Birds-Eye.Net
All things broadband and more...
 
Web Birds-Eye.Net
What's New?

Download Purchased Items

Research:
Analysis
International

Reference:
Acronyms & Definitions
Articles
Broadband Directory
Legacy
Operations
Technical
Yearly Predictions
> RSS Feeds <

Business Forms:
Due Diligence Checklist
Funding & VC Due Diligence
Real Estate Due Diligence

Resources:
Monitoring/Reporting/Benchmarking
Patent Harvesting Kit
Ready to Use Scripts
Source Code

Referral:
Expert Consulting
Referral

Other:
Advertise With Us
Feedback
Recommended Reading
Fishing
House
Baby in the City
Blog

Featured Product:

The Skype Loop Hole
How Skype exploited holes in telecommunications legislation and hype from Forbes and Red Herring

By: Bruce Bahlmann - Contributing Author (your feedback is important to us!)

Created: November 15, 2005

This paper is the product of VoIP Market Research  which is available from Birds-Eye.Net.

I recently red the article “Skype’s Payday” in this week’s Red Herring and was so amused by the article I had to write about it. Beneath are my rumblings. 

“This time, it’s perfectly legal” 

A classic statement to open the article which consists of a question and answer session with the Skype CEO, Niklas Zennstrom – it is just too bad that it wasn’t asked as a real question. Is it legal to provide global communications? Well, let me see. I can send an email for free to any person around the globe - so because of this fact is must be legal, right? Evidently, that is the basis for the conception of Napster, Kazaa, and now Skype – does that mean it is legal? Well, it worked before, didn't it? Skype believes they can build and maintain a private global communications network over the top of the existing broadband service infrastructure, sell premium voice services on this network, and yet not be subject to any laws that govern other telecommunications providers – certainly their aim is not to pay homage to franchise agreements and taxes imposed on these telecommunications providers. Is this legal? If it is, what does that say to legitimate telecommunications companies that do pay taxes and respectfully negotiate franchise fees – perhaps they are paying too much for taxes and should demand federal and state governments to cancel such anti-competitive measures? What would such repercussions be? What if those repercussions were that the annual taxes you and I pay would go up just so that companies like Skype can have a fair play at the global telecommunications market? All other telecommunications providers pay including cable, telco, mobile, satellite, wireless, but not Skype - it is different, right? 

The rate of consumer adoption is an interesting historical benchmark to gage questionable behavior. If the rate of consumer adoption of something looks like Napster, then one should question it as such. Similarly if the rate of consumer adoption looks like Skype then something is equally fishy. Look at any other roll out of legitimate, highly desirable technology. Nothing else looks quite like Napster or Skype, because they are not normal. 

“Skype is more of a complimentary service than a replacement service” 

Really, well then what exactly is Skype? Skype tries to make a case for it being what it calls a “personal mobile service”. It sounds catchy, only what does it mean? Answer, it is no different than cable companies wanting to classify their high speed Internet service as an 'Information Service' so as not to fall victim of regulation and open access requirements. In the end, if we all stepped back and call an Ace an Ace – all these linguistic reproductions are truly “telecommunications services.” Federal governments could save themselves a lot of deliberation and lobbying if they settled on just one communications playbook for all telecommunications providers - domestic and abroad. 

What is interesting is if Skype were classified correctly by world governments as a 'Telecommunications Service' they would have to open up to anyone and anything to be used or exploited – in other words, they would fall under regulations that they currently don’t observe and could never observe and in the end they too would become a 'dumb pipe'. Skype does not have a physical presence within the areas they are trying to serve, they don’t own the customer or the last mile, and basically only maintain a small piece of software and some partnerships. It is like saying FireFox or Netscape is a telecommunications service. Only, while these too are just applications they differ significantly as they empower users to access any Internet site. Skype is a proprietary network that is dependent on broadband Internet access to work.  

