Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-09 Thread John Scrivner
I do not have the  link to the proceeding but t is known as 04-186 and a 
quick Google should get you to it. It is on the FCC.gov website 
someplace. Anyone have a link to it? The power limits are spelled out 
there I believe. The public process on 04-186 is complete now. We will 
have what we have according to that proceeding. It is a good rulemaking 
for us. I think we should be able to ask for some adaptations in the 
future which could allow for some protections if we show substantial use 
of the band for public safety, government, economic development and 
general good of the public. Most of you guys already do this so it 
should be easy. For those of you who have not tapped into the killer 
application of public safety (police cars, firetrucks, civil defense, 
disaster preparedness, etc.) you need to get with the program. If you 
become the best friend of the head of your (EOC) Emergency Operations 
Center for your county then you will have a ticket to do most anything 
you need to protect and serve using good spectrum in your community. I 
whole heartedly believe this is the path to entrenching us into the 
fabric of communications from now on in our service areas.

Cheers,
Scriv


Dylan Oliver wrote:


Has there been any word on what the power limitations in the
whitespace band will be? Or is this up to the FCC when the bills pass?
I wish the band was WISP-only, and registered like 3650 to keep things
proper.

Thanks,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-09 Thread John J. Thomas

Yes, when you start working with Cities and giving them good service, they 
remember  It is nice to have someone call you asking for service because 
Mr. x from another city liked your work.

John

-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2006 08:33 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

I do not have the  link to the proceeding but t is known as 04-186 and a 
quick Google should get you to it. It is on the FCC.gov website 
someplace. Anyone have a link to it? The power limits are spelled out 
there I believe. The public process on 04-186 is complete now. We will 
have what we have according to that proceeding. It is a good rulemaking 
for us. I think we should be able to ask for some adaptations in the 
future which could allow for some protections if we show substantial use 
of the band for public safety, government, economic development and 
general good of the public. Most of you guys already do this so it 
should be easy. For those of you who have not tapped into the killer 
application of public safety (police cars, firetrucks, civil defense, 
disaster preparedness, etc.) you need to get with the program. If you 
become the best friend of the head of your (EOC) Emergency Operations 
Center for your county then you will have a ticket to do most anything 
you need to protect and serve using good spectrum in your community. I 
whole heartedly believe this is the path to entrenching us into the 
fabric of communications from now on in our service areas.
Cheers,
Scriv


Dylan Oliver wrote:

Has there been any word on what the power limitations in the
whitespace band will be? Or is this up to the FCC when the bills pass?
I wish the band was WISP-only, and registered like 3650 to keep things
proper.

Thanks,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
  

-- 
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: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread Dawn DiPietro

All,

I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press 
release with contact info was posted in my first email.
Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press 
release? What should be done in the future

to avoid a situation like this?

I was under the impression there were people on this list to make 
corrections when the media passes on misinformation.

We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.

Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for 
wireless broadband.

http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/philips_telemetry_system/index.html

  Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
   Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at 
608-614 MHz)
   Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in 
thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have 
proven both
   durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded 
transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
   on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide 
audio feedback for many tasks. They’re also upgradeable to run on our 
cellular

   telemetry system.

Apologies to all,
Dawn DiPietro

John Scrivner wrote:

We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong 
with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am 
sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose 
of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. 
Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information on the press 
outlet that sent out the previous information? It is time for us to 
SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let me know but 
apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the wrong position on 
this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I will never again 
send out any notices to all of you for action prior to reading the 
ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. I am very, very 
sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.

Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)



*From:* John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL 

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread John Scrivner
Thanks Dawn. I was in a bit of a panic when I asked for the contact info 
for the fist press release. I went back and re-read your post after that 
and contacted the TIA press agent directly. I copied this list on that 
message asking for them to correct the information.

Thanks all and so sorry,
Scriv


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press 
release with contact info was posted in my first email.
Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press 
release? What should be done in the future

to avoid a situation like this?

I was under the impression there were people on this list to make 
corrections when the media passes on misinformation.

We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.

Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for 
wireless broadband.
http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/philips_telemetry_system/index.html 



  Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
   Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at 
608-614 MHz)
   Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in 
thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have 
proven both
   durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded 
transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
   on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide 
audio feedback for many tasks. They’re also upgradeable to run on our 
cellular

   telemetry system.

Apologies to all,
Dawn DiPietro

John Scrivner wrote:

We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is 
wrong with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I 
am sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the 
purpose of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have 
happened. Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information 
on the press outlet that sent out the previous information? It is 
time for us to SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let 
me know but apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the 
wrong position on this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I 
will never again send out any notices to all of you for action prior 
to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. 
I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.

Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices 

RE: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread Rick Harnish
I'll tell all of the wispa list members something.  JOHN SCRIVNER is on of
the best allies any of us have.  His untiring devotion to the WISP industry
is amazing.  MARLON SHAFER also has but endless hours of volunteer time into
this effort.  These two gentlemen deserve a standing ovation from around the
country.  

I have been relatively absent from the list the last few months building new
systems and rebuilding old systems.  I owed my staff, my business and my
customers some time dedicated to them.  Hopefully, I can start getting more
involved again to help stimulate this legislation.

Thanks to all who have sent letters and commented on this legislation.  Lets
all keep it up.

Regards,

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 10:58 AM
To: WISPA General List
Cc: Frannie Wellings
Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

Thanks Dawn. I was in a bit of a panic when I asked for the contact info 
for the fist press release. I went back and re-read your post after that 
and contacted the TIA press agent directly. I copied this list on that 
message asking for them to correct the information.
Thanks all and so sorry,
Scriv


Dawn DiPietro wrote:

 All,

 I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press 
 release with contact info was posted in my first email.
 Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press 
 release? What should be done in the future
 to avoid a situation like this?

 I was under the impression there were people on this list to make 
 corrections when the media passes on misinformation.
 We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.

 Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for 
 wireless broadband.

http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/phili
ps_telemetry_system/index.html 


   Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at 
 608-614 MHz)
Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in 
 thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have 
 proven both
durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded 
 transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide 
 audio feedback for many tasks. They're also upgradeable to run on our 
 cellular
telemetry system.

 Apologies to all,
 Dawn DiPietro

 John Scrivner wrote:

 We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
 wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
 ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is 
 wrong with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I 
 am sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the 
 purpose of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have 
 happened. Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information 
 on the press outlet that sent out the previous information? It is 
 time for us to SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let 
 me know but apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the 
 wrong position on this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I 
 will never again send out any notices to all of you for action prior 
 to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. 
 I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.
 Scriv


 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

 *

 A BILL

 *

 To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

 expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

 other areas, and for other purposes.

 //

 /Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

 //

 /tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

 **

 *SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

 This Act may be cited as the ''American Broadband

 for Communities Act''.

 2

 **

 *SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

 **

 *FOR WIRELESS USE. *

 Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

 the following:

 **

 *''SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

 **

 *MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

 ''Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

 band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

 than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

 Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

 cluding wireless broadband devices.''.

 **

 *SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

 Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

 Act

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread Dawn DiPietro
Rick and All,

I agree. Thank you to everyone that has helped put this whole
organization together and stuck it out even when the membership and
lists get restless and cranky.  ;-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

On 4/8/06, Rick Harnish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I'll tell all of the wispa list members something.  JOHN SCRIVNER is on of
 the best allies any of us have.  His untiring devotion to the WISP industry
 is amazing.  MARLON SHAFER also has but endless hours of volunteer time into
 this effort.  These two gentlemen deserve a standing ovation from around the
 country.

 I have been relatively absent from the list the last few months building new
 systems and rebuilding old systems.  I owed my staff, my business and my
 customers some time dedicated to them.  Hopefully, I can start getting more
 involved again to help stimulate this legislation.

 Thanks to all who have sent letters and commented on this legislation.  Lets
 all keep it up.

