Editing Voice over IP (section)

==Regulatory and legal issues==
{{update section|date=April 2022}}
As the popularity of VoIP grows, governments are becoming more interested in regulating VoIP in a manner similar to PSTN services.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipall.org/matrix/|title=Global VOIP Policy Status Matrix|access-date=November 23, 2006|date=2005|publisher=Global IP Alliance}}</ref>

Throughout the developing world, particularly in countries where regulation is weak or [[Regulatory capture|captured]] by the dominant operator, restrictions on the use of VoIP are often imposed, including in [[Panama]] where VoIP is taxed, Guyana where VoIP is prohibited.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.e-forall.org/pdf/Wireless&VOIP_10July2006.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120602021012/http://www.e-forall.org/pdf/Wireless&VOIP_10July2006.pdf|archive-date=June 2, 2012|title=The Road to Broadband Development in Developing Countries is through Competition Driven by Wireless and VOIP|last=Proenza|first=Francisco J. |access-date=April 7, 2008}}</ref> In [[Ethiopia]], where the government is nationalizing telecommunication service, it is a criminal offense to offer services using VoIP. The country has installed firewalls to prevent international calls from being made using VoIP. These measures were taken after the popularity of VoIP reduced the income generated by the state-owned [[telecommunications company]].{{citation needed|date=April 2022}}<ref>{{Cite web |title=VOICE OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL |url=http://www.123seminarsonly.com/Seminar-Reports/037/50930740-Voice-over-IP.doc}}</ref>

=== Canada ===
In [[Canada]], the [[Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission]] regulates telephone service, including VoIP telephony service. VoIP services operating in Canada are required to provide [[9-1-1]] emergency service.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2005/dt2005-21.htm | title = Telecom Decision CRTC 2005-21 | date = April 4, 2005 | website = Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission | publisher = Government of Canada | access-date = April 29, 2017}}</ref>

===European Union===
In the [[European Union]], the treatment of VoIP service providers is a decision for each national telecommunications regulator, which must use competition law to define relevant national markets and then determine whether any service provider on those national markets has "significant market power" (and so should be subject to certain obligations). A general distinction is usually made between VoIP services that function over managed networks (via broadband connections) and VoIP services that function over unmanaged networks (essentially, the Internet).{{citation needed|date=September 2013}}

The relevant EU Directive is not clearly drafted concerning obligations that can exist independently of market power (e.g., the obligation to offer access to emergency calls), and it is impossible to say definitively whether VoIP service providers of either type are bound by them.{{citation needed|date=September 2013}}<ref>{{Cite web |title=Voice over IP |url=http://www.123seminarsonly.com/Seminar-Reports/037/50930740-Voice-over-IP.doc}}</ref>

===Arab states of the [[Gulf Cooperation Council|GCC]]===
====Oman====
In [[Oman]], it is illegal to provide or use unauthorized VoIP services, to the extent that web sites of unlicensed VoIP providers have been blocked.{{citation needed|reason=ref below doesn't mention blocked sites|date=June 2022}} Violations may be punished with fines of 50,000 Omani Rial (about 130,317 US dollars), a two-year prison sentence or both. In 2009, police raided 121 Internet cafes throughout the country and arrested 212 people for using or providing VoIP services.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Metz|first1=Cade|title=Oman cuffs 212 for selling VoIP calls|url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/20/oman_and_voip/|website=The Register|access-date=September 20, 2016}}</ref>

====Saudi Arabia====
In September 2017, [[Saudi Arabia]] lifted the ban on VoIPs, in an attempt to reduce operational costs and spur digital entrepreneurship.<ref>{{cite news|title=Saudi Arabia to lift ban on internet calls|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41332743|access-date=January 10, 2018|work=BBC News|date=September 20, 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Saudi Arabia to lift ban on internet calls|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-telecoms-ban/saudi-arabia-to-lift-ban-on-internet-calls-idUSKCN1BV128|access-date=January 10, 2018|work=Reuters|date=September 20, 2017}}</ref>

