb 19 11:57:02 1997
Return-Path: RedRster@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16635 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:57:01 -0500
From: RedRster@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA12972; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:57:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout07.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.22) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma012964; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:56:48 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout07.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id LAA19526 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:56:28 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:56:28 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219115622_2027402719@emout07.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: internet charges
Content-Length: 377

It has come to my attention that the various telephone companies are trying
to charge per minute fees for internet usage.  This is Crap.  
They are just trying to cash in on another potential profit area, without
having to spend an extra dime to justify it.  The internet is just fine the
way it is, the only true value for the dollar still existing in the US.  

Regards,

Ed

From dmosher@garnet.Eng.Sun.COM Wed Feb 19 11:58:03 1997
Return-Path: dmosher@garnet.Eng.Sun.COM
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id LAA16639 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:58:02 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id LAA13024; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:58:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from venus.sun.com(192.9.25.5) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013022; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:58:04 -0500
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM ([129.146.1.25]) by venus.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/mail.byaddr) with SMTP id IAA04658 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:57:43 -0800
Received: from garnet.eng.sun.com by Eng.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/SMI-5.3)
	id IAA02666; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:57:41 -0800
Received: from mosher.eng.sun.com by garnet.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id IAA02438; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:57:40 -0800
Received: by mosher.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id IAA00742; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:57:49 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:57:49 -0800
From: dmosher@garnet.Eng.Sun.COM (David Mosher)
Message-Id: <199702191657.IAA00742@mosher.eng.sun.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Billing by the minute for local calls to ISP providers
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Content-Length: 332

I disagree with allowing the local telephone companies to bill for
this.

In order for an ISP to be viable they already pay for a high speed
from the phone company so these costs are already being passed
onto the customers.

Local telephone companies didn't think ahead and now they want
the public to bail them out.

Just say no.

From Brian_Shrock@qmailgw.gar.esys.com Wed Feb 19 12:00:03 1997
Return-Path: Brian_Shrock@qmailgw.gar.esys.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16646 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:00:03 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13077; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:00:08 -0500 (EST)
Received: from zeus.esy.com(162.36.5.11) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013068; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:59:42 -0500
Received: by firewall.gar.esys.com; id KAA10333; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:58:26 -0600
Received: from gar.esys.com(162.36.1.11) by firewall.gar.esys.com via smap (3.2)
	id xma010315; Wed, 19 Feb 97 10:58:18 -0600
Received: from qmailgw by gar.esys.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA19560; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:58:25 -0600
Message-Id: <n1355772513.9643@qmailgw>
Date: 19 Feb 1997 10:52:38 -0600
From: "Brian Shrock" <Brian_Shrock@qmailgw.gar.esys.com>
Subject: Internet Access Fees
To: "FCC Internet Fees" <isp@fcc.gov>
X-Mailer: Mail*Link SMTP-QM 4.0.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; Name="Message Body"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 6225

  REGARDING           Internet Access Fees

To Whom It May Concern:

Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion.  For your information, I =
have never subscribed to any internet service.  I do intend to in the =
future, but for no more than $100/yr.  Getting a second phone line for =
that purpose is not out of the question, but otherwise is not even a =
remote consideration.  

Because I am a consumer and prefer to get more for my money, I am biased. =
 With that in mind, I am listing below reasons I believe the proposed =
access fee, fair or not, will have negative impacts, would be =
inconsistent, and is a bad idea.  Quotes are from an article on the =
Internet by Michelle V. Rafter from Thursday February 6 10:02 AM EST.

"In 1995, local phone companies spent a total of $245 million adding 6 =
million residential phone lines used primarily for Internet access, but
reaped $1.4 billion in revenue on those lines..."

*  The phone companies are making substantial money selling all these =
extra phone lines (which customers pay for continually regardless of =
use).  Just what effect has the internet boom had on phone company =
profits?

"Pacific Bell, for example, says Internet surfers use its phone lines an =
average of 45 minutes a day -- more than twice the amount the network was =
built to handle."

*  If phone companies lines were designed to handle averages of 22 =
minutes or less per day, like Pacific Bell), it seems to me they might =
already need upgrading, and certainly would soon, given steadily growing =
communication patterns.  

*  Why haven't the phone companies asked for a teenager tax?  I'm sure =
this group averages more than 22 minutes a day on the lines!

"But why should phone companies pick up all the costs when Internet
service providers will benefit, too, says Pacific Bell spokesman Bob
Deward."

* It is the consumers who are picking up the costs (through extra phone =
lines), and who would inherit any new costs.  And it is the consumers who =
benefit now.

* "If Internet traffic was such a threat, phone companies wouldn't be exac=
erbating the problem by jumping into the Internet access business =
themselves, providers say."

"If, for example, Internet providers passed through an access fee of 1 =
cent a minute, a subscriber spending 10 hours online a month would pay an =
extra $6 -- hardly a deterrent, said David Goodtree, an analyst with =
Forrester Research in Cambridge, Mass."

*  If charging by the minute won't decrease usage, why are providers like =
AOL giving up on charging by the hour?  Why is CompuServe's market share =
so small?

*  For the typical $20/month provider fee, a 1 cent/minute charge equates =
to a 30% increase in cost for a minimal 10 hours of connect time (which =
would be less than half of the 45 minutes/day reported by Pacific Bell).  =
And for people like me, who won't pay more than $100/yr for a provider, =
that extra $6/mo. is a 70%+ increase in cost, for less value.  I have a =
family of 4, meaning either each member would be limited to 2.5 hours per =
month for that price, or the cost would rise even more.  No way I'm =
buying that.  This would be a major deterrent.

*  I suspect if families must become time conscious and budget their =
internet connections, children will be the first to limited or denied =
access.

" 'Cable TV rates have doubled in the last three or four years, we got  =
nothing more for it, but cable subscribership didn't go down because of =
it,'  Goodtree said."

*  I include this in case people actually try to compare these two =
disjoint groups.  Forgive me, but somehow I think the average IQ (or use =
of it) of internet users is likely well above that of cable-TV =
subscribers as a whole (consider the internet origins), and therefore =
they will be more discriminating than to just pay more for the same or =
less without cutting back or quitting.  And again, often it may be childre=
n who get cut back first.  

*  Additionally, this could hurt companies that advertise on the =
internet, and those supported by advertising. People are a lot less =
likely to check out advertisers if they know they will be paying by the =
minute to do so.  I foresee a very negative domino effect.

*  If additional fees are not avoided altogether, perhaps they should =
only be levied on "excess time" used by an individual beyond a given =
amount, such as 20 hours/month.  But then why include only the internet co=
nnected?

*  Additional fees cannot have a positive impact, except possibly for =
phone company profits, and I'm not sure about that.  So the only question =
is, how great would the negative impact be?

*  Finally, can you say "Luxury Tax"?

In summary, I believe that the phone companies would eventually have to =
upgrade their systems anyway, that the internet boom is not a threat, but =
a serendipity for them to pay for those upgrades and provide nice =
residual profits as well.  Any additional internet access fees would land =
on the consumer, regardless of where they were levied.  I believe such =
fees would have significant and widespread negative consequences, and =
could have no redeeming value.  If phone companies are already profiting =
from the situation, it makes no sense to even consider moves that could =
only damage it.  Therefore, I urge the FCC to reject the proposed =
additional internet fees and maintain the status quo.  This seems to be a =
win-win situation for everybody.

Thank you,

-- Brian D. Shrock
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Brian D. Shrock                        Brian_Shrock@qmailgw.esy.com
Sr. Software Engineer                  972-205-8487
Raytheon E-Systems 
                     
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not
bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man." 

