FCC Record, Volume 19, No. 8, Pages 5879 to 6813, March 31 - April 13, 2004 Page: 5,893
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
9~--C~isslFederal Communications Commission DA 04-851~
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of )
Vox Populi Telecommunications ) IC No. 03-I0048552S
Unauthorized Change of )
Subscriber's Telecommunications Carrier
Adopted: March 2, 2004 Released: March 31,2004
By the Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau:
1. In this Order, we consider the complaint1 alleging that Vox Populi
Telecommunications (Vox), changed Complainant's telecommunications service provider
without obtaining authorization and verification from Complainant in violation of the
Commission's rules.2 We conclude that Vox's actions did result in an unauthorized change in
Complainant's telecommunications service provider and we grant Complainant's complaint.
2. In December 1998, the Commission released the Section 258 Order in which it
adopted rules to implement Section 258 of the Communications Act of 1934 (Act), as amended
by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act).3 Section 258 prohibits the practice of
"slamming," the submission or execution of an unauthorized change in a subscriber's selection
Informal Complaint No. IC-03-I0048552S, July 2, 2003.
2 See 47C.F.R. 64.1100- 64.1190.
47 U.S.C. 258(a); Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996);
Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996;
Policies and Rules Concerning Unauthorized Changes of Consumers' Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket No.
94-129, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 14 FCC Red 1508 (1998) (Section
258 Order), stayed in part, MCI WorldCom v. FCC, No. 99-1125 (D.C. Cir. May 18, 1999); First Order on
Reconsideration, 15 FCC Red 8158 (2000); stay lifted, MCI WorldCom v. FCC, No. 99-1125 (D.C. Cir. June 27,
2000); Third Report and Order and Second Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 15996 (2000), Errata, DA No.
00-2163 (rel. Sept. 25, 2000), Erratum, DA No. 00-2192 (rel. Oct. 4, 2000), Order, FCC 01-67 (rel. Feb. 22, 2001);
Third Order on Reconsideration and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 18 FCC Red 5099 (2003);
Order, FCC 03-116, (rel. May 23, 2003). Prior to the adoption of Section 258, the Commission had taken various
steps to address the slamming problem. See, e.g., Policies and Rules Concerning Unauthorized Changes of
Consumers'Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket No. 94-129, Report and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9560 (1995), stayed
inpart, 11 FCC Rcd 856 (1995); Policies and Rules Concerning Changing Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket
No. 91-64, 7 FCC Red 1038 (1992), reconsideration denied, 8 FCC Red 3215 (1993); Investigation of Access and
Divestiture Related Tariffs, CC Docket No. 83-1145, Phase I, 101 F.C.C.2d 911, 101 F.C.C.2d 935,
reconsideration denied, 102 F.C.C.2d 503 (1985).
]Federal Communications Comms ~Qarmaission
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. FCC Record, Volume 19, No. 8, Pages 5879 to 6813, March 31 - April 13, 2004, book, April 2004; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc4077/m1/34/: accessed March 30, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.