====United Arab Emirates====
In the [[United Arab Emirates]] (UAE), it is illegal to provide or use unauthorized VoIP services. Web sites of unlicensed VoIP providers have been blocked. Some VoIP services such as [[Skype]] were allowed.<ref>{{cite news|title=Don't worry, Skype is working in UAE|url=https://www.khaleejtimes.com/technology/dont-worry-skype-is-working-in-uae-|access-date=January 11, 2018|work=Khaleejtimes|date=June 26, 2017}}</ref> In January 2018, internet service providers in UAE blocked all VoIP apps, including Skype, but permitting only 2 government-approved VoIP apps (C’ME and BOTIM).<ref>{{cite news|last1=Debusmann|first1=Bernd Jr.|title=Etisalat launches new unlimited calling plan with VoIP apps|url=http://www.arabianbusiness.com/technology/387211-etisalat-launches-new-unlimited-calling-plan-with-voip-apps|access-date=January 9, 2018|work=Arabian Business|date=January 9, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Maceda|first1=Cleofe|title=No Skype? Pay Dh50 monthly for video calls|url=http://gulfnews.com/business/sectors/technology/no-skype-pay-dh50-monthly-for-video-calls-1.2153623|access-date=January 9, 2018|work=Gulf News|date=January 8, 2018}}</ref> In opposition, a petition on ''Change.org'' garnered over 5000 signatures, in response to which the website was blocked in UAE.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Zacharias|first1=Anna \|title=Etisalat launches new calling app plan days after Skype disruptions|url=https://www.thenational.ae/uae/etisalat-launches-new-calling-app-plan-days-after-skype-disruptions-1.693837|access-date=January 9, 2018|work=The National|date=January 8, 2018}}</ref>

On March 24, 2020, the United Arab Emirates loosened restriction on VoIP services earlier prohibited in the country, to ease communication during the [[COVID-19 pandemic]]. However, popular instant messaging applications like [[WhatsApp]], [[Skype]], and [[FaceTime]] remained blocked from being used for voice and video calls, constricting residents to use paid services from the country's state-owned telecom providers.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/coronavirus-lockdown-uae-residents-call-for-end-to-whatsapp-skype-ban.html|title= UAE loosens some VoIP restrictions as residents in lockdown call for end to WhatsApp and Skype ban|access-date=March 26, 2020|website=CNBC|date= March 26, 2020}}</ref>

===India===
In [[India]], it is legal to use VoIP, but it is illegal to have [[VoIP gateway]]s inside India.<ref name="TRAI-voip-gateway">{{cite web|title=Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) Consultation paper on Issues related to Internet Telephony. Consultation Paper No. 11/2008.|publisher=Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI)|date=May 2008|url=http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReaddata/ConsultationPaper/Document/cpaper12may08.pdf|author=Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan and Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141006100940/http://www.trai.gov.in/WriteReaddata/ConsultationPaper/Document/cpaper12may08.pdf |archive-date=October 6, 2014|access-date=September 19, 2012|location=New Delhi India|quote=An end-user is allowed to make PC–to-Phone Internet Telephony calls only on PSTN/PLMN abroad.|page=16 (Section 2.2.1.2 PC–to–Phone Internet telephony)}}</ref> This effectively means that people who have PCs can use them to make a VoIP call to other computers but not to a normal phone number. Foreign-based VoIP server services are illegal to use in India.<ref name="TRAI-voip-gateway"/>

Internet telephony is permitted to the ISP with restrictions. The following services are permitted:<ref>Harish Kumar Gangwar [https://www.scribd.com/doc/101919043/TECHNICAL-NOTE-ON-ILLEGAL-INTERNATIONAL-LONG-DISTANCE-TELEPHONE-EXCHANGE-IN-INDIA Technical Note on Illegal International Long Distance telephone Exchange in India]</ref>
# PC to PC; within or outside India
# PC / a device / Adapter conforming to the standard of any international agencies like- ITU or IETF etc. in India to PSTN/PLMN abroad.
# Any device / Adapter conforming to standards of International agencies like ITU, IETF etc. connected to ISP node with static IP address to similar device / Adapter; within or outside India.
# Except whatever is described in {{Clarify|reason=There is no condition (ii). This material appears to be a direct quote of the source which is also unclear.|text=condition (ii) above|date=December 2019}}, no other form of Internet Telephony is permitted.
# In India no Separate Numbering Scheme is provided to the Internet Telephony. Presently the 10 digit Numbering allocation based on E.164 is permitted to the Fixed Telephony, GSM, CDMA wireless service. For Internet Telephony, the numbering scheme shall only conform to IP addressing Scheme of [[Internet Assigned Numbers Authority]] (IANA). Translation of E.164 number / private number to IP address allotted to any device and vice versa, by ISP to show compliance with IANA numbering scheme is not permitted.
# The Internet Service Licensee is not permitted to have PSTN/PLMN connectivity. Voice communication to and from a telephone connected to PSTN/PLMN and following E.164 numbering is prohibited in India.

===South Korea===
In [[South Korea]], only providers registered with the government are authorized to offer VoIP services. Unlike many VoIP providers, most of whom offer flat rates, Korean VoIP services are generally metered and charged at rates similar to terrestrial calling. Foreign VoIP providers encounter high barriers to government registration. This issue came to a head in 2006 when [[Internet service providers]] providing personal Internet services by contract to [[United States Forces Korea]] (USFK) members residing on USFK bases threatened to block off access to VoIP services used by USFK members as an economical way to keep in contact with their families in the United States, on the grounds that the service members' VoIP providers were not registered. A compromise was reached between USFK and Korean telecommunications officials in January 2007, wherein USFK service members arriving in Korea before June 1, 2007, and subscribing to the ISP services provided on base could continue to use their US-based VoIP subscription, but later arrivals are required to use a Korean-based VoIP provider, which by contract will offer pricing similar to the flat rates offered by US VoIP providers.<ref>{{citation |url=http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=41826&archive=true |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100113013434/http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=41826&archive=true |archive-date=January 13, 2010 |title=Stars and Stripes: USFK deal keeps VoIP access for troops}}</ref>

===United States===
In the United States, the FCC requires all interconnected VoIP service providers to comply with requirements comparable to those for traditional telecommunications service providers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cybertelecom.org/voip/fcc.htm|title=Cybertelecom :: VoIP :: FCC|first=Genny|last=Pershing|website=www.cybertelecom.org|access-date=September 21, 2017}}</ref> VoIP operators in the US are required to support [[local number portability]]; make service accessible to people with disabilities; pay regulatory fees, [[universal service]] contributions, and other mandated payments; and enable law enforcement authorities to conduct surveillance pursuant to the [[Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act]] (CALEA).

Operators of ''Interconnected'' VoIP (fully connected to the PSTN) are mandated to provide [[Enhanced 911]] service without special request, provide for customer location updates, clearly disclose any limitations on their E-911 functionality to their consumers, obtain affirmative acknowledgements of these disclosures from all consumers,<ref>[http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/47cfr9_07.html GPO.gov] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100608124332/http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/47cfr9_07.html |date=June 8, 2010 }}, 47 C.F.R. pt. 9 (2007)</ref> and may not allow their customers to opt-out of 911 service.<ref name=FCC-VoIP-911>{{cite web|title=VoIP and 911 Service|date=May 26, 2011|url=http://www.fcc.gov/guides/voip-and-911-service|publisher=FCC|access-date=August 16, 2014}}</ref> VoIP operators also receive the benefit of certain US telecommunications regulations, including an entitlement to [[interconnection]] and exchange of traffic with [[incumbent local exchange carrier]]s via wholesale carriers. Providers of ''nomadic'' VoIP service—those who are unable to determine the location of their users—are exempt from state telecommunications regulation.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fcc.gov/voip/|title=Voice Over Internet Protocol (VoIP)|date=November 18, 2010|access-date=September 21, 2017}}</ref>

Another legal issue that the [[US Congress]] is debating concerns changes to the [[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]]. The issue in question is calls between Americans and foreigners. The NSA is not authorized to tap Americans' conversations without a warrant—but the Internet, and specifically VoIP does not draw as clear a line to the location of a caller or a call's recipient as the traditional phone system does. As VoIP's low cost and flexibility convinces more and more organizations to adopt the technology, surveillance for law enforcement agencies becomes more difficult. VoIP technology has also increased federal security concerns because VoIP and similar technologies have made it more difficult for the government to determine where a target is physically located when communications are being intercepted, and that creates a whole set of new legal challenges.<ref name="Greenberg">{{cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/2008/05/15/wiretapping-voip-lichtblau-tech-security08-cx_ag_0515wiretap.html/|title=The State Of Cybersecurity Wiretapping's Fuzzy Future|date=May 15, 2008|last=Greenberg|first=Andy |access-date=March 2, 2009|work=Forbes}}</ref>