 --Mark Twain  
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

From jpl8@juno.com Wed Feb 19 12:00:04 1997
Return-Path: jpl8@juno.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16650 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:00:04 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13083; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:00:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from m7.boston.juno.com(205.231.100.196) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013071; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:00:07 -0500
Received: (from jpl8@juno.com) by m7.boston.juno.com (queuemail)
	id LmX19722; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:56:09 EST
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Re: CC Docket No 96-263
Message-ID: <19970219.105756.3350.2.jpl8@juno.com>
References: <199702181557.HAA25496@m1.sprynet.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 1.15
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-12,14,16-21,23,25-32,35,38-47
From: jpl8@juno.com (John Paul M Leofsky)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:56:09 EST
Content-Length: 1259

 Send it to:  isp@fcc.gov

Subject:  CC Docket No 96-263

Include your name and address.

Thanks to everyone who is fighting against this preposterous matter.

Timothy

*********
Dear Internet customer,

We are writing you this to inform you of a very important matter
currently
under review by the FCC.  Your local telephone company has filed a
proposal
with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your internet service. They
contend that your usage has or will hinder the operation of the telephone
network.  

It is our belief that internet usage will diminish if users were required
to pay additional per minute charges.  The FCC has created an email box
for
your comments; responses must be received by February 13, 1997.  Send
your
comments to isp@fcc.gov and tell them what you think.
John Paul Leofsky
1524 Westminster Drive
Montgomery, AL 36117

 Dear  Friends,

I oppose the proposal by telephone companies to charge internet access by
the minute.  This pricing structure will discriminate most against people
with few resources. 
      The enormous telephone companies enjoy protections from free market
capitalism - we will all be better served by more competition not special
protections of narrow interest profits.

Sincerely,

jpleofsky

From dmason@Uwohali.Com Wed Feb 19 12:00:40 1997
Return-Path: dmason@Uwohali.Com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16654 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:00:35 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13103; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:00:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from gateway.uwohali.com(205.139.141.224) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013099; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:00:31 -0500
Received: from Uwohali1.Uwohali.Com (uwohali1.uwohali.com [205.139.141.1]) by gateway.uwohali.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA00599 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:01:21 -0600
Received: from UWOHALI1/MAILQ by Uwohali1.Uwohali.Com (Mercury 1.13);
    Wed, 19 Feb 97 10:58:11 -0500
Received: from MAILQ by UWOHALI1 (Mercury 1.13); Wed, 19 Feb 97 10:57:46 -0500
From: "Dona Mason" <dmason@Uwohali.Com>
Organization: Uwohali, Incorporated
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:57:37 CST
Subject: Internet Charging Legislation
Reply-to: dmason@Uwohali.Com
X-Confirm-Reading-To: dmason@uwohali.com
X-pmrqc: 1
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.52)
Message-ID: <4F3C7AD5B3E@Uwohali1.Uwohali.Com>
Content-Length: 1322

It was passed to me that you are considering the following 
legislation:

>A very important matter
> currently under review by the FCC. Your local telephone company has 
> filed a proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for
> your internet service. They contend that your usage has or will 
> hinder the operation of the telephone network.

I am very much against this charge.  Computerized households are the 
future.  If the local telephone company doesn't have enough bandwidth 
to support what is needed, they will be out of business.  They 
must increase their lines now, but not at the expense of the 
future, but at basic rate increases.  They always say that the 
basic rate is a flat rate, but now change that, I don't think so.  
They will do to us what long distance has done and it is NOT in their 
best interest.

The charge per minute will hold the future back or spawn work 
arounds that will not facilitate the future.

Please vote this legislation down.

Dona Mason, registered voter
2105 Villaret Dr
Huntsville Al 35803

 the become computer literate and purchase computers, 

***************************************************

From:      
Dona Mason
Uwohali in Huntsville, AL
System Analyst on MLRS Automation Initiative
Huntsville CALS Interest Group (HCIG) Director
Phone (205) 837-4482

From bsampson@flash.net Wed Feb 19 12:01:05 1997
Return-Path: gbarham@flash.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16658 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:01:05 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13117; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:01:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from centurion.flash.net(206.149.24.19) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013110; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:00:48 -0500
Received: (from gbarham@localhost) by flash.net (8.8.5/8.7.5) id LAA12490; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:00:59 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199702191700.LAA12490@flash.net>
From: "Robert L. Sampson" <bsampson@flash.net>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:53:17  -0600
Subject: CC docket No 96-263
cc: arevalo_c@hccs.cc.tx.us
Content-Length: 1069

I strongly oppose the local telephone companies charging customers for
Internet access.  Internet usage has had a very positive effect on the
economy and is educational and entertaining for the users.  This plan would:

a. Seriously curtail Internet usage which would drastically effect sales and
service that Internet usage has created.

b. Discourage computer sales and new Internet subscribers.
 
c. Deny access to those that are unable to afford the luxury that this would
become.
The elderly and the working families would be unable to use this new and
wonderful creation.

Telephone customers pay their telephone bills and now the telephone companies
have found a way to charge for local calls that the Internet offers.  My
Internet access is a local call and I do not expect to pay long distance
charges as well as a monthly telephone bill.  The telephone companies charge
for every feature they can think of and now they want to charge for Internet
assess which is not even their idea.

Robert L. Sampson
1716 Norfolk #22
Houston, Texas 77098

Robert L. Sampso

From ozark.doug@worldnet.att.net Wed Feb 19 12:01:07 1997
Return-Path: ozark.doug@worldnet.att.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16662 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:01:06 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13123; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:01:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailhost.worldnet.att.net(204.127.131.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013113; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:01:07 -0500
Received: from LOCALNAME ([207.116.68.211]) by mtigwc03.worldnet.att.net
          (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with SMTP id AAA15770
          for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:57:59 +0000
X-Sender: ozark.doug@postoffice.worldnet.att.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: Douglas Walker <ozark.doug@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: per minute charge for internet usage
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:57:59 +0000
Message-ID: <19970219165757.AAA15770@LOCALNAME>
Content-Length: 1398

To whom it may concern:

Upon hearing notice of the local thelephone companies wanting to charge a
per minute fee for internet usage seems to me to be singling out a group of
people and bashing them.  Not unlike the KKK singling out blacks.  This is
truly discrimination.  We currently have the highest of telephone charges
here in Northern Illinois.  In fact, we pay a toll for all calls, even the
local ones.  Plus this per call charge for local calls also applies to long
distance.  So not only do we pay long distance charges, but we also pay
local charges on long distance.  Toll free numbers, in Northern Illinois do
not exist, we pay a toll for every call we make.  Some calls we are double
and triple billed for.

My usage of the internet is primarily for E-mail.  Anyone who knows anything
about the system knows that E-Mailing takes less time to transfer your
message than by any other medium.  We actual use less telephone time than if
we were talking with our contact.  
People who do faxing of documents and computer networking over the telephone
lines will by far tie up more services than anyone else.  

If there are not enough curcuits to handle all of the telephone calls, put
in more curcuits.  We as the consumer have by far paid for additional
services.  We keep paying more for our telephone as it is, yet we get less
and less for our dollar.

