Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List 38

Posted by timothy on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @04:30PM from the must-prevent-informed-customers dept.

An anonymous reader writes: "Verizon Wireless has silenced a tech-savvy user's web site for publishing the PRL content of Verizon phones. The PRL revealed that Verizon's popular and "expanding" America's Choice Plan has actually been shrinking in coverage in the latest few phone updates. Verizon of course, doesn't want this to tarnish their image, so they threaten legal action. Here is the usenet announcement. Can they hear us now?" PRL stands for Preferred Roaming List, and since roaming agreements can greatly influence the worth (and cost) of a particular calling plan, it's information I'd rather have available.

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Load All Comments

Search 38 Comments Log In/Create an Account

Comments Filter:

Trade Secret? (Score:5, Insightful)

by PD ( 9577 ) writes: <slashdotlinux@pdrap.org> on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @04:42PM (#4064472) Homepage Journal

A trade secret is only secret if nobody knows about it. If Verizon failed to protect that secret it's their fault, and they can't do anything about it once it's revealed.

- Re:Trade Secret? (Score:3, Insightful)
  
  by L-Train8 ( 70991 ) writes:
  
  Regardless of the legal merits of Verizon's claims, and they seem specious to me at best, just the threat of possible expensive legal action is enough to stop the the list. Even if Mr. Lurker fought and won his case, he would spend a lot of time and money doing so. And yes, there is a chance that he might have his money returned to him with a favorable ruling, but that is a gamble. Freedom of speech is a constitutional right, unless you're a regular person and the corporation that wants to shut you up has a lot of pricey lawyers.
  
  I posted this before, but I find it is relevant to so much that I see on /. Emmanuel Goldstein, writing in the summer 2001 issue of 2600 magazine, said:
  
  "The injustice takes on an even more serious tone when it no longer seems to matter whether or not you're found guilty. or innocent - whether you win or lose. If you're even brought into the game, you lose regardless of whether or not you win....
  Every time we find ourselves in a court of law, we seem to have lost by default, something even a victory can't seem to change. Not that we don't relish the idea of standing up to any of the bullies who put us through this hell. But every time we do, it costs us and not just financially. We have to devote tremendous resources into the act of simply defending who we are and what we've been doing for all these years."
  
  It's easy to see how someone who doesn't live to fight the good fight, someone who just wants to post some cool stuff he figured out, would give up rather than take on the hassle of proving the obvious - that he has every right to do his thing.
  - Re:Trade Secret? (Score:1)
    
    by AyeRoxor! ( 471669 ) writes:
    
    So it's down to fighting for your rights.
    
    What else is new? Since the beginning of this legal system, it's always been a costly risky proposition to fight a large corporation, but I'll be damned if I would just turn over for them. Fuck that.
    
    Who the hell do they think they are, telling people "You can't do that. The gov't says you can, bur we say you can't, and our rules are more important because we have money."
    
    That churns my stomach, and I would be on the phone with a lawyer, if not the EFF, so fast, my phone would warp from the heat. Some people might say don't bother the EFF. They're busy enough. Granted they're busy. But this is the reason they exist, and the fact they're busy is a great indicator of a climate in which we should do *anything* but turn over.
    
    Who's next on the soapbox?
only one thing bugs me (Score:5, Insightful)

by medcalf ( 68293 ) writes: on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @04:42PM (#4064476) Homepage

The only thing that really bugs me about this is that intellectual property rights are being asserted over a collection of information from multiple sources, all public. This would indicate, if it stands and sets a precedent, that public information is only public in its original format. If I make every third cell of a table of radio frequency assignments bold to highlight an interesting trend, am I now guilty of infringing the intellectual property "rights" of the users of the associated spectra?

- Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:3, Insightful)
  
  by ka9dgx ( 72702 ) writes:
  
  "Intellectual Property" is a propaganda term that groups things in an unnatural and unfair manner to the advantage of a few at the expense of the many.
  Copyright is granted to the author of a work for the express purpose of enhancing the creation of work destined for the public domain.
  Patents are a temporary monopoly issued to inventors for the express purpose of enhancing the creation of technology destined for the public domain.
  If the use of the term "property" implies permanent ownership, it is a LIE, and should be treated as such. There is NO SUCH THING AS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
  --Mike--
  - Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:2)
    
    by medcalf ( 68293 ) writes:
    
    Although the parent was moderated as "flamebait" due to the tone of the post, ka9dgx does make a valid point: "intellectual property" is a societally-created fiction, just like a "corporate person" is.
    - Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:1)
      
      by martyn s ( 444964 ) writes:
      
      I totally agree with everything you an he are saying; in fact, I don't think there is anyone who agrees with you more about it. But the problem with "intellectual property" is not so simple as calling it a "societally-created fiction". After all, personal property is "societally-created". Just the mere fact that it is created by society does not make it wrong or bad. The point is that "intellectual property" is not just a "societally-created fiction," it's a societally-created fiction that does not accomplish what it was designed to do, and does more harm than good. Personal property, on the other hand, as a societally-created fiction, is a good thing, and is uaually a good thing.
  - Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:3, Insightful)
    
    by Prior Restraint ( 179698 ) writes:
    
    For the sake of completeness, I should point out that there are a couple of other concepts within the rubric of IP: trademarks and trade secrets.
    
