Don's Blog

As shared by Bruce Gross of WRAD:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Anthony Mowl, the former assistant vice president of business development for Viable Communications Inc. (Viable), and Donald Tropp, the former human resources manager for Viable, pleaded guilty today to engaging in a conspiracy to defraud the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Video Relay Service (VRS) program of more than $2.5 million, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division.

Today, Mowl, 25, and Tropp, 25, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Court Judge Joel A. Pisano in Trenton, N.J., to conspiracy to commit mail fraud. Mowl and Tropp were indicted on Nov. 19, 2009, along with Viable’s president, John T.C. Yeh; Viable’s vice president of corporate strategy, Joseph Yeh; and the Viable corporate entity.

In pleading guilty, Mowl and Tropp admitted that beginning in approximately fall of 2007 and continuing through approximately January 2009, they conspired with others to pay individuals to make fraudulent VRS phone calls using Viable’s VRS service. According to the pleas, John and Joseph Yeh paid Mowl and Tropp who would then pay people for using Viable’s VRS service. Mowl and Tropp kept a portion of the payments for themselves and distributed the remainder to the paid callers. Viable then caused the submission of fraudulent call minute claims to the FCC, causing the FCC to pay those claims at a rate of approximately $390 per hour for each of the VRS calls that it processed.

…

According to information contained in the plea documents, Mowl and Tropp admitted that their role in defrauding the FCC’s VRS program led to a total of between $2.5 million and $7 million in fraudulent billing to the program. At sentencing, both Mowl and Tropp face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, a fine of $250,000, as well as mandatory restitution and forfeiture. A sentencing date has not yet been set by the court.

Co-defendants John T.C. Yeh, Joseph Yeh and Viable are scheduled to stand trial on the charges in the indictment on May 24, 2010. An indictment is merely an accusation, and defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty at trial beyond a reasonable doubt.

Thanks for sharing this article, Bruce!

Apologies about the video quality! Source: CBS News via Ken Arica

Read on for more details! Source: Justice.gov

As usual, the disclaimer as per from Justice.gov: an indictment is merely an accusation, and defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

The people arrested for VRS Fraud worked for 7 different companies:

1. Viable Communications (Rockville, MD)
2. Master Communications (Las Vegas, NV)
3. KL Communications (Phoenix, AZ)
4. Mascom (Austin, TX)
5. Deaf and Hard-ofHearing Interpreting Services (DHIS) (New York & New Jersey)
6. Innovative Communication Services for the Deaf (ICSD) (Miami Lakes, FL)
7. Deaf Studio 29 (Huntington Beach, CA)

The 26 people who were arrested [edit: and/or subpoenaed] are:

1. Viable Owner and CEO, John Yeh, 62 (Potomac, MD)
2. Viable COO Joseph Yeh, 64 (Potomac, MD)
3. Viable Assistant Vice President Anthony Mowl, 25 (Rockville, MD)
4. Viable Human Relations Director Donald Tropp, 25 (Rockville, MD)
5. Master Communications, KL Communications, Mascom Owner Kim E. Hawkins, 46 (Las Vegas, NV)
6. Master Communications employee, KL Communications owner/employee Larry Berke, 62 (Phoenix, AZ)
7. KL Communications employee Dary Berke (Phoenix, AZ)
8. KL Communications & Master Communications employee Lisa Goetz, 43 (Phoenix, AZ)
9. Mascom Marketing and Advertising Director David Simmons, 43 (Austin, TX)
10. DHIS Owner Irma Azrelyant, 47 (Basking Ridge, NJ)
11. DHIS Co-owner Joshua Finkle, 41 (New York)
12. DHIS Video Interpreter Natan Zfati, 31 (Brooklyn, NY)
13. DHIS Bookkeeper Oksana Strusa, 35 (Jersey City, NJ)
14. DHIS Video Interpreter Alfia Iskandarova, 29 (Brooklyn, NY)
15. DHIS Video Interpreter Hennadii Holovin, 36 (Philadelphia, PA)
16. ICSD Owner Yosbel Buscaron, 25 (Hialeah, FL)
17. ICSD Co-owner Lazaro Fernandez, 35 (Hialeah, FL)
18. ICSD Call Center Manager Wanda Hutchinson, 35 (Pembroke Pines, FL)
19. ICSD Call Center Manager Jessica Bacallo, 23 (Miami, FL)
20. ICSD Marketing Manager Kathleen Valle, 23 (Miami, FL)
21. Viable Contractor Benjamin Pena, 34 (Scottsdale, AZ) [Paid by Viable CEO John Yeh]
22. Viable Contractor Robert Z. Rubeck, 34 (Surprise, AZ) [Paid by Viable CEO John Yeh]
23. Viable Contractor Tamara Frankel, 28 (Surprise, AZ) [Paid by Viable CEO John Yeh]
24. Marc Velasquez Verson, 56 (Oswego, OR)
25. Ellen Thompson, 43 (Oswego, OR)
26. Doris Martinez, 51 (Oswego, OR)