Internet and E-Mail Subscriber

From nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov Wed Feb 19 12:02:06 1997
Return-Path: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16666 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:02:05 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13148; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:02:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exodus.content.earthlink.net(206.250.94.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013142; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:01:53 -0500
Received: (from nobody@localhost) by exodus (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id JAA08482 for isp@fcc.gov; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:01:32 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:01:32 -0800
From: nobody@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (SVR4 nobody uid)
Message-Id: <199702191701.JAA08482@exodus>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Reply-To: webadmin@cactuspetes.com
Subject: Form Data from 206.26.230.12
Content-Length: 985

Date: Wed Feb 19 09:01:32 PST 1997

 = 1761 3rd Ave E 
city = Twin Falls
comments = I am the web admin. for a corprate web site and Intranet service.  Charging a EXTRA fee for modem usage is contrary to everything the internet is based on.  Also I belive the Telco's are making enough money on the internet already, ours is also our provider, and we buy seperate lines for each modem every month.  I think that we should be looking at other ways to access the net instead of charging more to the user.

email = webadmin@cactuspetes.com
name = Scott Robinson
regarding =   FCC Docket #96-263 
state = ID
statement =  I understand the FCC has tentatively concluded that providers of information services (including Internet service providers) should not be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies currently assess on long-distance carriers. I agree that Internet Service Providers should not be subject to the interstate access charges. 
zipcode = 83301

From mbacall@msn.com Wed Feb 19 12:02:36 1997
Return-Path: mbacall@msn.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16670 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:02:36 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13174; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:02:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from upsmot02.msn.com(204.95.110.79) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013164; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:02:31 -0500
Received: from upmajb02.msn.com (upmajb02.msn.com [204.95.110.74]) by upsmot02.msn.com (8.6.8.1/Configuration 4) with SMTP id IAA00628 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 08:58:54 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 97 16:56:06 UT
From: "Michael Bacall" <mbacall@msn.com>
Message-Id: <UPMAIL06.199702191701170346@msn.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: proposed per minute charge for Internet service
Content-Length: 534

February 19, 1997

Dear FCC
isp@fcc.gov

I understand local telephone companies are filing proposals with the FCC to 
impose per minute charges for Internet service.  I question whether Pac Bell 
is concerned about the telephone network or loss of revenue due to competition 
from services offered over the net.  Please reject these proposals and 
guarantee the public's access to the net at reasonable rate.

Thank you,

Michael Bacall, Esq.
Mbacall@msn.com
4330 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 230
San Diego, CA 92122
(619) 546-8197

From tuley@flash.net Wed Feb 19 12:03:06 1997
Return-Path: tuley@flash.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16674 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:06 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13190; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from endeavor.flash.net(208.194.223.40) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013186; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:02:44 -0500
Received: from LOCALNAME (pm20-120.flash.net [208.194.194.120]) by endeavor (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA15067 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:59:45 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <330B4E39.7284@flash.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:02:17 -0800
From: Tuley Home <tuley@flash.net>
Reply-To: tuley@flash.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Internet charges
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 883

Please, do not begin to issue phone charges for internet use.  I know
many missionaries on the field that cannot afford phone charges and find
being able to make contact with the states via E-Mail a tremendous
source of strength and encouragement.  I have family members in other
places that we communicate with other more now...due to internet
activity.  Being a marriage and family trained counselor, I am so
excited about a means of bringing extended families closer together
again after decades of scattering the support group through mobility in
our society.  Internet communication does that while still allowing
families to live where they need to.  Please, consider these folks needs
and the great potential to enrich our society with no Internet charges. 
Thank you.
Sincerely,

Virginia Tuley 
tuley@flash.net
3200 Covert Ave.
Fort Worth, Texas 76133-1718
(817) 927-7962

From rcollins@arinc.com Wed Feb 19 12:03:36 1997
Return-Path: rcollins@arinc.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16678 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:36 -0500
From: rcollins@arinc.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13214; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from interlock.arinc.com(144.243.4.2) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013204; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:03:25 -0500
Received: from ccmail.arinc.com ([144.243.35.242]) by interlock.arinc.com with SMTP id <27744>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:02:01 -0500
Received: from ccMail by ccmail.arinc.com
  (IMA Internet Exchange 2.1 Enterprise) id 0001A3BB; Wed, 19 Feb 97 11:56:09 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:50:39 -0500
Message-ID: <0001A3BB.3227@ccmail.arinc.com>
Subject: Local Phone Charges
To: isp@fcc.gov
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
Content-Length: 668

     
     It has come to my attention that several local telephone companies 
     have petitioned the FCC for permission to charge Internet Users by the 
     minute for  LOCAL  dial-up telephone service.  This would affect every 
     Internet User, including those using AOL dial-up.
     
     I would like to ask for a minute of your time to consider what you are 
     being asked to do.  What these local telephone companies are asking 
     you to do is unfair to the consumer.  I speak on the behalf of many 
     when I ask that this petition be put in it's proper place... the 
     trash!
     
     Thank you for your time,
     
     Richard S. Collins

From SCLEP@aol.com Wed Feb 19 12:04:07 1997
Return-Path: SCLEP@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16686 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:07 -0500
From: SCLEP@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13245; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout12.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.38) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013235; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:04:08 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout12.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id MAA19778 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:48 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:48 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219120347_751602922@emout12.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: ISP charges
Content-Length: 25

To whom it may concern,

From mmsi@glasnet.ru Wed Feb 19 12:04:22 1997
Return-Path: mmsi@glasnet.ru
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16682 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:06 -0500
From: mmsi@glasnet.ru
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13241; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eagle.glas.apc.org(193.124.5.49) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013230; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:03:51 -0500
Received: from ppp302.glas.apc.org(really [193.124.5.43]) by eagle.glasnet.ru
	via sendmail with smtp
	id <m0vxFSP-001ozUN@eagle.glasnet.ru>
	for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:05:25 +0300 (WSU)
	(Smail-3.2 1996-Jul-4 #4 built 1996-Dec-30)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 20:05:25 +0300 (WSU)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970219200345.2e07931e@pop-win.glas.apc.org>
X-Sender: mmsi@pop-win.glas.apc.org
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_856411425==_"
To: isp@fcc.gov
Cc: weckc001@tc.umn.edu
X-Attachments: C:\E_MAIL\BOX\ISP.TXT;
Content-Length: 650

--=====================_856411425==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

--=====================_856411425==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

 Greetings, from Moscow / MMSI 

But we have 2 basic problems at INTERNET:
- Large cost ISP in Russia (about 3 $ per hour)
- Bad telephone lines in Moscow
Our ISP is GlasNet.

Thank to you for your help.
 

Best regards, Alexandre Airapetov,
Coordinator by an educational programs,
Division of Medical Computer Science and Management,
Moscow Medical Stomatological Inst
20, Delegatskaya, Moscow, 103473, Russia
email   mmsi@glas.apc.org   

--=====================_856411425==_--

From markn@cameron.edu Wed Feb 19 12:04:39 1997
Return-Path: markn@cameron.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16690 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:38 -0500
From: markn@cameron.edu
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13276; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from shakaree.cameron.edu(164.58.112.6) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013271; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:04:36 -0500
Received: from cuok.cameron.edu ([164.58.112.125]) by shakaree.cameron.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA17444 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:54:18 -0600
Message-Id: <199702191754.LAA17444@shakaree.cameron.edu>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <markn@mail.cameron.edu>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:04:48 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Comments On Telephone Company Proposal With the FCC to Impose a 
Return-receipt-to: markn@cameron.edu
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Content-Length: 1913

As a consumer I am concerned about the proposal which some telephone 
companies are making to charge a fee for access to the internet on a 
per minute basis.

As the Director of Telecommunications at Cameron University I know 
the impact that internet access has had on our switch and that the 
impact could become a problem for all telephone companies.  They are 
used to having many short conversations on their networks and not the 
long sessions which are required for internet use.

I think the major factor that the telephone companies need to 
consider is the fact that most consumers are ordering and paying for 
a second telephone line to take care of internet service.  I also 
think the telephone companies are making profit on the many other 
services they are offering and that adding a fee for LOCAL access to 
the internet is not fair.

