Something on your mind? Want to give us feedback on something in particular or everything in general? Tell us how we are doing!
#5879 by lohertz
Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:48 am
Robspace1 wrote:So are you trying to port a MJ number to Ooma or a Vontage number to Ooma? I was told yesterday that MJ numbers can't be ported because MJ owns them and they are not required to port numbers because they are not listed as a phone carrier but as a "multimedia experience" whatever that is but the FCC regulations about them required to port a number for a customer as long as it's in the local area does not apply to MJ. Now, I have not checked this info out so I don't really know if thats true or not. Maybe someone else does. Do you know anyone that has ported a MJ number to another carriewr?


I believe the rule is, if you can port in you can port out. see wikipedia entry

And
FCC Number Pooling law 1996

In either case you have to make a BONA FIDE Request
Try and see what happens.
#5881 by socalgail
Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:57 am
Reply to oomg:

I am new to this forum. I do not see a way to reply directly to your reply to me so I am just posting a general reply.

It is clear that MagicJack is making money on its service. They cannot do this with what they are charging customers for the service. Therefore, they must be making money somehow. It is obvious that their revenue stream comes from advertisers who want to entice you into purchasing something or who need a way around your right to avoid telemarketers on the national "Do Not Call" registry. The advertisers pay this premium because MagicJack is analyzing your calls to target you personally making it much easier for advertisers to get you to click on a link. Once you do that, you waive all privacy rights.

I think I have read the EULA correctly. I am glad you posted the tricky language in the contract. For example, here is a gem:

magicJack won't ever rent, sell, or share your personal information with other people or other companies except to share personal information in order to allow you to use the free calling features that magicJack provides...These companies may use your personal information to help magicJack provide you with their service.

Or this one:
We will transfer personal information if magicJack is acquired by or merged with another company. We reserve the right to include your personal information, collected as an asset, in any such transaction.

Or this one:
Advertisers may assume that people who interact with, view, or click targeted ads meet the targeting criteria....By interacting with or viewing an ad you are consenting to the possibility that the advertiser will assume that you are interested in the ad and meet the targeting criteria used to display the ad. The advertisements appearing on magicPage are delivered to you by magicJack LP, our web advertising partner and are subject to magicJack’s Privacy Policy. We will not provide personal information to anybody else

In other words, translating from the legalese, we will provide these advertisers with your personal contact information.
#5882 by southsound
Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:09 am
Why do I get the strange idea that socalgail and robspace1 are somehow connected? Either alters of the same person, coworkers of he same company (possibly Jaduka), roomies, or something similar. If you check for posts from either of them, they all point back to this forum. Not one post other than to trash MagicJack.

I think the moderators might want to look into this.
#5884 by socalgail
Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:38 am
southsound wrote:Why do I get the strange idea that socalgail and robspace1 are somehow connected? Either alters of the same person, coworkers of he same company (possibly Jaduka), roomies, or something similar. If you check for posts from either of them, they all point back to this forum. Not one post other than to trash MagicJack.

I think the moderators might want to look into this.


What an odd little reply to my post! I dislike companies with deceptive practices - plain and simple. The motivation for my post is to provide readers with information that make it clear that Ooma is a far better alternative than MagicJack. I think that this is a perfectly appropriate comment to post on an Ooma forum!

I resent your inuendos since you have no basis for them and are violating the rules of participation in the forum by making them.
#5885 by Robspace1
Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:51 am
lohertz wrote:
Robspace1 wrote:So are you trying to port a MJ number to Ooma or a Vontage number to Ooma? I was told yesterday that MJ numbers can't be ported because MJ owns them and they are not required to port numbers because they are not listed as a phone carrier but as a "multimedia experience" whatever that is but the FCC regulations about them required to port a number for a customer as long as it's in the local area does not apply to MJ. Now, I have not checked this info out so I don't really know if thats true or not. Maybe someone else does. Do you know anyone that has ported a MJ number to another carriewr?


I believe the rule is, if you can port in you can port out. see wikipedia entry

And
FCC Number Pooling law 1996

In either case you have to make a BONA FIDE Request
Try and see what happens.


Well, that's what I thought too. My handle on the MJ forum is Saxman, (cuz I am)-but this guy is saying that MJ is somehow able to get around the FCC rules by saying they are not a phone company-Here is the post from yesterday if you want to check it out.I may write the FCC and ask them just what the status of MJ is. Are they required to port numbers for their customers or not. There is no reason they should not have to go by FCC rules. They are just as much a phone company as OOMA is-Only difference is OOMA works! hahaha--check this out-
saxman
Dan isn't smart enough to hire me


Joined: 25 Feb 2008
Posts: 372

Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 6:33 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it may be against FCC rgulations for a carrier to refuse to port a number to a new carrier I just found an inter esting article regarding LPNs.

Who should consumers contact if they want to port their number to a new carrier?

Consumers should contact their prospective new carrier, who will start the porting process. The new carrier will first confirm the consumer's identity and then make a porting request of the old carrier. When consumers go to their new carrier to port a number, they should bring along a recent bill, which will have their correct name and address as it appears in the carrier’s database. This should aid in making the porting process go smoothly. Once a valid porting request has been made, the old carrier cannot refuse to port a number
Under the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) “local number portability” (LNP) rules, so long as you remain in the same geographic area, you can switch telephone service providers, including interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers, and keep your existing phone number. If you are moving from one geographic area to another, however, you may not be able to take your number with you. Therefore, subscribers remaining in the same geographic area can now switch from a wireless, wireline, or VoIP provider to any other wireless, wireline, or VoIP provider and still keep their existing phone numbers.