    Trademarks, IIRC, are valid so long as you make a reasonable attempt to enforce them. "Reasonable" is vague, which is why things like this [slashdot.org] happen. They aren't evil; they're just worried their trademark will be ruled abandoned.
    
    Trade secrets (such as in this case) are valid so long as they remain a secret. You can use contracts to allow some people to access them on the condition everything stays mum, but once a third party gains access to the data, you're up a creek.
    - Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:2)
      
      by Prior Restraint ( 179698 ) writes:
      
      Trademarks, IIRC, are valid so long as you make a reasonable attempt to enforce them. "Reasonable" is vague, which is why things like this [slashdot.org] happen. They aren't evil; they're just worried their trademark will be ruled abandoned.
      
      Replying to oneself is gauche, but I made a mistake and no one has called me on it. The *zilla case isn't about abandonment, but about generics. You can't trademark a generic term, so they're worried that if enough people start calling things Foozilla, then Godzilla becomes generic, and loses its value as a trademark.
- Re:only one thing bugs me (Score:1)
  
  by peeping_Thomist ( 66678 ) writes:
  
  This would indicate, if it stands and sets a precedent,
  
  Precedents are set when decisions are made in legal cases. This was just a corporation sending a threatening letter to an individual. There's no precedent being set.
So that explains it..... (Score:3, Interesting)

by jweb ( 520801 ) writes: <jweb68 AT hotmail DOT com> on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @04:45PM (#4064495)

I got a phone/plan with Verizon for one simple reason: I could go 'anywhere' within a 6 state area and have my phone work. Verizon was the only plan that allowed local coverage both in Minnesota (where I live) and rural Iowa (where many of my friends/family live). The last 2 times I've driven back and forth, I've noticed about a 70-mile gap in Verizon coverage along my main route, which wasn't there when I originally got the plan almost a year ago. I called Verizon, but never got a straight answer. You know, if they would TELL customers about things like this, they just might be willing to accept it. As it is, I'm currently searching for a new phone plan.

- Re:So that explains it..... (Score:1)
  
  by EvilBudMan ( 588716 ) writes:
  
  --I called Verizon, but never got a straight answer.--
  
  If anyone has ever got a straight answer out of Verizon, please let me know?
so? (Score:1)

by jeffy124 ( 453342 ) writes:

move the pages to a non-US server! Let's see Verizon try to pull it down now!
- Won't work (Score:2)
  
  by Bastian ( 66383 ) writes:
  
  That won't work any better than being outside the US has helped foreign companies from dodging the DMCA in the past. . .
Thank goodness for... (Score:2, Informative)

by linuxwrangler ( 582055 ) writes:

Google's cache [google.com]
- - Re:Thank goodness for... (Score:4, Informative)
    
    by kevin lyda ( 4803 ) writes: on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @07:14PM (#4065502) Homepage
    
    good point. see http://ie.suberic.net/justalurker.com/ [suberic.net]. verizon's lawyers can feel free to look me up - just look in your handy copy of the eircom phone book for the 07 and 09 area codes.
    
- For Example: (Score:1, Interesting)
  
  by Anonymous Coward writes:
  