The FCC must protect the average consumers right to have access to 
the internet and keep the cost low on the internet will not grow and 
provide the services that it has the potential to provide.  

If the telephone company believes it needs to charge for more to 
build a better switching system then they need to find some method 
other than taxing those who are helping them by purchasing additional 
services.  My second line for the internet service is costing me $20 
a month or $240 a year and the telephone company already had the 
lines in the ground and had no expense in hooking me up, except a 10 
min. visit by a local telephone line man.  The will have my $240 to 
use to build their future network.  The telephone company needs to 
stop being greedy and start helping to make the internet a major part 
of the daily life of the average consumer.

Mark Norman                         Cameron University
Director of Broadcasting            2800 West Gore
markn@cameron.edu                   Lawton, OK  73505
405-581-2425 Office
405-581-5571 Fax

From Sirjeffer@aol.com Wed Feb 19 12:05:09 1997
Return-Path: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16694 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:05:08 -0500
From: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13293; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:05:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout12.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.38) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013288; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:05:02 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout12.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id MAA20444 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:42 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219120441_-1675599631@emout12.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Fwd: Returned mail: User unknown
Content-Length: 1875

---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:	MAILER-DAEMON@aol.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
To:	Sirjeffer@aol.com
Date: 97-02-17 13:07:01 EST

The original message was received at Mon, 17 Feb 1997 13:06:31 -0500 (EST)
from root@localhost

   ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications -----
isp.fcc.gov  (unrecoverable error)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 isp.fcc.gov... User unknown

   ----- Original message follows -----

Return-Path: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout24.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id NAA07556 for isp.fcc.gov;
	  Mon, 17 Feb 1997 13:06:31 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 13:06:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Message-ID: <970217121648_785829710@emout04.mail.aol.com>
To: isp.fcc.gov
Subject: Phone Company Charges

Fcc:

Allowing the phone company to regulate access charges to users on the
internet is wrong.  They already charge ISP's for access and that means they
would be making profits from both ends.

The internet was started as a free enterprise system, what our country was
built on and allowing a private institution (or public company) to come in
and say we have to regulate this, is wrong.  It directly goes against the
President's move to get everyone connected.  It will effect schools who can't
afford anything, families who can't even afford their monthly bills and limit
the growth of intelligence of our country, all in the name of profits.

Please don't allow this to happen.

Thank you.

P.S.  What if the Air Quality Control folks started charging you for the
amount of air space your home took up, or what you breathe.  While is sound
ludicrous, their argument would be much the same as the phone compnay..."We
have to montior this because otherwise it will eventually get all used up,
and we won't be able to have enough to go around.  A

From Sirjeffer@aol.com Wed Feb 19 12:05:39 1997
Return-Path: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16698 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:05:39 -0500
From: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13318; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:05:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout16.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.42) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013291; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:05:14 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout16.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id MAA07972 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:53 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:04:53 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219120452_-1206733583@emout16.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Thanks for listening
Content-Length: 1896

Thanks for listening!
---------------------
Forwarded message:
From:	MAILER-DAEMON@aol.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
To:	Sirjeffer@aol.com
Date: 97-02-17 13:07:01 EST

The original message was received at Mon, 17 Feb 1997 13:06:31 -0500 (EST)
from root@localhost

   ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications -----
isp.fcc.gov  (unrecoverable error)

   ----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 isp.fcc.gov... User unknown

   ----- Original message follows -----

Return-Path: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout24.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id NAA07556 for isp.fcc.gov;
	  Mon, 17 Feb 1997 13:06:31 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 13:06:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Sirjeffer@aol.com
Message-ID: <970217121648_785829710@emout04.mail.aol.com>
To: isp.fcc.gov
Subject: Phone Company Charges

Fcc:

Allowing the phone company to regulate access charges to users on the
internet is wrong.  They already charge ISP's for access and that means they
would be making profits from both ends.

The internet was started as a free enterprise system, what our country was
built on and allowing a private institution (or public company) to come in
and say we have to regulate this, is wrong.  It directly goes against the
President's move to get everyone connected.  It will effect schools who can't
afford anything, families who can't even afford their monthly bills and limit
the growth of intelligence of our country, all in the name of profits.

Please don't allow this to happen.

Thank you.

P.S.  What if the Air Quality Control folks started charging you for the
amount of air space your home took up, or what you breathe.  While is sound
ludicrous, their argument would be much the same as the phone compnay..."We
have to montior this because otherwise it will eventually get all used up,
and we won't be able to have enough to go around.  A

From seb@schof.Colorado.EDU Wed Feb 19 12:06:47 1997
Return-Path: seb@schof.Colorado.EDU
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16702 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:06:39 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13361; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:06:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from schof.colorado.edu(128.138.200.20) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013357; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:06:31 -0500
Received: from [128.138.105.84] (itp84.Colorado.EDU [128.138.105.84])
          by schof.Colorado.EDU (8.8.5/8.8.5/Unixops/Hesiod/(SDM)) with SMTP
	  id KAA28982 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:05:53 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:05:53 -0700 (MST)
X-Sender: seb@schof.colorado.edu
Message-Id: <v01510101af307c8a595f@[128.138.105.84]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: seb@schof.Colorado.EDU (Stan Bush)
Subject: RBOC per-minute usage charges for Internet access
Content-Length: 1308

To whom it may concern:
It is my understanding that many of the RBOCs are requesting permission to
charge by the minute for local circuit-switched connections. This will
probably include voice although they are requesting it for relief from
long-holding time Internet access users.

In my opinion this is not justified. It is true that Internet access and
connections to services such as Compuserve and AOL tend to have very long
holding times which were not anticipated in the design and implementation
of the circuit switches. But it is also true that the public network should
be moving toward support of packet switching. Packet switching is a part of
the ISDN plan and is part of all the ADSL schemes I have seen.

The RBOCs should get into the modern world and implement packet switching.
Then it would be possible for them to make some money as Internet Access
Providers themselves. Per-minute charges are not appropriate for data
services and it would be particularly unfortunate if the RBOCs were allowed
to use this smoke screen to institute per-minute charges on telephone calls
in the base-rate area that exists today.

Stanley E. Bush
Director, Telecommunication Systems Laboratory
Interdisciplinary Telecommunicatons Program
University of Colorado at Boulder
Campus Box 530
Boulder, CO 80309

From EAM6602@ssu.edu Wed Feb 19 12:07:11 1997
Return-Path: EAM6602@ssu.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16706 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:07:11 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13398; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:07:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from csin.ssu.edu(131.118.47.1) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013394; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:07:06 -0500
Received: from ITS-Message_Server by ssu.edu
	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:03:28 -0500
Message-Id: <s30aec10.027@ssu.edu>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:51:21 -0500
From: Eric Myers <EAM6602@ssu.edu>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Phone companies
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Length: 468

The phone companies get to much money to begin with.  To pass this
legislation would seriosly decrease usage of the internet.  It is expensive
enough to get on.  ie; Buying a computer and paying for Access.  The
phone company is just trying to cut in on the action.  Take a look at some
of the ridiculaous charges they already get away with.   It would take
millions of americans off the internet, and how can that be good for the
country!

