FCC says CALEA applies to P2T and VoIP

FCC commissioners today declared that push-to-talk providers must comply with federal law-enforcement surveillance guidelines under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) and tentatively agreed that “managed” voice-over-IP (VoIP) calls will have to meet a similar standard.

For wireless carriers, the push-to-talk declaration is not expected to have much impact on the marketplace, as Nextel Communications’ offering has been CALEA-compliant for more than two years and Verizon Wireless applauded the commission vote. GSM carriers are still developing push-to-talk capabilities, but the CALEA obligation is “not a significant obstacle” to deployment, Precursor wireless strategist Rudy Baca said.

The FCC’s decision could have a greater impact on VoIP providers, who will be the focal point of a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding CALEA compliance for the nascent voice-calling technology. In the order, the commission tentatively ruled that all managed VoIP calls would be available to law-enforcement surveillance under CALEA guidelines.

That would mean service providers offering VoIP services over their own broadband networks—for instance, an incumbent telecom carrier or a cable operator—would have to meet CALEA standards. However, pure peer-to-peer offerings such as Skype and pulver.com’s Free World Dialup are not considered to be managed VoIP services and would not be required to comply with CALEA.

Still to be determined are the CALEA obligations for VoIP providers such as Vonage and Skype’s recent Skypeout offering that connect calls to the public-switched telephone network. Those services fall into a “gray area” that will be the focus of the NPRM, according to an FCC official. Even if those providers’ calls are determined to be required to comply with CALEA, it’s unclear whether the provider or its underlying carrier—for example, a carrier like Level 3—would be responsible for ensuring that surveillance is possible, according to the FCC official

Currently, only telecom carriers are required to comply with CALEA, and many VoIP providers have been worried that placing CALEA obligations on them would be a precursor to making them adhere to the significant regulatory burdens placed on telecom carriers. However, FCC Chairman Michael Powell said that is not his intention.

“I want to make clear that our tentative conclusion is expressly limited to the requirements of the CALEA statute and does not indicate a willingness on my part to find that VoIP services are telecommunications services under Title II of the Communications Act,” Powell said during the meeting. “We have before us a pending rulemaking and several petitions for declaratory ruling that address themselves to the classification of VoIP services and nothing in this item prejudices the outcome of those proceedings.”

Despite Powell’s statement, the VON Coalition expressed concern with aspects of the order, particularly the FCC finding that VoIP meets the CALEA standard of being “a replacement for a substantial portion of the local telephone exchange service.”

Law enforcement has plenty of tools it can use to conduct surveillance without requiring VoIP providers to bear the additional costs associated with CALEA compliance that could deter the technology’s development, according to VON Coalition spokesman Dave Svanda.

“When Congress enacted CALEA, lawmakers specifically did not want the law applied to Internet communications nor used in ways that would stifle innovation or delay deployment of new technologies like VoIP,” Svanda said in a prepared statement.

“VoIP is not another flavor of telephone service. It’s a new frontier in communications for individuals and businesses alike, and it requires forward-thinking regulatory approaches. If we subject this new technology to legacy telecom regulation, consumers and business users will miss out on the new services, increased choices and better prices that VoIP can deliver.”