From: frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 64e6f1bab89d20f4d24d766e57b2b01c9bc505210e6e2807819d28a2be408969
Message ID: <199602120410.UAA15696@netcom7.netcom.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-12 21:43:17 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 05:43:17 +0800
From: frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 05:43:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: China
Message-ID: <199602120410.UAA15696@netcom7.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
At 8:29 AM 2/11/96 -0500, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote:
>Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
>> At 01:54 PM 2/10/96 EST, you wrote:
>> >It's not difficult to imagine that governments will seek to regulate the
>> >possession of modems again. Some may recall that in the U.S. it used to be
>> >technically illegal to connect a modem to the phone jack without a permissio
>> >from AT&T.
>>
>> Actually, permission from the local phone companies, who owned the system,
>> I assume? (Though I don't actually remember which parts of The Phone Company
>> were involved in the Carterphone decision.)
>
>Nope. I used modems back when the local phone company _was AT&T. :-)
Back in the really dark ages, we used acoustic couplers (300 b/s max) which
held a telephone handset, so there was no direct connection to the
telephone lines. The phone company asserted that they were also illegal,
but their argument was kind of weak!
Return to February 1996
Return to “frantz@netcom.com (Bill Frantz)”