Eric Myers
College Student

From lundy@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU Wed Feb 19 12:07:42 1997
Return-Path: LUNDY@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16710 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:07:41 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13423; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:07:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from madder.ccit.arizona.edu(128.196.120.13) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013420; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:07:34 -0500
Received: from CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU by CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU (PMDF V5.0-6 #2381)
 id <01IFLH9DOU1S8WXILC@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU> for isp@fcc.gov; Wed,
 19 Feb 1997 10:07:00 -0700 (MST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:07:00 -0700 (MST)
From: lundy@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Imposed Access Fees
To: isp@fcc.gov
Message-id: <Pine.PMDF.3.91.970219095619.539040864A-100000@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU>
X-Envelope-to: isp@fcc.gov
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-Length: 2097

I am an educator at a major university.  We rely on the internet to 
delivery the highest technical education we can.  If we are charged for 
this service, it will not be used.  We do not recieve enough money to 
cover supplies such as photocopies, textbooks, etc.  We put our course 
syllabi on the internet and provide articles electronically.  If that is 
gone, we won't be able to afford the quality of education we are striving 
for in efforts to compete globally with other nations.  I would employ 
you to you read books on education, societal factors affecting education 
and the technological impact on education.  If we cave in to greed and 
let these folks charge, we're going to be in deep trouble as a nation.  
The only way they should be allowed to charge is if they provide the 
serve free to the educational systems and the military, and/or increase 
via contribution to national higher educational institutions.  They do 
not need to charge for this service - it does not strain their phone 
systems!  Trust me, I go to school, teach and study my buns off for a 
living! I would caution reading statistics provided by the phone 
companies - these are easy to scew in directions to benefit their profit 
margins!  They hire overly education people like myself to make these 
projects that are borderline true and in the best interest of their 
organization! Ensure you too have these bookworms to help you decipher 
the crap from the reality before imposing such a tremendous strain on the 
American population.  Once you let them charge one cent, they will find 
ways to wage it higher in the coming years. Also - keep an eye on those 
within your organization with hidden agendas.  The phone companies will 
pay a lot of money to see something like this imposed!  Trust me when I 
say they don't need the money (there's not damage to the system requiring 
compensation).  Not all roads have tolls - the phone companies don't need 
to impose one on the information superhighway!

-Gina Lundy, AA, BA2, M.Ed., Ed.D
 Assitant Professor of Aerospace Studies
 University of Arizona 

From rvon@apeleon.net Wed Feb 19 12:08:11 1997
Return-Path: rvon@shell.apeleon.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16714 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:08:11 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13437; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:08:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from apeleon.net(206.29.222.4) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013430; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:07:54 -0500
Received: from Default (s19.cs00.Io.apeleon.net [206.29.222.52]) by shell.apeleon.net (8.8.4/8.6.10) with SMTP id KAA28527; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:06:06 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <199702191706.KAA28527@shell.apeleon.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <rvon@mail.apeleon.net>
From: "Vincent O'Neil" <rvon@apeleon.net>
Organization: mail.apeleon.net
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:06:06 +0000
Subject: Internet rate hike
Reply-to: rvon@apeleon.net
CC: sandmt@highfiber.com
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.30)
Content-Length: 733

To whom it may concern;

If you raise the rates on my modem line, you will be hurting me in 
more ways than one.

I am disabled and rely on a small pension to live.

The computer is my main source of contact with the outside world. 
I depend on it like a friend.

If my rate goes up, I may not be able to afford this link.

PLEASE, do not allow this to happen.

Additionally, the phone company will then force others to use their 
Internet services, thus creating a monoply and sending many ISP's out 
of business.  This is NOT fair!

PLEASE, do not allow this to happen.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

Vincent O'Neil
4640 South 475 West
Ogden, Utah 84405

:)
Vince O'Neil
voneil@rvon.com
http://www.rvon.com

From wp@sonic.net Wed Feb 19 12:08:42 1997
Return-Path: wp@sonic.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16718 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:08:42 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13453; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:08:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sub.sonic.net(208.201.224.8) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013445; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:08:45 -0500
Received: from wp.ppp (d135.pm4.sonic.net [208.201.229.135]) by sub.sonic.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA17186 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:08:24 -0800
Message-ID: <330B340C.2A05@sonic.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:10:36 -0800
From: William Pinkus <wp@sonic.net>
Reply-To: wp@sonic.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Proposal for per minute charge for internet use
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 974

>         "I understand local telephone companies are filing proposals with
> the FCC to impose per minute charges for internet service. They contend that
> customer usage has or will hinder the operation of the telephone network.
> The truth is that the phone company is in a panic that the internet is
> becoming a competitor, i.e., make a local call to internet then use the
> internet to have voice mail to anywhere in the world at minimal
> cost---undercutting the phone company profits. The phone companies
> technology is outdated and will be replaced by internet type connections.
> The only question is when.  If they win the public loses.   It seems that
> the FCC is in a position to foster the future or safeguard the past.  I hope
> you will look forward to what can be rather than protect what will become
> antiquated technology.  Please reject these proposals and guarantee the
> public's access to this new medium.
>
        Yours truly,
	
	William Pinkus>

From gordelida@juno.com Wed Feb 19 12:09:12 1997
Return-Path: gordelida@juno.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16722 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:09:12 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13468; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:09:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from m5.boston.juno.com(205.231.100.197) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013463; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:08:53 -0500
Received: (from gordelida@juno.com) by m5.boston.juno.com (queuemail)
	id MqD24562; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:08:18 EST
To: isp@fcc.gov (FCC)
Subject: New internet phone charges
Message-ID: <19970219.110503.11430.1.GordElida@juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 1.15
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-7
From: gordelida@juno.com (Gordon R Barnett)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:08:18 EST
Content-Length: 236

I added an additional phone line in my home to handle my 
internet phone requirements and the phone company 
receives payments monthly now for my internet use.

The have already made a profit on my use of the internet.

Gordon Barnett

From JThreadgill@mail.sanjuan.edu Wed Feb 19 12:10:12 1997
Return-Path: JThreadgill@mail.sanjuan.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16727 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:10:12 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13488; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:10:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from bashful2.sanjuan.edu(136.235.14.4) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013484; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:10:00 -0500
Received: from mail.sanjuan.edu ([136.235.1.11]) by bashful2.sanjuan.edu
          via smtpd (for gatekeeper2.fcc.gov [192.104.54.4]) with SMTP; 19 Feb 1997 17:10:22 UT
Received: from SJ-Message_Server by mail.sanjuan.edu
	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:05:30 -0800
Message-Id: <s30ac25a.091@mail.sanjuan.edu>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:07:10 -0800
From: Judy Threadgill <JThreadgill@mail.sanjuan.edu>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Internet Access Charge
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Length: 127

Please provide me with any information you might have regarding Internet
access charge legislation (bill number, author, etc.)

From cmaster1@tuelectric.com Wed Feb 19 12:11:42 1997
Return-Path: cmaster1@tuelectric.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16732 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:11:42 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13535; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:11:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ns.tuelectric.com(204.251.119.66) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013531; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:11:29 -0500
Received: from rpc17518 (ns.tuelectric.com [146.61.102.20]) by ns.tuelectric.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA34259 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:14:50 -0600
Message-ID: <330ADF97.2D4B@tuelectric.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:10:15 +0000
From: CC Masters <cmaster1@tuelectric.com>
Reply-To: cmaster1@tuelectric.com
Organization: TEXAS Utilities
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: CC Docket No 96-263
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 391

Access to information is important to all Americans.
It is my belief that per minute charges for internet access is
unreasonable and will seriously limit information access to
all internet users.

Please do not allow the local carriers to take this away from us.

