Not to be confused with a BIGASS provider.

-----Original Message-----
From: Af [] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown
Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms

I would say if you file a 477 your are a BIAS provider.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Weekley
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms

Here is a stupid question.  What is the official designation of an ISP?
Can I get a cable connection, re-distribute it to 4 people wirelessly, file 
form 477 and get access to the right of way?

Chuck McCown wrote:
> Works everywhere.  If the CATV has pole access you do too.  Same thing 
> with streets and other public places.
> They may charge you a franchise fee, but it has to be the same as 
> everyone else.
> *From:* Kurt Fankhauser
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 12:26 PM
> *To:*
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms Does that 
> even work in the municipal boundaries not just rural? I was thinking 
> about deploying fiber in the city here and didn't know if the city 
> could stop me if they wanted too.
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Josh Reynolds <>
> wrote:
>     What Chuck said.
>     On Dec 1, 2016 1:22 PM, "Chuck McCown" <> wrote:
>         Absolutely.  You are a BIAS provider and the FCC explicitly
>         defined BIAS providers as being eligible for ROW access equal
>         to a public utility.
>         *From:* Ben Royer
>         *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 12:20 PM
>         *To:*
>         *Subject:* [AFMUG] Here's a question for a can of worms
>         Get out your can openers. Does me, the ISP, being classified
>         as a common carrier, mean I get right of way access?
>         Thank you,
>         Ben Royer, Operations Manager
>         Royell Communications, Inc.
>         217-965-3699 <tel:%28217%29%20965-3699>
>         <>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - <>
> Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4664/13518 - Release Date: 
> 12/01/16

Reply via email to