[WISPA] OTARD and Wireless Broadband
Folks, http://wireless.fcc.gov/siting/otard.html I just heard about a local Virginia WISP who used the OTARD rule to site a tower. Has anyone else used this ruling to apply to Wireless Broadband where a tower is placed on a property owner's land and then service offered to the property owner on a secondary basis? I see various writeups on the topic on the 'net, but can't find one that specifically differentiates between the siting of an antenna versus a tower with and antenna on it. Kelly Shaw Pure Internet, Inc. www.pure.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OTARD
This brings up an important issue. The difference between a Lease and a License. Very few Colo managers, lease space anymore, because it takes away their right to control its use. Instead they license the right to specifically do something in that space, which is still in the control of the landlord. Not only is it beneficial for the landlord to only issue you licenses instead of leases, but its as importnat that you buy space from someone that licenses to the other tenants, instead of lease to them. I often specifically add text in my agreement, that prevent a licensor from doing a future lease that would restrict my license. For example, a non-interference clause may be uninforcable, if the licensor, leased part of the roof to someone else. One of the background checks that are needed before procuring tower space is, are there previous leases that would overide or risk a given license. I guess what I'm saying is that this ruling with the airlines, is not only a good thing. It also has negative ramification. It also limits a leasor's control, when you want the leasor to have control, to protect your lease. It is clearly a victory for free use of spectrum though. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Bob Moldashel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 8:09 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] OTARD The case involved Continental Airlines providing free Internet access to both employees and passengers who were members of their members club. The AP was set up in the lounge area where it was accessible to paid members. Continental's position was that they were within their own exclusive leased space and subsequently could provide such a service and were protected under the OTARD determination and ruling. The airport authority argued that the system could cause interference to the airports existing master antenna system which supplied passengers with cellular and internet access (for a fee obviously) amongst other services. They wanted Continental to pay to put their equipment on the master antenna system or use the airport system. In addition, they would pay for RF Studies to see if the system could be placed without issue (Probably Marlon with his spectrum analyzer! :-P ). The airport also argued that they had listed in their lease contracts with the airline that they could not use radio systems or spectrum not approved by the airport authority. Clearly the Commission must have seen this otherwise.. First, I doubt that anyone in the Commission was happy with the airport authority trying to say who could use what spectrum where. After all, that is their exclusive job as allowed by law. So that didn't go over well I'm sure. Second, Continental proved, without a doubt, that they had exclusive rights to use the space they leased. As such, they are within the OTARD guidelines to supply the service. And finally, the airport authority would need to suffer interference before they could complain about Continental's Wi-Fi system. And we all know how quick the Commission jumps on interference issues under Part 15. Especially when you are using type accepted equipment. I think the case settled as expected. -B- John Scrivner wrote: In this particular situation the client (tenant) was owner of both ends (base station and CPE) I think. Correct me if I am wrong. I seem to remember reading that the airline wanted a private WiFi network for themselves. The airport (landlord) was trying to prevent this. In this type of a situation I think OTARD would apply regardless of the type of equipment used. In the event of a base station where a third party ISP is the beneficiary of use of a base station OTARD right of access would still not apply. I welcome feedback, corrections, rebuttals here. Truth is I know little about this but think I would like to know more. If anyone else has knowledge of this particular case and can add more enlightenment it is much appreciated. Scriv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: It was. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] OTARD Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent
Re: [WISPA] OTARD
The case involved Continental Airlines providing free Internet access to both employees and passengers who were members of their members club. The AP was set up in the lounge area where it was accessible to paid members. Continental's position was that they were within their own exclusive leased space and subsequently could provide such a service and were protected under the OTARD determination and ruling. The airport authority argued that the system could cause interference to the airports existing master antenna system which supplied passengers with cellular and internet access (for a fee obviously) amongst other services. They wanted Continental to pay to put their equipment on the master antenna system or use the airport system. In addition, they would pay for RF Studies to see if the system could be placed without issue (Probably Marlon with his spectrum analyzer! :-P ). The airport also argued that they had listed in their lease contracts with the airline that they could not use radio systems or spectrum not approved by the airport authority. Clearly the Commission must have seen this otherwise.. First, I doubt that anyone in the Commission was happy with the airport authority trying to say who could use what spectrum where. After all, that is their exclusive job as allowed by law. So that didn't go over well I'm sure. Second, Continental proved, without a doubt, that they had exclusive rights to use the space they leased. As such, they are within the OTARD guidelines to supply the service. And finally, the airport authority would need to suffer interference before they could complain about Continental's Wi-Fi system. And we all know how quick the Commission jumps on interference issues under Part 15. Especially when you are using type accepted equipment. I think the case settled as expected. -B- John Scrivner wrote: In this particular situation the client (tenant) was owner of both ends (base station and CPE) I think. Correct me if I am wrong. I seem to remember reading that the airline wanted a private WiFi network for themselves. The airport (landlord) was trying to prevent this. In this type of a situation I think OTARD would apply regardless of the type of equipment used. In the event of a base station where a third party ISP is the beneficiary of use of a base station OTARD right of access would still not apply. I welcome feedback, corrections, rebuttals here. Truth is I know little about this but think I would like to know more. If anyone else has knowledge of this particular case and can add more enlightenment it is much appreciated. Scriv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: It was. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] OTARD Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] OTARD CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. Broadband Deployment Group 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, New York 11741 USA 800-479-9195 Toll Free US Canada 631-585-5558 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OTARD
I know we've followed this issue pretty closely. I can't remember if the FCC asked a question about this and we filed on the issue or not. The whole issue revolves around the idea that the OTARD rule has historically ONLY applied to CLIENT antennas. Not base stations. That's one of the risks of Mesh systems In this case, the airline wanted to put in a wifi system for it's self and it's customers. The airport had it's own wifi system and wanted to be able to charge everyone for access. The airline basically told the air port to stuff it. Looks like OTARD has just been expanded. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 10:08 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] OTARD In this particular situation the client (tenant) was owner of both ends (base station and CPE) I think. Correct me if I am wrong. I seem to remember reading that the airline wanted a private WiFi network for themselves. The airport (landlord) was trying to prevent this. In this type of a situation I think OTARD would apply regardless of the type of equipment used. In the event of a base station where a third party ISP is the beneficiary of use of a base station OTARD right of access would still not apply. I welcome feedback, corrections, rebuttals here. Truth is I know little about this but think I would like to know more. If anyone else has knowledge of this particular case and can add more enlightenment it is much appreciated. Scriv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: It was. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] OTARD Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] OTARD CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- 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] OTARD
It was. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] OTARD Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] OTARD CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://4isps.com/newsletter.htm -- 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/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OTARD
In this particular situation the client (tenant) was owner of both ends (base station and CPE) I think. Correct me if I am wrong. I seem to remember reading that the airline wanted a private WiFi network for themselves. The airport (landlord) was trying to prevent this. In this type of a situation I think OTARD would apply regardless of the type of equipment used. In the event of a base station where a third party ISP is the beneficiary of use of a base station OTARD right of access would still not apply. I welcome feedback, corrections, rebuttals here. Truth is I know little about this but think I would like to know more. If anyone else has knowledge of this particular case and can add more enlightenment it is much appreciated. Scriv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: It was. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] OTARD Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] OTARD CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OTARD
There is more to this in that no one but the FCC is allowed to restrict the airwaves use. Anyone can license the use of a physical space, controled by them for a specific purpose. However, As long as a radio is in ones own controlled space, I'm not sure it matters wether its an AP or an SU. Its not about being a radio, its about not being able to tell someone what to do in their own space. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 1:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] OTARD In this particular situation the client (tenant) was owner of both ends (base station and CPE) I think. Correct me if I am wrong. I seem to remember reading that the airline wanted a private WiFi network for themselves. The airport (landlord) was trying to prevent this. In this type of a situation I think OTARD would apply regardless of the type of equipment used. In the event of a base station where a third party ISP is the beneficiary of use of a base station OTARD right of access would still not apply. I welcome feedback, corrections, rebuttals here. Truth is I know little about this but think I would like to know more. If anyone else has knowledge of this particular case and can add more enlightenment it is much appreciated. Scriv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: It was. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] OTARD Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] OTARD CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- 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/
[WISPA] OTARD
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://4isps.com/newsletter.htm -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] OTARD
Fascinating. I had always read OTARD to only cover client devices and not base station devices. -Hal __ Harold Bledsoe Deliberant LLC 800.742.9865 x205 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.deliberant.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] OTARD CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING REGARDING THE OVER-THE-AIR RECEPTION DEVICES (OTARD) RULES. Found that Massport's restrictions on Continental's use of its Wi-Fi antenna are pre-empted by the OTARD rules and therefore granted Continental's petition. (Dkt No. 05-247). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 10/17/2006 by MOO. (FCC No. 06-157). OET http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A1.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A2.txt http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-157A3.txt -- Regards, Peter RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://4isps.com/newsletter.htm -- 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/