-- 
"Most of life's failures are people who did not realize how
close they were to success when they gave up." - Thomas Edison

From kraemer@insync.net Wed Feb 19 12:11:45 1997
Return-Path: kraemer@insync.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16733 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:11:42 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13533; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:11:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(206.222.163.150) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013530; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:11:21 -0500
Received: by GODZILLA with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1389.3)
	id <01BC1E55.690749B0@GODZILLA>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:09:44 -0600
Message-ID: <01D117CCEB89D01183B800AA00BC76690A16@GODZILLA>
From: tim kraemer <kraemer@insync.net>
To: "Aaron (E-mail)" <SXN02740@Jetson.UH.EDU>,
        "Al Reyes (E-mail)"
	 <alreyes@3dfx.com>,
        "Angela Johnson (E-mail)"
	 <AngelaJohnson@associates.pennzoil.com>,
        "Catherine Manville (E-mail)"
	 <CMMA@ngccorp.com>,
        "Dan Carr (E-mail)" <dcarr@nol.net>,
        "dave and judy (E-mail)" <crunchy@usa.pipeline.com>,
        "David Bonds (E-mail)" <dbonds@insync.net>,
        "David Neal (E-mail)"
	 <dneal@ix.ngccorp.com>,
        "Don Grey (E-mail)" <dongrey@roamer.net>,
        "Dylan Hayes (E-mail)" <dhayes@inteq.bhi-net.com>,
        "edwin and lesley (E-mail)" <edles@juno.com>,
        "'Florante and Cheryl Galvez' (E-mail)" <florante@ix.netcom.com>,
        "'Glenn \"mr. cool\" Warner' (E-mail)" <ghwa@chevron.com>,
        "Huong Charles (E-mail)" <charles@lmpcgw.jsc.nasa.gov>,
        "Jay Thomas (E-mail)" <jayt@hal-pc.org>,
        "Jeffrey Maloy Jones (E-mail)"
	 <jmjo@insync.net>,
        "Jeffrey Maloy Jones (E-mail 2)" <jmjo@ngccorp.com>,
        "Jerry Wolski (E-mail)" <jaroslaw@applink.net>,
        "Joe \"qspy\" Powell (E-mail)" <jep@sclsis.navy.mil>,
        "John Ross (E-mail)" <jross@pobox.com>,
        "John Ross (E-mail 2)"
	 <john.ross@compaq.com>,
        "John Serrano (E-mail)" <serrano@usoft.com>,
        "Katherine (E-mail)" <beesonk@ccvalve.com>,
        "Lee Pham (E-mail)"
	 <leethal@anet-dfw.com>,
        "Michael Goldsberry (E-mail)"
	 <root@admin.ci.houston.tx.us>,
        "Miss Sheila (E-mail)"
	 <sheila77@juno.com>,
        "Mr. Davis \"the quake man!\" (E-mail)"
	 <Bum@inetnow.net>,
        "Nilo man (E-mail)" <nilo@juno.com>,
        "Noel Serrano (E-mail)" <SERRANO_NO@WILCOR.COM>,
        "Phil Parker (E-mail)"
	 <pparker@nine.com>,
        "Pinky (E-mail)" <prdigamo@paranet.com>,
        "Roland Dunkerly (E-mail)" <rolandd@mpd.tandem.com>,
        "Ronan Greg (E-mail)" <ragregg@insync.net>,
        "Ronan Greg (E-mail 2)"
	 <ragr@ngccorp.com>,
        "Sean Martin (E-mail)" <SMartin@XGATE.COMPAQ.com>,
        "Sean Martin (E-mail 2)" <redwood@gatsbyhouse.com>,
        "Sharlla Nunez (E-mail)" <sharlla@juno.com>,
        "Sieu Nguyen (E-mail)"
	 <nsieu@cs.uh.edu>,
        "steve gibson (Scary's Quakeholio) (E-mail)"
	 <smiles@aug.com>,
        "Tammy Bryson (E-mail)" <tlbr@ngccorp.com>,
        "Tommy Huong (E-mail)" <thoang@juno.com>,
        "Tommy Mcclain (E-mail)"
	 <tmcclain@ionet.net>,
        "wade man (E-mail)" <wadep@hal-pc.org>
Cc: "'isp@fcc.gov'" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: Please help me!!!!!
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:09:41 -0600
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1389.3)
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Length: 705

If I only ask you for one favor in 1997, this is it......

Southwestern Bell and the other Bells have decided that they are not
making enough cash on the
internet. They want the internet providers to pay a "special" connect
fee for people using the
internet. Southwestern Bell is a provider too and naturally will NOT
charge itself this fee!

The FCC is asking for your opinion on this RIGHT NOW.. Please use the
mail link below
or send an email to:     isp@fcc.gov  and tell them you think that extra
fee's for the internet
is the biggest bunch of crap you have ever heard!
click on this link: mailto:isp@fcc.gov

I really appreiciate you taking the time to kick this one in the butt.

Thanks

kraemer

From mbowman@turbonet.com Wed Feb 19 12:12:12 1997
Return-Path: mbowman@turbonet.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16739 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:12 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13552; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cypher.turbonet.com(204.188.48.1) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013543; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:11:54 -0500
Received: from [204.188.48.236] by cypher.turbonet.com (NTMail 3.01.03) id ga246876; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:11:27 +0000
Message-ID: <MAPI.Id.0016.00626f776d616e203030303730303037@MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
To: isp@fcc.gov
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Mike & Mary Bowman" <mbowman@turbonet.com>
Subject: surcharges
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 97 09:05:21 PST
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1483

Today I was provided with your address, and even though this is a few days
past the stated closing date for comments regarding surcharges purposed by
local internet service providers, I want to be heard even though I may not
be counted.

Sometimes businesses or individuals find themselves behind the power curve
instead of leading it.  I believe this is the case with the telephone
companies and internet access.  The implication is that the local telephone
companies are being left out in the cold as far as fees are concerned which
is more than a little bit hard to swallow.  My local server pays line fees
and keeps his equipment updated to attempt to accomodate the increased
demand.  He also takes the brunt of complaints when something goes awry and
people can't log-on.  I would think the telephone companies would welcome
an opportunity to sell additional service without the headaches of dealing
with mega-thousands of customers when something goes wrong.  Yes, the fees
the provicers are paying for the use of the lines are probably less than if
those fees were being billed to individual users, but I would think the
administration costs are also much lower.  If the telephone companies are
authorized to charge individual line time, are they also going to be
required to provide the personnel to handle the calls from individuals to
maintain individual accounts.  It seems to be the telephone companies have
a pretty good deal right now and they don't even know it!  MB

From brydon@chaos.ph.utexas.edu Wed Feb 19 12:12:13 1997
Return-Path: brydon@chaos.ph.utexas.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16743 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:13 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13550; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from chaos.ph.utexas.edu(128.83.131.3) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013542; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:11:53 -0500
Received: from localhost (brydon@localhost) by chaos.ph.utexas.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA15177 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:07:41 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:07:41 -0600 (CST)
From: David Brydon <brydon@chaos.ph.utexas.edu>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: No per-minute internet phone charges
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970219120451.9323E-100000@chaos.ph.utexas.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 579

	Greetings.  I have lived in Spain and Argentina where local phone
calls are charged per minute.  Cheap and easy communication is a vital
part of a healthy society. The internet is so important to the
communication base.  
	For these reasons, I urge you to reject phone companies' bid for
per-minute charges for internet access.

