(a) For purposes of this subpart, a Completing Carrier is a long distance carrier or switch-based long distance reseller that completes a coinless access code or subscriber toll-free payphone call or a local exchange carrier that completes a local, coinless access code or subscriber toll-free payphone call.
(b) Except as provided herein, a Completing Carrier that completes a coinless access code or subscriber toll-free payphone call from a switch that the Completing Carrier either owns or leases shall compensate the payphone service provider for that call at a rate agreed upon by the parties by contract.
(c) The compensation obligation set forth herein shall not apply to calls to emergency numbers, calls by hearing disabled persons to a telecommunications relay service or local calls for which the caller has made the required coin deposit.
(d) In the absence of an agreement as required by paragraph (b) of this section, the carrier is obligated to compensate the payphone service provider at a per-call rate of $.494.
[71 FR 3014, Jan. 19, 2006]
Notes of Decisions
Sprint Commc'ns Co. v. APCC Servs., Inc., 554 U.S. 269 (2008).
· cites it 2× “*2534 I When a payphone customer makes a long-distance call with an access code or 1-800 number issued by a long-distance communications carrier, the customer pays the carrier (which completes that call), but not the payphone operator (which connects that call to the carrier in…”
Precision Pay Phones v. Qwest Commc'ns Corp., 210 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (N.D. Cal. 2002).
· cites it 6× “” 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300 (c). Plaintiff filed two separate, but similar, small-claims complaints against Defendant which differ only with regard to the time period and amounts claimed due.”
APCC Servs., Inc. v. Cable & Wireless, Inc., 281 F. Supp. 2d 52 (D.D.C. 2003).
· cites it 8× “Private Right of Action The issue presented by C & W’s motion is whether section 276(b)(1)(A) of the Communications Act and its implementing regulation, codified at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300 et seq, confer a private right of action based on a common carrier’s alleged failure to pay…”
Global Crossing Telecomm., Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 259 F.3d 740 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
· cites it 2× “1300 (a) (“[E]very carrier to whom a completed call from a payphone is routed shall compensate the payphone service provider for the call at a rate agreed upon by the parties by contract.”); Report and Order, Payphone Orders, 11 FCC Red at 20,566, ¶ 48; id.”
Phonetel Tech., Inc. v. Network Enhanced Telecom, 197 F. Supp. 2d 720 (E.D. Tex. 2002).
· cites it 6× “Plaintiffs allege NET’s failure to compensate them for calls violates FCC regulations found at 47 C.F.R. 64.1300 et seq. and is actionable under the Federal Telecommunications Act, 47 U.”
Ton Servs., Inc. v. Qwest Corp., 493 F.3d 1225 (10th Cir. 2007).
“§ 276 (b)(1)(A); 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300 . 10 . Although the Bureau Wisconsin Order applied only to the Wisconsin LECs specifically identified in the Order, 15 F.”
APCC Servs., Inc. v. Sprint Commc'ns Co., LP, 297 F. Supp. 2d 90 (D.D.C. 2003).
“§ 276 , and its implementing regulations, codified at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300 . Plaintiffs base their claims on sections 206 and 207 that provide for the recovery of damages for violations of the Act.”
GCB Commc'ns, Inc. v. U.S. South Commc'ns, Inc., 650 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2011).
“See 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300 . The regulations also require completing carriers to “establish a call tracking system that accurately tracks coinless” payphone calls.”
Fair v. Sprint Payphone Servs., Inc., 148 F. Supp. 2d 622 (D.S.C. 2001).
· cites it 2× “” 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300 (a). While the FCC’s regulations prescribe certain procedures for tracking calls so that compensation can be computed, they do not mandate the terms of these contracts or the rate at which payphone service providers are to be compensated.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.