Comments on: No Deaf Conference Calls

By: Deaf John J

Deaf John J — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:29:26 +0000

Correct, rules need to be clarified in order for society to function. Transparancy is needed for the overall society to become aware of the Deaf community. There are *many* misperceptions already; these need to be confronted. Transparancy will be a major effort towards this end.

I believe Purple is correct in what the FCC has been asked to do.

I can see where the FCC would review the position of the regulations; however, by “reviewing” the regulations they are not necessarily overturned. Just clarified.

By: Leigh

Leigh — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:25:33 +0000

I’m going to have to say that I agree with Matt’s comment above.

Purple Communications and GoAmerica are companies of “greed.”

And now Purple voluntarily delisted from NASDAQ? Oh boy, this company is going down. Unfortunately.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:38:57 +0000

Seriously LOL.

Purple trying to get the FCC to reimburse for Deaf-Deaf conference calls?

I have to laugh here. I have been using i711 exclusively – and this will make me switch to another service.

By: Chad

Chad — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:19:44 +0000

I agreed you. FCC should allow the deaf people whom involve home base business. The hearing guy emails spreads to hearing and deaf. That how I got message from hearing guy that I call vrs to call hearing guy to listen the conference for new update or new features and etc… I want hearing and deaf are same access the opportunity. What if FCC can’t allow deaf people therefore deaf people’s lifestyle will be dead and their home base business will be dead also.

Hence, the deaf people always strive and enter the company for an interview to get a job but unfortunate they don’t get a job. Therefore they have to set up their own business. Therefore they must call vrs to call the conference to understand their business to improvement benefit and education benefit. I hope FCC allow the deaf people call the conference calls.

By: Sandon

Sandon — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:08:32 +0000

I am a little confused… I’m wondering why Purple, et al. is fighting for reimbursement of Deaf-to-Deaf conference calls. Why is this reimbursement necessary if Deaf people can just call each other directly using broadband service? Please clarify!
Thanks,
Sandon

By: Charles

Charles — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:20:36 +0000

Deaf conference calls should not be reimburse by FCC since the purpose of the reimburement is to pay providers to faciliate the calls between deaf and hearing. If a deaf caller calls deaf person, does FCC reimburse the deaf caller? No

By: Steve R

Steve R — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:29:25 +0000

Kelby,

I agree with you that we should be functionally equivalent but there

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:07:25 +0000

Purple should make point to point conference call like they said they would have it on MVP but they decide not to do it….It’s all about making $$$$. FCC should allow conferecne calls but cut from $6 dollars to $2 dollars for using conference call

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:40:06 +0000

I do not understand why FCC would pay for Deaf to Deaf to Deaf to (etc…) conference call? I thought FCC only paid for VRS calls. Can you clarify? Does Purple offer this service? Is there a website link to explain how it works?

By: RedWolf

RedWolf — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:40:37 +0000

Hi Kelby,
I thought I would bring in a link to show you about this same topic at alldeaf.com. Maybe you can go over there and maybe you can clarify about the issues. My name is RedWolf, and I did posted mine to clarify about what you meant in your vlog. I really support your vlog and I believed it is unfair to all deaf community who owns their business. Here is the link: http://www.alldeaf.com/relay-services/71058-purple-upset-fcc-says-no.html#post1440280

Thank you.