Hopefully this will not have much of a negative fallout on the VRS industry!

Ever wish you could talk to people via videophone while on a plane enroute to somewhere? Or go online for free while on the plane?

Or wish you could use the Wi-Fi while at the airport for free?

Thanks to Google, now you can!

Google is paying for free wifi for everyone on the planes, and at the airports! Simply check with the flight attendant and the airport staff to ascertain whether the plane/airport provides wifi, and is covered by Google! To be fair, I should clarify: for free wifi while flying, this is available only on Virgin America, who I would strongly recommend you fly with anyway, because as far I am concerned, they’re the most awesome airline to fly with! Other airlines may also offer in-flight wifi, but I’m betting it’s not for free—so you’d be well advised to check with the flight attendant prior to checking for wifi on your device.

UPDATE: The free wifi provided by Google expires on January 15, 2010– thanks for pointing this out Joey!

For more information on which airports are participating in this: http://www.freeholidaywifi.com/

I have not checked it out for myself yet, but if you do check it out, try calling people via a videoconferencing software such as Purple P3, Z PC-100, Viable Vision, etc. Let me know how it works out!

I haven’t really played with Z PC-100, and Viable Vision yet. I probably will, eventually. But I’ve had the opportunity to play with Purple P3—it worked like a charm at a bowling alley that had wifi, and at Starbucks. So I think it’s safe to try it out at the airport, and on the plane.

Although to be fair, I should probably also add it may not work well on the plane. Allow me to clarify. I used to work as a videophone installer, and one of the customers I installed for had satellite for broadband internet. The install was successful—but I immediately noticed extreme latency. That translates into delay between transmissions. It took about 10 to 15 seconds before the other person responded to what I said. The video streaming was smooth, but very delayed.

Why you may ask, is this applicable to using videoconferencing software on a plane? Easy; the plane’s wifi is based on internet from satellite, not from radio on the ground (which phones make use of). That’s the only reason why the planes allow wifi—it minimizes interference with the plane’s radio reliance, thus in compliance with FCC/FAA concerns. So because of the internet being broadcast from satellite, I think it’s safe to say you’ll see some latency on the plane, so don’t be surprised if you see some delay (if it works). But if it does work, don’t you think it’s pretty awesome to videoconference with someone while flying?

Being able to videoconference with people from the airport, especially without having to pay for it is a definite bonus—it’d be excellent to be able to chat with someone face to face during a layover, flight delays, and so on.

The ability to check emails, go on Facebook, and so forth also are most excellent! =)

I found out about this from this Google press release.

That’s an awesome present from Google to everyone!

Just when I thought ViableVRS was seeing the light at the end of the tunnel when they got snapped up (pun intended) by Snap!VRS, Viable gets slammed by a federal class action lawsuit. Ouch. And apparently it’s not the only one, there’s another lawsuit pending that I wasn’t aware of. Interesting. I almost feel bad for Viable…

I’ll just quote the article so you get a general picture of it:

Employees sue Viable over wages

List of plaintiffs in class-action suit to grow, alleging state, federal law violations

by Kevin James Shay | Staff Writer

 

Rockville deaf-services company Viable has been hit with a class-action lawsuit filed by former and current employees seeking back payment of wages, interest, compensatory damages and other relief. The litigation comes not long after Viable made an agreement to be bought by a New York competitor.

