Why is SIPphone excluded from FCC E911 Order?

Why does SIPphone believe they do not need to offer E911? How do they get away with it? Or are they simply hoping they stay under the radar? They offer an ATA option, where I can get access to the PSTN for making calls and virtual numbers for receiving calls from the PSTN. Doesn’t that make them an “interconnected” VoIP provider by the FCC’s definition?

Anyone know on what grounds they would claim that E911 does not need to be provided?

Update: I ask because I sincerely want to know, not in a sarcastic manner as if I think SIPphone are doing something wrong. I have a better understanding of the grounds SIPphone’s Gizmoproject software VoIP might use, but I’m less clear of the grounds for SIPphone with an ATA and PSTN number and I’m speaking specifically of the US FCC mandated E911. I ask because it is something customers apparently want (a phone that can make and receive calls, but doesn’t have 911) and SIPphone has the balls to give it to them, but I’m very curious on what basis they feel legally safe enough to do so.

5 comments for “Why is SIPphone excluded from FCC E911 Order?

  1. In Italy you just need to claim that your service is not intended as "primary" telephony service. It’s not that simple actually, but it explains what happens here.

  2. in the UK ofcom has issued a new consultation on 999 (Uk equiv of 911) that says any service that allows connection to or from pstn numbers MUST offer 999. that will now include skype and every other pc based voip service that has tried to avoid being captured by 999/911.

  3. I get that Moshe. I understand why people may want it. The problem is the FCC seems to want to ensure nobody is allowed to offer it, but SIPphone still does, so I want to understand their legal basis for doing so.

Comments are closed.