 Regards,

 Rick Harnish
 President
 OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
 260-827-2482 Office
 260-307-4000 Cell
 260-918-4340 VoIP
 www.oibw.net
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]




 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of John Scrivner
 Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 10:58 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Cc: Frannie Wellings
 Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

 Thanks Dawn. I was in a bit of a panic when I asked for the contact info
 for the fist press release. I went back and re-read your post after that
 and contacted the TIA press agent directly. I copied this list on that
 message asking for them to correct the information.
 Thanks all and so sorry,
 Scriv


 Dawn DiPietro wrote:

  All,
 
  I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press
  release with contact info was posted in my first email.
  Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press
  release? What should be done in the future
  to avoid a situation like this?
 
  I was under the impression there were people on this list to make
  corrections when the media passes on misinformation.
  We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.
 
  Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for
  wireless broadband.
 
 http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/phili
 ps_telemetry_system/index.html
 
 
Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
 Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at
  608-614 MHz)
 Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in
  thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have
  proven both
 durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded
  transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
 on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide
  audio feedback for many tasks. They're also upgradeable to run on our
  cellular
 telemetry system.
 
  Apologies to all,
  Dawn DiPietro
 
  John Scrivner wrote:
 
  We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was
  wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for
  ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is
  wrong with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I
  am sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the
  purpose of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have
  happened. Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information
  on the press outlet that sent out the previous information? It is
  time for us to SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let
  me know but apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the
  wrong position on this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I
  will never again send out any notices to all of you for action prior
  to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is.
  I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.
  Scriv
 
 
  IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 
  Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced
 
  the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on
 
  *
 
  A BILL
 
  *
 
  To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and
 
  expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and
 
  other areas, and for other purposes.
 
  //
 
  /Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /
 
  //
 
  /tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,
 
  **
 
  *SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *
 
  This Act may be cited as the ''American Broadband
 
  for Communities Act''.
 
  2
 
  **
 
  *SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *
 
  **
 
  *FOR WIRELESS USE. *
 
  Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934
 
  (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
 
  the following:
 
  **
 
  *''SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *
 
  **
 
  *MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread John J. Thomas

It is a little strange to have a few MHz be left out, but with that range, who 
cares? This will make for some very cool possibilities...


John


-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2006 09:24 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for ALL 
tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong with 
that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am sorry for 
the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose of the bill. 
Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. Dawn DiPietro, 
can you please send me contact information on the press outlet that sent 
out the previous information? It is time for us to SUPPORT this bill If 
you need help with language let me know but apparently I am not much 
help as I told you guys the wrong position on this one.. I learned a 
valuable lesson here gang. I will never again send out any notices to 
all of you for action prior to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what 
he news tells us it is. I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. 
Please forgive me.
Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)



*From:* John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Fri 07/04/2006 15:07
*To:* Frannie Wellings
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] TV spectrum

I need a copy of this bill right away.
Scriv


Frannie Wellings wrote:

  Hey John,
 
  The Inslee bill is a good bill - it doesn't do what you're saying
  here. I'm not sure what you've read, but it opens up spectrum between
  54-698 MHz (except 608-614) for unlicensed use just like one of the
  Senate bills. He's introduced it as a House companion bill. The only
  difference is a bit of additional language about protection from
  interference.
 
  This is legislation we need to support. Can you review the bill and
  get back to me? If you don't have the text I can send it over. I'm out
  of town, but could get a copy to send to you.
 
  Best, Frannie
 
 
 

-- 
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

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread John J. Thomas
Thanks for the link, it seemed kind of strange why that little slice of 6 MHz 
was left out.

John


-Original Message-
From: Dawn DiPietro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2006 06:43 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

All,

I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press 
release with contact info was posted in my first email.
Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press 
release? What should be done in the future
to avoid a situation like this?

I was under the impression there were people on this list to make 
corrections when the media passes on misinformation.
We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.

Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for 
wireless broadband.
http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/philips_telemetry_system/index.html

   Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at 
608-614 MHz)
Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in 
thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have 
proven both
durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded 
transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide 
audio feedback for many tasks. They’re also upgradeable to run on our 
cellular
telemetry system.

