[WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
Forbes, Did you happen to ask them if they ever sold any of their data to commercial organizations? That might also indicate their intent and why they are pushing so hard...just a thought. Thank You, Brian Webster -Original Message- From: Forbes Mercy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 1:15 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
disclaimerIANAL/disclaimer The problem is, that if they win the suite, I think it would be for all the information. Regardless of what their intent it, once that case is made, the information is there for anyone. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Forbes Mercy wrote: So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
Excellent job. Forbes, you are to be commended for going directly to the source to register your opinion personally and to get the skinny. Beats the heck out of a continued speculative thread with much rumor, angst, and anger, but no action. Taking personal initiative like that is how real change begins. Thank you for your effort. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forbes Mercy Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(190). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(42). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses
RE: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
My sentiments exactly! Excellent initiative Forbes. Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Founding Member of WISPA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 1:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI Excellent job. Forbes, you are to be commended for going directly to the source to register your opinion personally and to get the skinny. Beats the heck out of a continued speculative thread with much rumor, angst, and anger, but no action. Taking personal initiative like that is how real change begins. Thank you for your effort. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forbes Mercy Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(190). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(42
Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:15:04 -0800, Forbes Mercy wrote So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com I tried emailing them, but they don't respond to emails that say I don't like what you're trying to do, why are you doing this? It's harder to turn away a phone call, I guess. Did you suggest to any of them that they ask US for information or try negotiating with trade groups for info? Mark -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
It doesn;t matter what their intent is. Them winning will set a presidence, making it easier for others that may have mal-intent. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Forbes Mercy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 1:15 PM Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/ Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said Yes all we really want is the provider name. So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the full disclosure request. His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything, I said, it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more that could damage us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off. By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said, it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best bargaining method. He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers. I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you can never really trust their intent. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc. www.wabroadband.com -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
