Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Your Rights Online

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List 38

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This discussion has been archived.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

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List More

Verizon Silences Amateur Roaming Number List

Comments Filter:

  • Trade Secret? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PD ( 9577 ) <slashdotlinux@pdrap.org> on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @03:42PM (#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 )
      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.
      • 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 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @03:42PM (#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?
    • "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--

      • 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.
        • 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.

      • 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.

        • 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.

    • 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 ) <jweb68@nOSpAM.hotmail.com> on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @03:45PM (#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.
  • move the pages to a non-US server! Let's see Verizon try to pull it down now!
    • That won't work any better than being outside the US has helped foreign companies from dodging the DMCA in the past. . .
  • Google's cache [google.com]

    • For Example: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      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
      ....
  • Just goes to show you how laws against trade secrets are obviously unconstitutional.

  • this coul be (Score:3, Interesting)

    by www.sorehands.com ( 142825 ) on Tuesday August 13, 2002 @06:02PM (#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 cached [google.com] by Google, if you're curious.
  • 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.
    • 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.
  • Can somebody point out an example of a delta from one month to another?
  • 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!

Slashdot Top Deals

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Close