…

The lawsuit adds to the woes of Viable, which has been under a cloud since a June visit by federal investigators. Viable CEO and founder John Yeh faces a separate trial next month in Silver Spring on charges he did not pay regular wages to an employee, and others have filed complaints against Viable with the employment standards unit of the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation’s Division of Labor and Industry.

The class-action lawsuit lists 17 plaintiffs, and that number was expected to grow to 42 by the end of Wednesday, said Nicholas Woodfield, a principal with the Washington, D.C., law firm Employment Law Group and an attorney for the plaintiffs. He said that Viable, Yeh and other officers were served with the lawsuit Tuesday and have a little less than three weeks to respond. The other Viable officers named as defendants are Mary Yeh, John Yeh’s wife; and Joseph Yeh, a brother of John Yeh.

The lawsuit alleges that Viable and the officers violated the federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as well as Maryland wage payment and other laws.

…

Viable recently entered into a purchase agreement with Snap!VRS, a Pearl River, N.Y., video relay service company. Whether Snap!VRS will bear any responsibility in the class-action lawsuit "depends on the nature of the transaction between Snap!VRS and Viable," Woodfield said.

…

"There are large issues that remain to be resolved with Viable," Woodfield said. "But the facts are clear that Viable and the named officers failed to meet their payment obligations to their employees."

In the Montgomery County case, Yeh faces a trial Oct. 19. The plaintiff, Mary K. Moylan of Catonsville, said that she was laid off in early July and was not paid for several weeks. Her claim was for $7,450.

(Link to Source – Gazette.net [The Gazette])

Basically, the employees (both current and former) are pissed at not getting paid, and have decided to force Viable’s hand. No word on whether Snap!VRS will assist with this latest bout of legal troubles, or whether Viable is on their own for this one. I considered contacting Viable and Snap!VRS for comment, but saw this part from the same article I quoted earlier:

Maureen Ellenberger, Snap!VRS vice president of marketing, said in an email Thursday that the company cannot comment on pending legal matters.

"That said, Snap!VRS is committed to finalizing the acquisition of Viable over the next few months and confident that it will result in a plan that will be both fair to employees and beneficial to customers," Ellenberger said.

In a previous e-mail, she had said, Snap!VRS "has taken over payroll for current Viable employees as well as health and life insurance payments."

(Link to Source – Gazette.net [The Gazette])

So that’s already been done. Saves time for me. Based on Maureen Ellenberger’s response, it seems Viable employees will be now paid regularly. However, there’s no word on the back pay owed to both former and current employees, and due to the ongoing class action lawsuit, I doubt there’ll be more forthcoming until that lawsuit has been completed.

Tip for Viable: you should have declared bankruptcy PRIOR to going into buyout negotiations with Snap!VRS. This way, you’re protected from lawsuits such as the one you’re going through. Snap!VRS, you could have made bankruptcy a conditional requirement for buyout of Viable so you would have not had to deal with this hassle. Standard business practice. Anyhow, good luck to you both—I truly do hope you guys can work this out and move on. The VRS industry needs more innovation, less legal wrangling. Yeehaw!

Just heard that Congress is considering a bill (HR 3101) about internet captioning. Got excited! Did some checking — the few blogs that I found only had vlogs talking about it, or simple blurbs. Very limited information for me to cut my teeth on.

So I decided to do research and detailed analysis. Found the actual bill: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3101/text

The bill will basically do the following:

1. Increase FCC powers so they can mandate accessibility for devices that provide verbal/audible communications
2. Require VO-IP providers to also pay into the TRS fund
3. Enables FCC to establish standards for accessibility in regards to communications-based devices/software
4. Strengthen Lifeline and Link-Up federal-provided discounts
5. Require all video-playback devices above 13 inches to support captioning
6. Require, after inquiry by FCC, all video-playback devices below 13 inches to support captioning
7. Require internet video containing audio, that are comparable to television-based video programming provide captioning

-
This bill was introduced into Congress by Representative Edward Markey (Democrat, 7th district, Massachusetts). Two other representatives signed on as sponsors: Representative Barbara Lee (Democrat, 9th district, California), and Representative Linda Sanchez (Democrat, 39th district, California).

If you’d like the in-depth analysis of the bill and the people behind the bill, go ahead and jump into my blog post!

More »