Skype will never be anything more than a secondary line service that one has in addition to one's primary line service. Only how does one know which is which? If you have a two-line house and you forget to engage your primary line before you dial 911 what will you get and who is responsible if you don’t get what you would expect? If Skype is anything like the CEO’s previous accomplishments, dialing 911 on its network will get you the run around. Skype and its CEO are more geared and experienced to challenge and disrupt our current conception, ideals, and regulations around telecommunications than solve real world problems for real people – that is why they don’t want to talk about adhering to regulations. Until we figure out this current 'Skype loop hole' and rewrite telecommunications laws that are universally and globally fair, we open ourselves to confusing choices such as Skype. Oh, but I forgot, Skype is not a 'Telecommunications Service' so why would anyone ever have a two line phone in their home where Skype is the second line. Rather, Skype is simply a “personal mobile service” – a nebulous little toy service that you engage when you want to make free phone calls around the world. Nothing life threatening or critically important ever flows over this covert, unregulated, and un-taxed telecommunications system. I’m sure Skype would vouch for that. 

While this may work in a world still new to the legalities of free Internet trade, this 'Skype loop hole' in the definition of telecommunications has given rise to Skype. Skype like Napster, is only the first of a host of look-a-alike exploiters of this loop hole in current federal regulations. Skype is even claiming to play fair and be legal, but if a company like Kazaa can quickly rise up in the aftermath of 'Nice Napster', what is there to prevent an even better, more devious model from replacing the likes of a 'well behaved Skype'. 

“we’re helping telcos sell broadband connections” 

Interesting, the Skype site doesn’t advertise for BT, Verizon, Comcast, or Time Warner broadband services so I’m not sure how Skype is helping sell more broadband connections. In fact, if this is the case why does Skype advertise their minimum connection speed as 56k if they really promote broadband connections? Don’t worry Mr. Zennstrom, you needn’t hype about your helping telco’s and cable operators selling more broadband connections. Forbes and Red Herring may believe your hype, but they are just the uninformed media. Serious communications companies see these claims for what they really are. 

I look at Skype the way that cable companies probably look at Netflix. Netflix allows cable subscribers to down grade to a very minimal programming package (like basic or extended basic) and then subscribe to Netflix for premium movies through their Internet mail order rental business. At least while Netflix is taking away the cable company profits from its premium customers it isn’t exploiting its data services in the process – at least not yet. Skype is doing just that to both cable and telephone companies. Only it is playing with fire from the standpoint of regulatory agencies. Telecommunications are regulated and the proceeds from taxes on these regulated entities fund federal, state, and local government. If taxes collected on these sources go down, guess what happens? I wish I could say that government has layoffs and cutbacks, rather taxes go up. So what benefits Skype through it exploiting a loop hole in regulations, ends up costing you and I more in the end – regardless of whether we are Skype subscribers or not. 

My Conclusions...

Yes, I’m afraid the only thing that Mr. Zennstrom is good at is challenging the world’s perceptions of the usefulness of telecommunications. His first creation was a simple copy of Napster but in a masterfully devious organization aimed chiefly at avoiding certain prosecution of a growing awareness and concern over the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. 

Skype, is no stranger to deception either but this time instead of taking on MPAA or RIAA, Mr. Zennstrom faces certain wranglings with federal governments around the world. Only this time they will come at him with a lot more than a few measly subpoenas. Like Napster, which exploded on the scene due in large part to a deal that was too good to be true - free copyrighted music. Skype has also exploded on the scene with an equally obscene deal that is too good to be true – free telephone calls anywhere in the world. While governments are slower to react than greedy musicians, Skype’s destiny lays not far from the tree as that of free-for-all file swapping companies. Just because it is great and everyone loves it doesn’t mean it is worth anything or that it has a future. If eBay goes on to purchase Skype, I’ll be curious as to how it plans to explain to its shareholders when hype (sorry, I meant Skype) fails to hold its weight against the looming onslaught of regulations.

Check out these other Birds-Eye.Net papers/products regarding VoIP:

Check out these other Birds-Eye.Net papers/products regarding broadband policy:

Can Birds-Eye.Net help you or your Company?
Receive your Birds-Eye.Net articles and white papers hot off the presses by adding our RSS feed to your reader.

(C) Copyright Birds-Eye.Net, All rights reserved.
It is against the law to reproduce this content or any portion of it in any form without the explicit written permission of Birds-Eye Network Services, LLC. Federal copyright law (17 USC 504) makes it illegal, punishable with fines up to $100,000 per violation plus attorney's fees.