[VoiceOps] efax port out

[Carlos Alvarez]

"Sure" is difficult with these gray and changing topics.  The company 
trying to port to us was a law firm, so they researched it.  They are 
not a telecom-specific firm, but I assume they know how to research law 
in general.  They brought up the ITSP rule and the company holding the 
number (a local answering/forwarding company similar to Google Voice) 
said they are not an ITSP nor transporting calls, they are the end user. 
  The lawyers could find no clear way around that.  A test case is 
probably needed.

Speaking of all this, what's the port-out situation with Google Voice?


Alex Balashov wrote:
> Are you sure?  The FCC was pretty firm in its 2007 clarification that ITSPs do not own numbers, but that logical end-customers own numbers (even if the ITSP spent money to acquire the numbers on an end-customer's behalf or has had that number in inventory for a long time), and that ITSPs must allow and assist with port-outs, even if there are outstanding balances due or other unresolved billing disputes.
>
> I am guessing, however, that an inbound-only application provider like Efax is not considered an ITSP.  However, there is precedent for an end-customer forcing a hosted IVR company to allow a port-out (though I don't know to what extent regulatorily enshrined).
>
> --
> Alex Balashov - Principal
> Evariste Systems LLC
> 260 Peachtree Street NW
> Suite 2200
> Atlanta, GA 30303
> Tel: +1-678-954-0670
> Fax: +1-404-961-1892
> Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/
>
> On Apr 26, 2011, at 12:11 AM, Carlos Alvarez<carlos at televolve.com>  wrote:
>
>> Efax and other endpoint services like those call forwarding and
>> receptionist services are not bound by porting rules. I've had success
>> in paying extort(COUGH) fees to get the numbers out, but they don't
>> have to allow it.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2011, at 9:08 PM, "Eric Hiller"<clec at cygnustel.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> We have been trying to port out an efax number for one of customers but
>>> efax says they do not have to comply as they are not a phone company. XO
>>> is the underlying carrier, but they will not accept a Port Out form from
>>> our end user, which is not XO's end user. Any experience with this, ideas,
>>> or suggestions?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Eric
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> VoiceOps mailing list
>>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops


-- 
Carlos Alvarez
TelEvolve
602-889-3003