Apologies to all,
Dawn DiPietro

John Scrivner wrote:

 We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
 wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
 ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong 
 with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am 
 sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose 
 of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. 
 Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information on the press 
 outlet that sent out the previous information? It is time for us to 
 SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let me know but 
 apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the wrong position on 
 this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I will never again 
 send out any notices to all of you for action prior to reading the 
 ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. I am very, very 
 sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.
 Scriv


 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

 *

 A BILL

 *

 To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

 expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

 other areas, and for other purposes.

 //

 /Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

 //

 /tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

 **

 *SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

 for Communities Act’’.

 2

 **

 *SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

 **

 *FOR WIRELESS USE. *

 Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

 the following:

 **

 *‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

 **

 *MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

 ‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

 band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

 than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

 Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

 cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

 **

 *SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

 Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

 Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

 (1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

 ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

 the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

 available under section 342 of the Communications

 Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

 including wireless broadband devices; and

 (2) establish rules and procedures to—

 (A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

 cluding broadcast television and public safety

 equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

 3

 from harmful interference from such unlicensed

 devices;

 (B) address complaints from licensed

 broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

 using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

 ference that include verification, in the field, of

 actual harmful interference;

 (C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

 devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

 to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

 actual harmful interference to the extent that

 harmful interference is found by the Commis-

 sion which may include disabling or modifying

 the unlicensed device remotely; and

 (D) require

Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-08 Thread Dylan Oliver
Has there been any word on what the power limitations in the
whitespace band will be? Or is this up to the FCC when the bills pass?
I wish the band was WISP-only, and registered like 3650 to keep things
proper.

Thanks,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-07 Thread John Scrivner
We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for ALL 
tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong with 
that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am sorry for 
the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose of the bill. 
Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. Dawn DiPietro, 
can you please send me contact information on the press outlet that sent 
out the previous information? It is time for us to SUPPORT this bill If 
you need help with language let me know but apparently I am not much 
help as I told you guys the wrong position on this one.. I learned a 
valuable lesson here gang. I will never again send out any notices to 
all of you for action prior to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what 
he news tells us it is. I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. 
Please forgive me.

Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)



*From:* John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Fri 07/04/2006 15:07
*To:* Frannie Wellings
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] TV spectrum

I need a copy of this bill right away.
Scriv


Frannie Wellings wrote:

 Hey John,

 The Inslee bill is a good bill - it doesn't do what you're saying
 here. I'm not sure what you've read, but it opens up spectrum between
 54-698 MHz (except 608-614) for unlicensed use just like one of the
 Senate bills. He's introduced it as a House companion bill. The only
 difference is a bit of additional language about protection from
 interference.

 This is legislation we need to support. Can you review the bill and
 get back to me? If you don't have the text I can send it over. I'm out
 of town, but could get a copy to send to you.

 Best, Frannie




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-07 Thread Anthony Will
Well below is the copy of the apologies I sent to my congressman.  I'm 
posting it here to just give everyone some cut and paste materials NOT 
to admonish Mr. Scrivner.  You acted with best intentions at heart and 
are obviously passionate about this industry.  Thank you for your 
initiative because I likely would not have know about this legislation 
until it was to late if you would not have posted what you have.  Thanks 
again,  Anthony


Apology sent to congressman,

It seems a previous message I sent earlier this evening was not 
accurate.  After further investigation on the details of this bill I am 
in support of this legislation.  I was mistaken in the fact about it 
limiting frequency use to 6 MHz but in reality the bill opens up most 
spectrum other then those 6 MHz.  I apologize for the strong wording in 
the previous message.  As you likely can tell I am passionate about this 
issue for our rural communities and have spent the last 8 years trying 
to deliver them the much needed High speed Internet resources they need. 

Again I offer my apologizes and understanding of these issues if you 
would like to find out more about how this issue impacts farmers, other 
rural community members or more about how local small business in MN are 
approaching this issue please contact me.


Anthony Will
Broadband Solutions


John Scrivner wrote:

We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong 
with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am 
sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose 
of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. 
Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information on the press 
outlet that sent out the previous information? It is time for us to 
SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let me know but 
apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the wrong position on 
this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I will never again 
send out any notices to all of you for action prior to reading the 
ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. I am very, very 
sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.

Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)