MB-I got that from the FCC website-there's alot of good info on the subject of porting numbers and the law. I know I read of other MJ users doing it already so I know it's possible and now it seems it's actually on the books as a regulation.

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/NumberPortability/.

Back to top


mberlant
Dan Should Pay Me


Joined: 01 Feb 2009
Posts: 671
Location: Japan
Posted: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:14 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's be clear about this - MJ is not a telephone carrier. The ToS goes to great pains to specify this. As I explained in this thread, MJ is a "multimedia experience" exempt from carrier regulations.

mberlant wrote:
az2008 wrote:
[F]rom what I've read, it sounds like they (MJ -- ed.) don't have much choice:

Quote:
The right of consumers to keep the same, familiar phone number when switching to a new telephone company was expanded today by the Federal Communications Commission, in an Order that will further ensure consumers’ opportunity to choose a telephone service provider based on quality, price and service.

The FCC made clear that the obligation to provide local number portability extends to interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol providers and the telecommunications carriers that obtain numbers for them. This action was, in part, a response to numerous complaints by consumers about their inability to port numbers to or from interconnected VoIP providers. The FCC also initiated a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on additional VoIP numbering issues.
--http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277752A1.pdf


Mark
Yes, the key phrase in the FCC announcement is "interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol providers", and MJ has specifically positioned themselves so as not to fit this categorization.magicJack_ToS wrote:
The goods and services offered by magicJack provide a multimedia experience which includes a voice over Internet information service feature. It is not a telecommunications service and is subject to different regulatory treatment from telecommunications services.
The bottom line remains. Don't hold your breath waiting for inbound LNP to become a reality, and don't wager your precious phone number that you will be able to port it out later if you manage to port it in.


MJ leases every last one of their phone numbers from YMAX. YMAX is the carrier and MJ is the customer. We are not YMAX's customers. MJ lends us one of their phone numbers for the duration of our relationship with them, but they retain ownership of that number.

This is very similar to the relationship you have with your office telephone if you work for Verizon, as an example. Verizon, the employer, lends you one of the phone numbers they have leased from Verizon, the phone company, for the duration of your employment. Verizon, the employer, is the customer of Verizon, the phone company, with respect to everyone's office phone number. You, the employee, have no right to import your own "office phone number" nor take theirs with you when you leave Verizon's employment.

YMAX is obliged to support LNP, and I suppose that if any direct YMAX customer requested an LNP transaction they would accommodate it. MJ, on the other hand, has no interest in expending the resources to handle LNP, as the incremental expense would far outstrip the incremental revenue, and that would only serve to raise the price that we pay for our MJs. This is very likely why MJ was set up as a separate company in the first place.

Back to top
#5889 by lohertz
Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:23 pm
I guess my response to this is simple...does MJ terminate to a telephone? Can someone initiate a call from the telecom system to MJ. Then by that, if they are using the telecommunications systems then they are a part of the telecommunication industry.
Whether or not all of their services are part of the telecom industry is a different matter, but a least some segment is.

Its that simple.

But like it states, in order to port, you new carrier has to make the request. That is step one, if your denied you have to investigate why then complain to the FCC
#5905 by Robspace1
Fri Apr 03, 2009 2:51 pm
I was never denied the right to port my number as I never wanted it ported. There is no way I want to keep that number after all that. My name is probably in some files all over the world. After 3 years those guys have sold and resold my personal info many times over. I would like to know the FCC law regarding MJ. That would be the only reason I would contact them. I have a hard time with their supposed status as a phone company that isn't, which it really isn't, not in the working sense of the word. I think someones been reading too many spy novels. I keep hearing about Magic Jack conspiracy therories. I have MJ opinions on several sites. If you look you can find them in alot of forums. There seems to be a MJ uprising going on. People are just finding out what a $20.00 phone is.-Ooma is a real, hard working, accurate telephone. Magic Jack is just what they said it is-"a multimedia experience". Now, that is in no way "trashing" the thing. It's what THEY call it, not me. I call it junk. If anyone has one and needs the email address's of some of their main techi's let me know.
#5945 by Tenor
Sat Apr 04, 2009 11:10 am
Robspace1 wrote:
Tenor wrote:Sorry to be devil's advocate here but the Magic Jack works fine for me. In fact, I sent it to a relative of mine who was doing work in Turks and Caicos and he loves it. He was even surprised how well it worked despite his bandwidth not being great. Every call we made to one another sounded like he was local and not thousand of miles away overseas.

Before I sent it away, I even tested it on my wi-fi and it worked flawlessly. I'll admit, my bandwidth is pretty great here.

Now MJ and ooma are two different devices with their own purpose. So just understand the pro's and con's of both. If you are traveling I'd definitely recommend MJ over ooma. It fits in your pocket and you can connect it to a Mac or PC. For the home or any non-mobile environment, ooma wins hands down.

As suggested, your experience will vary.


If I was traveling I would do myself a big favor and use a calling card from Ooma-at only a few pennys per minute and crystal clear calls, why would I even mess with something as bad as a 3rd world "phone" like MJ? Do you know that Magic Jack is not even listed as a phone carrier but as a "multimedia experience"? What does that tell you?

After 3 years of living with terrible audio and having to constantly make excuses to people for the bad sounds in the background, there is no way that thing is going traveling with me anywhere! God, that's a great way to spoil a good vacation-try calling friends back home to brag about your great vacation and all they hear is clicking and buzzing and beeping. lol great!


I guess you didn't read my last sentence. You did quote me on it. Magic Jack worked great not only for me, but for the family member I sent it to as well.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests