Ask/Tell Dr. Z

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Subject

Your Message

Meta

Editorial #7-Missed Calls with a VP-200 (VLOG)

Missed Calls with a VP-200
An Op-Ed Editorial from Dr. Z

When hearing people call other hearing people using their cellphones, they all can communicate with one another. In cases where a phone is not answered, a cell phone can call back with a missed call feature like many videophones have. But—in the case of videophones, the VP-200 has a nonstandard feature when it comes to missed calls. When the VP-200 user sees a missed call and clicks on it to redial–if the call came from a VP-200, there is no problem. But if the call came from a non-VP 200 phone, it often does not work. This is because Sorenson is using a non-standard protocol for this. We need to file a complaint to the FCC to ask them to make all videophones compatible with one another. This is Sorenson again treating deaf and hard of hearing people like second-class citizens. They are not making the VP-200 functionally equivalent. Here’s the link to make a complaint to the FCC: complaint form. When you write the complaint, you should indicate that the VP-200 has features that are not functionally equivalent, such as missed calls and caller-ID processing. Be sure to indicate 03-123 as the proceeding number and leave the Law Firm name and Attorney Name blank.





Link to filing a complaint with the FCC

2 comments to Editorial #7-Missed Calls with a VP-200 (VLOG)

  • Lawrence J Brick

    I just filed the following comment. Feel free to use it as a model or copy and paste it on the complaint form under brief comment. Also be sure to change the button from “Comment” to Complaint.

    VP-200 has features that are not functionally equivalent, such as missed calls and caller-ID processing. If my VP-200 shows a missed call from a non VP-20O and I try to redial, it doesn’t work. Also it doesn’t show the caller’s Ten-digit number. It shows the ip address which is not helpful. It’s not fair that hearing people canreturn calls even if the person the caller is caling has a different brand telephone. Functional equivalence demands that VPs have the same capabilities.

    For the more tech savvy that want to check the FCC page, below is the info:

    The FCC Acknowledges Receipt of Comments From …
    Lawrence J Brick
    …and Thank You for Your Comments

    Your Confirmation Number is: ‘2009916213347 ‘
    Date Received: Sep 16 2009
    Docket: 03-123
    Number of Files Transmitted: 1
    DISCLOSURE
    This confirmation verifies that ECFS has received and accepted your filing. However, your filing will be rejected by ECFS if it contains macros, passwords, redlining, read-only formatting, a virus or automated links to source documents that is not included with your filing.
    Filers are encouraged to retrieve and view their filing within 24 hours of receipt of this confirmation. For any problems contact the Help Desk at 202-418-0193.
    Initiate a Submission | Search ECFS |

  • Jwa

    Hello, I am very much in favor of Phil Bravin’s comment so I hope that FCC will succeed to make all kinds especially with the calls to return when we get missed calls to work as equally as possible like hearing people enabling to return calls with no hassle.

    VP-200 has features that are not functionally equivalent, such as missed calls and caller-ID processing. If my VP-200 shows a missed call from a non VP-20O and I try to redial, it doesn’t work. Also it doesn’t show the caller’s Ten-digit number. It shows the ip address which is not helpful. It’s not fair that hearing people canreturn calls even if the person the caller is caling has a different brand telephone. Functional equivalence demands that VPs have the same capabilities.

    Jeanne M Lambert

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>