  PRL 50037 - America's Choice (May 16th, 2002) Priority 1 04097 PCS RM Pacific Com Alaska 04500 PCS RM SprintPCS - Fairbanks Priority 2 02042 (A) RM ACS Wireless License Sub 316B Alaska 2 - Bethel 00251 (A) RM AT&T Wireless Services 187A Anchorage, AK Priority 1 00208 D/A FR Alltel Communications 092B Little Rock-North Little Rock, 327B Arkansas 4 - Clay 328B Arkansas 5 - Cross 329B Arkansas 6 - Cleburne 330B Arkansas 7 - Pope 333B Arkansas 10 - Garland 00342 D/A FR Alltel Communications 165B Fort Smith AR-OK 182B Fayetteville-Springdale, AR 324B Arkansas 1 - Madison 331B Arkansas 8 - Franklin 599B Oklahoma 4 - Nowata Priority 2 04144 PCS FR SprintPCS - Little Rock AR Priority 3 00478 (A) RM CenturyTel Wireless 291B Pine Bluff, AR 01038 (A) RM CenturyTel Wireless 325B Arkansas 2 - Marion 01058 (A) RM CenturyTel Wireless 335B Arkansas 12 - Ouachita Priority 1 00048 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 026B Phoenix, AZ 077B Tucson, AZ 321B Arizona 4 - Yuma 322B Arizona 5 - Gila 01030 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 00140 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 01026 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 319B Arizona 2 - Coconino 01034 D/A RM Valley Telecommunications 323B Arizona 6 - Graham Priority 2 01028 (A) -- Verizon Wireless Priority 3 04170 PCS FR SprintPCS - Phoenix AZ Priority 4 01024 (A) RM Mohave Cellular LP 318B Arizona 1 - Mohave Priority 1 00064 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 093B Las Vegas, NV 488B Minnesota 7 - Chippewa 547B Nevada 5 - White Pine 00002 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 002B Los Angeles-Long Beach/Anaheim 073B Oxnard-Simi Valley-Ventura, CA 00004 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 018B San Diego, CA 342B California 7 - Imperial 00040 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 007B San Francisco-Oakland, CA 027B San Jose, CA 111B Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa, CA 123B Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA 124B Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lomp 126B Salinas-Seaside-Monterey, CA 175B Santa Cruz, CA 339B California 4 - Madera 340B California 5 - San Luis Obispo 00162 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 074B Fresno, CA 150B Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, CA 339B California 4 - Madera 347B California 12 - Kings 00228 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 097B Bakersfield, CA 341B California 6 - Mono 00228 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00002 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00004 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00064 PCS -- Verizon Wireless 00112 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 035B Sacramento, CA 254B Redding, CA 274B Yuba City, CA 345B California 10 - Sierra Priority 2 00498 D/A -- Verizon Wireless 171B Reno, NV 543B Nevada 1 - Humboldt 544B Nevada 2 - Lander 545B Nevada 3 - Storey 546B Nevada 4 - Mineral 547B Nevada 5 - White Pine 00498 PCS -- Verizon Wireless Priority 3 00224 (A) -- Verizon Wireless 107B Stockton, CA 142B Modesto, CA 338B California 3 - Alpine 00294 (A) -- Verizon Wireless 215B Chico, CA 254B Redding, CA 337B California 2 - Modoc Priority 4 04183 PCS FR SprintPCS - San Fransisco CA (including Eureka) Priority 5 24615 PCS RM Iusacel - Tujuana MX 01474 D/A RM CC Communications 543B Nevada 1 - Humboldt 01064 D/A RM Golden State Cellular 338B California 3 - Alpine Priority 6 01059 (A) RM United States Cellular 336A California 1 - Del Norte 01473 D/A RM Western Wireless 543A Nevada 1 - Humboldt 01080 (A) FR El Dorado Cellular 346B California 11 - El Dorado ....
Free speech (Score:2)

by anthony_dipierro ( 543308 ) writes:

Just goes to show you how laws against trade secrets are obviously unconstitutional.
this coul be (Score:3, Interesting)

by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) writes: on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @07:02PM (#4065415) Homepage

This could be a violation of the consumer protection acts.

I would say Verizion should be burried, but Verizion is also going after a Ralksy [146.145.213.90], a big time spammer.

It's in the Google Cache for the curious (Score:1)

by Frumious ( 1000 ) writes:

It's cached [google.com] by Google, if you're curious.
Information unavailable (Score:2)

by m_evanchik ( 398143 ) writes:

For all you amateur lawyers stating Verizon has no case in blocking the site from deseminating its information, might I point out that the sight has taken the info offline.

Verizon's lawyers' letter had the desired effect, even if just temporarily.

Big companies can successfully bully you into shutting up, just like any mafia thug.
- Re:Information unavailable (Score:1)
  
  by Ironica ( 124657 ) writes:
  
  The fact that they won doesn't mean they have a case, however. It's still useful to make the distinction between valid claims and bullying tactics.
  
  They don't have a case. Fact is, though, they don't seem to need one... but if someone with more acquired power [ohio-state.edu] decides to take up the banner, they may find the situation somewhat changed.
So, the evidence is....? (Score:1)

by rf600r ( 236081 ) writes:

Can somebody point out an example of a delta from one month to another?
US talkplans (Score:1)

by burts_here ( 529713 ) writes:

no offense but your cell phone tarrifs suck, do you still pay for incomming calls as well? And can you not manually select which network to use when your roaming? doesent it come up on the screen with the network name? On UK phones you can manually select which network to use when you are in a diffrent county roaming, plus it shows which network you are using on the main screen of your phone. Damit i can even use a french network from the uk if the weathers good!

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List 38

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List More Login

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List

Trade Secret? (Score:5, Insightful)

Re:Trade Secret? (Score:3, Insightful)

Re:Trade Secret? (Score:1)

only one thing bugs me (Score:5, Insightful)

Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:3, Insightful)

Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:2)

Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:1)

Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:3, Insightful)

Re:"Intellectual Property" (Score:2)

Re:only one thing bugs me (Score:1)

So that explains it..... (Score:3, Interesting)

Re:So that explains it..... (Score:1)

so? (Score:1)

Won't work (Score:2)

Thank goodness for... (Score:2, Informative)

Re:Thank goodness for... (Score:4, Informative)

For Example: (Score:1, Interesting)

Free speech (Score:2)

this coul be (Score:3, Interesting)

It's in the Google Cache for the curious (Score:1)

Information unavailable (Score:2)

Re:Information unavailable (Score:1)

So, the evidence is....? (Score:1)

US talkplans (Score:1)

Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.

Slashdot Top Deals

Slashdot