	Thank you.  Sincerely, David

---------------------------------
David Brydon 
(505) 665 1180 (O)
(505) 662 7087 (H)
email:
brydon@lanl.gov
brydon@physics.utexas.edu
mail:CNLS, MS B258, LANL,
Los Alamos, NM  87545
---------------------------------

From masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us Wed Feb 19 12:13:13 1997
Return-Path: masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16747 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:12 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13604; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lams.lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us(198.59.99.1) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013592; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:12:56 -0500
Received: from [198.59.99.109] (mac109.lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us [198.59.99.109]) by lams.LAMS.LosAlamos.k12.nm.us (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA19762 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:12:31 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <v01540b00af2a52cc4371@[198.59.99.109]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:12:35 -0700
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us (Nathan Mason)
Content-Length: 501

        I do not think that it is a good idea to CHARGE by the minute.

i       many people will stop getting the internet

h                             H   H       Y    Y         !
       #       ##      #      H   H        Y Y           !
        #     #  #    #       HHHHH         Y            !
         #   #    #  #        H   H         Y            !
          # #      ##         H   H         Y           ***
                                                        ***

Nathan Mason

:0)

From masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us Wed Feb 19 12:13:14 1997
Return-Path: masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16754 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:13 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13611; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lams.lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us(198.59.99.1) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013596; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:13:09 -0500
Received: from [198.59.99.109] (mac109.lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us [198.59.99.109]) by lams.LAMS.LosAlamos.k12.nm.us (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA19768 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:12:40 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <v01540b02af2a55fb0125@[198.59.99.102]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:12:42 -0700
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us (Nathan Mason)
Content-Length: 501

        I do not think that it is a good idea to CHARGE by the minute.

i       many people will stop getting the internet

h                             H   H       Y    Y         !
       #       ##      #      H   H        Y Y           !
        #     #  #    #       HHHHH         Y            !
         #   #    #  #        H   H         Y            !
          # #      ##         H   H         Y           ***
                                                        ***

Nathan Mason

:0)

From dec@hopper.unh.edu Wed Feb 19 12:13:14 1997
Return-Path: dec@hopper.unh.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16757 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:13 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13612; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unh.edu(132.177.132.50) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013595; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:13:07 -0500
Received: from kng513.unh.edu by unh.edu with SMTP id AA06056
  (5.67b+/IDA-1.5 for <isp@fcc.gov>); Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:33 -0500
Received: from localhost (dec@localhost)
          by kng513.unh.edu (8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id MAA04537 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:11:08 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: kng513.unh.edu: dec owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:11:08 -0500 (EST)
From: "Dan Chapman (Sparky)" <dec@hopper.unh.edu>
X-Sender: dec@kng513.unh.edu
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Telephone charges
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970219120535.4500C-100000@kng513.unh.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 540

Dear Sir

I understand the phone company wanting to get some money for all the local
service calls being generated by internet use.  I feel that if this
happens that internet usage will be dramatically reduced.  I know that as
a student I will no longer be able to afford to be on the internet if
there is a charge for local calls.  I also feel that this charge will be
hard to regulate and ALL calls (internet or just plain local calls will
end up costing money.  That is what the monthly service charge is for.  

Sincerely
Dan Chapman

From Thespias1@aol.com Wed Feb 19 12:13:14 1997
Return-Path: Thespias1@aol.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16756 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:14 -0500
From: Thespias1@aol.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13602; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from emout03.mx.aol.com(198.81.11.94) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013599; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:13:14 -0500
Received: (from root@localhost)
	  by emout03.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0)
	  id MAA28753 for isp@fcc.gov;
	  Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:12:55 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970219121254_1049885015@emout03.mail.aol.com>
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Phone charges for Internet use
Content-Length: 286

I strongly oppose the proposal by telephone companies to impose a per-minute
charge on Internet services.  Such a move would be extremely detrimental to
current use and continued growth of this valuable communications resource.  
                                          Claudia Capos

From kraemer@insync.net Wed Feb 19 12:13:15 1997
Return-Path: kraemer@insync.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16767 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:15 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13631; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(206.222.163.150) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013597; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:13:14 -0500
Received: by GODZILLA with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1389.3)
	id <01BC1E55.C2B38690@GODZILLA>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:12:14 -0600
Message-ID: <01D117CCEB89D01183B800AA00BC76690A17@GODZILLA>
From: tim kraemer <kraemer@insync.net>
To: "'isp@fcc.gov'" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: rboc access fee's
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:12:13 -0600
X-Priority: 3
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1389.3)
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Length: 252

Access fees for RBOC's is the biggest bunch of B.S. I have ever heard.
The Bells are in serious
need of hardcore regulation by the FCC. We will never have competition
for phone service unless
you guys do something about the Bells.

Thanks

kraemer

From masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us Wed Feb 19 12:13:14 1997
Return-Path: masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16755 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:14 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13608; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lams.lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us(198.59.99.1) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013594; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:12:59 -0500
Received: from [198.59.99.109] (mac109.lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us [198.59.99.109]) by lams.LAMS.LosAlamos.k12.nm.us (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA19765 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:12:36 -0700 (MST)
Message-Id: <v01540b01af2a55e6fcae@[198.59.99.102]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:12:39 -0700
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: masonna@lams.losalamos.k12.nm.us (Nathan Mason)
Content-Length: 501

        I do not think that it is a good idea to CHARGE by the minute.

i       many people will stop getting the internet

h                             H   H       Y    Y         !
       #       ##      #      H   H        Y Y           !
        #     #  #    #       HHHHH         Y            !
         #   #    #  #        H   H         Y            !
          # #      ##         H   H         Y           ***
                                                        ***

Nathan Mason

:0)

From coondm@gemstate.net Wed Feb 19 12:13:45 1997
Return-Path: coondm@gemstate.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16771 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:45 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13650; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:50 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199702191713.MAA13650@gatekeeper2.fcc.gov>
Received: from mail.gemstate.net(208.128.143.5) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013644; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:13:24 -0500
Received: from [208.128.143.18] by mail.gemstate.net
  (SMTPD32-3.02) id A5D2BAF01F8; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:18:10 -0700
X-Sender: coondm@mail.gemstate.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:13:00 -0700
To: isp@fcc.gov
From: Don Coon <coondm@gemstate.net>
Content-Length: 543

  I am voicing my opion regarding the Telephone companies proposal to charge
internet providers with a charge . This Proposal is out of line . Many of
the usesrs
of the internet have add to put in an extra phone .I know in my case . it costs
$15.00 a month . If this proposal is allowed to pass . It will be the end of
the internet. i for one will cancel my internet membership is this is
allowed to pass.
The phone companies are just using this to fatten their pockets . 
--
Registered ICC User
check out http://www.usefulware.com/~jfoltz

From husker@daci.com Wed Feb 19 12:13:46 1997
Return-Path: husker@daci.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16775 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:46 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13654; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:13:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(207.15.196.45) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013646; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:13:36 -0500
Received: from jfd14.daci.com (jfd14.daci.com [207.15.199.14])
          by smtp.daci.net (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id MAA24228 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: by jfd14.daci.com with Microsoft Mail
	id <01BC1E5E.6DD891C0@jfd14.daci.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:17 -0500
Message-ID: <01BC1E5E.6DD891C0@jfd14.daci.com>
From: "David A. Grachek" <husker@daci.com>
To: "'isp@fcc.gov'" <isp@fcc.gov>
Subject: per minute charges
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:06:48 -0500
Return-Receipt-To: <husker@daci.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 725

Dear Sirs,

This matter of per minute charges is merely a matter of a way to =
seperate people from their money.  This Internet system that has been =
established enables kids of all ages to explore and learn more about the =
world around them.  By charging more for the time, the kids will not be =
allowed to use the system and their learning will be diminished.  =
Please, you cannot impose capitalism on our kids' learning by taking =
away this database of knowledge from them. =20

I firmly believe that this is just another way for a larger corporation =
to fatten their wallets at the expense of my child's education.  I would =
like to hear your thoughts on this matter.

Thank you,

David A. Grachek
husker@daci.com

From jeff_megy@om.cv.hp.com Wed Feb 19 12:14:15 1997
Return-Path: jeff_megy@om.cv.hp.com
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16779 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:15 -0500
From: jeff_megy@om.cv.hp.com
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13669; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from hp-cv.cv.hp.com(15.255.72.17) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013665; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:14:07 -0500
Received: from hp-pcd.cv.hp.com (hp-pcd.cv.hp.com [15.0.200.33]) by hp-cv.cv.hp.com (8.8.5/8.8.0) with ESMTP id XAA25848 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 23:41:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from  by hp-pcd.cv.hp.com with SMTP
	(1.37.109.16/15.5+IOS 3.22+OM+CV 1.0) id AA195973280; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 23:41:20 -0800
X-Openmail-Hops: 2
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 97 23:40:47 -0800
Message-Id: <H000191215d1d42f@MHS>
In-Reply-To: <H000370309abb6cf@MHS>
Subject: Re: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use
To: isp@fcc.gov
Content-Length: 3303

Item Subject: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use
     
        I am a taxpayer and responsible parent, I do not see the future of 
capitalizing on the use of the internet from a utilities standpoint. If this is 
the type of legislation that we will have to fight in order to keep the internet
what it is today, then I will consistently vote against candidates and 
government in hopes of reducing the utilities power to capture the consumer 
dollar. Leave the internet alone and allow the utilities to prove the competency
for normal telephone service first; which I believe, they have not.

-Concerned Patriot

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use
Author:  Robert Moline at Non-HP-Corvallis,om2
Date:    2/10/97 10:09 PM

---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes --------------------------- 
From: Dennis Wyman at HFCCM9
Date: 2/10/97 6:51AM
To: Steven Pollock at HFCCM13
To: Bob A Crepps at HFCCM13
*To: Viqar Shamim at ccNotes
*To: Jay Feire
*To: Jim Kennedy at HFCCM1
*To: Ron Wagoner at HFCCM1
*To: Jerry W Parson at HFCCM1
*To: David Foote at HFCCM1
*To: William Morris at HFCCM16
Subject: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     
     
     YIKES!
     
     
______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use
Author:  Dennis Wyman at HFCCM9
Date:    2/10/97 6:51 AM
     
     
>From: David and Jill Bearss <bearss@e-cafe.com> 
>Subject: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use 
>
>>From: Bruce.Bacon@radisys.com
>>X-Lotus-FromDomain: RADISYS_CORPORATION
>>To: bbacon@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, 106605.3627@compuserve.com,
>>        gcbacon@roadrunner.com, bearss@e-cafe.com, jbender8@ix.netcom.com, 
>>        Boedecker.Bear@tci.com, Jim_Bowker@mail.fws.gov, rexh@mcn.net,
>>        Harley@ee.montana.edu, gmobley@ibm.net, DanM@ee.montana.edu, 
>>        cxpalm3@uswest.com, tanthony@aracnet.com,
>>        Joakim.Walstam@era-a.ericsson.se, ptrevith@poci.amis.com, 
>>        wthompson@mcn.net
>>Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 15:04:47 -0700
>>Subject: Phone companies want to bill for Internet use 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Bruce Bacon@RADISYS_CORPORATION
>>02/07/97 03:04 PM
According to people in the know, they are trying to sneak this one through 
congress in some obscure bill so no one will find out until it's too late...
     
     
Your local telephone company has filed a proposal with the FCC to impose 
per minute charges for your internet service. They contend that your 
usage has or will hinder the operation of the telephone network. 
additional per minute charges. The FCC has created an email box for  your 
comments, responses must be received by February 13, 1997. Send your 
comments to isp@fcc.gov and tell them what you think.
     
Every phone company is in on this one, and they are trying to sneak it 
in just under the wire for litiagation. Let everyone you know herethis 
one. Get the e-mail address to everyone you can think of.
     
                         isp@fcc.gov
     
Please forward this email to all your friends on the internet so all our 
voices may be heard!

From Tammy_Bruns@everett.wednet.edu Wed Feb 19 12:14:45 1997
Return-Path: Tammy_Bruns@everett.wednet.edu
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16784 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:45 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13680; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from unknown(168.212.224.15) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013667; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:14:38 -0500
Received: from internet ([168.212.224.8]) by mail.everett.wednet.edu
          (Netscape Mail Server v2.01) with SMTP id AAA73
          for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:15:41 -0800
From: Tammy_Bruns@everett.wednet.edu (Tammy Bruns)
Sender: Tammy_Bruns@everett.wednet.edu
To: isp@fcc.gov
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:15:29 -0800
Subject: paying by the minute
Message-ID: <msg35020.thr-276635.f5846@everett.wednet.edu>
Organization: Everett School District - For District Business Only
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-ID: <msg35020.thr-276635.f5846.part0@everett.wednet.edu>
X-Gateway: NASTA Gate 1.17 for FirstClass(R)
Content-Length: 352

I am not surprized that you have come up with yet another way to make
the rich richer - but I also believe that this idea of paying by the
minute is outrageous.....

for those of us who have teaching jobs and use the internet as a
teaching tool and research area, this is an outrage - please do what is
necessary to stop this

tammy bruns
math teacher

From robertm@portage.net Wed Feb 19 12:14:50 1997
Return-Path: robertm@portage.net
Received: from gatekeeper2.fcc.gov (firewall-user@internet2.fcc.gov [165.135.0.253]) by www2.fcc.gov (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA16787 for <isp@www2.fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:46 -0500
Received: by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov; id MAA13682; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 12:14:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pinky.junction.net(199.166.227.12) by gatekeeper2.fcc.gov via smap (V3.1.1)
	id xma013674; Wed, 19 Feb 97 12:14:41 -0500
Received: from megamach.portage.net (megamach.portage.net [204.112.250.1]) by pinky.junction.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id JAA30011 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 09:13:51 -0800
Received: from robertm.portage.net (portage-pm1-s9.portage.net [204.112.250.137]) by megamach.portage.net (8.6.5/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA15758 for <isp@fcc.gov>; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:16:58 -0600
Message-ID: <330B51B1.542F@portage.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:17:05 -0800
From: "Robert B. McLaughlin" <robertm@portage.net>
Reply-To: robertm@portage.net
Organization: McLaughlin Two-Way Radio
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: isp@fcc.gov
Subject: Re: Greed of phone companies
References: <199702111745.MAA29487@vixa.voyager.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2096

Robert E. Robison wrote:
> 
> The phone companies are at it again.  They are trying to add a per
> minute charge on to Internet users.  Send a letter to the FCC
> informing them of your opinion on this matter.  And also to your
> Senator and Representative.
> 
> Send to:  isp@fcc.gov
> 
> I am writing in response to the proposal made by telephone providers
> to
> the FCC.  I do not think it is in the best interest of the general
> public,
> nor is it in the best interest of the economy of the United States.
>  The
> proposed "per-minute" charge scheme would be highly damaging to the
> fledgling economy developing across the computer networks in this
> country.
> 
> It would also be harmful to researchers, students, and government
> agencies
> across the country and world-wide.  If per-minute charges are allowed
> to
> be initiated, the effect would be a reduction of consumer interest,
> and a
> stagnation of academic progress and communications.
> 
> I urge you to deny the proposal as it would deny many people the right
> to
> fast communications, as they would no longer be able to afford the
> charges. Many non-profit organizations and research groups would have
> a
> much more restricted access to this indispensable mode of
> communication.
> 
> I urge you to do what is right for the general public of the United
> States, and for its many invaluable organizations.  Please do not
> grant
> telephone providers' proposal as it is a monopolistic measure and
> would
> contribute to the rapid decline of services involved with the
> internet.
> You should consider how much economic damage this proposal will do to
> local access providers, major access providers (e.g. AOL), and
> universities as these groups attempt to develop and improve the
> communications and services provided on the internet.  They would be
> hard
> pressed to deal with this new burden.  Thank you for your time and
> consideration.
> 
>                                Sincerely, Robert B. McLaughlin
>                                        
>                                 (put your name here)