Re: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
agreement (such as preventing other ISPs from non-interference or using your spectrum), thye become a valuable landlord to do business with. Initially, Property Management companies are looked at as the bad guy, getting in the way of prgress. But once you grow, establish relationships with GOOD property management companies, they can be your best assets, and worth every penny that they weasle out of you for their support. I charish my property management "partners" like gold. The problem is that property managers are generally obligated to represent the landlord not the buyer of space, so in can be a battle to win good terms. BUt once every one understands everyones position, there is a making for a deal. The best property manager see both sides of the coin, and educate the property owner on why they must also look after the WISPs interests for mutual benefit. The trade off is they then ask for top dollar :-( So in summary, wether something holds up in court, is not always a legalissue or the wording of your agreement, but often an issue of who and how strong your partnerships are with the people that assist the deployment of your network, such as property owners. I will also add that the best defense for an infraction or violation of your agreement, (interference or unauthorized use of your spectrum) is not legal action, but injunction relieve (or however that word is spelt). IMMEDIATELY STOP THE VIOLATION. Most landlords don't even know what they are licensing to you, or what they are licensing to the next guy, and really don't know what interferes and doesn't with another. So immediate action on the ISP's part to insist and assistance, or more important providing documentation and explanation clearly on what needs to be done is most helpful. Also a plan should be made a head of time, of what the course of action is, and who to contact if a violation occurs, so it can be executed quickly. Roofs that have management, often havethat person that is authorized to immediately take action to cure violations. Once again one of the reason I have chosen to pay heavilly for roof access in our competitive market. I've proven that the rightagreement, the right relationships, and licensing exclusive use of spectrum rights, has been invaluable in protecting turf, the spectral environment, and in fact VERY enforceable, both socially and legally. However, anytime anything goes to court, its a disaster, as damages were already done at that point, and financially everyone looses by that point. The purpose of a good agreement, is so that nobody evet chooses to go to court because everyone knows in advance who will win, ot for that matter the outcome, if peopel don't cooperate. Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dylan Oliver To: WISPA General List Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:06 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan? Huh. What's the difference between quasi and true exclusive rights? What *would* hold up?Best,-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 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] Anyone know Verilan?
Tom,Thanks for the great message; I always look forward to reading your posts. Would you be willing to distribute an example of an agreement that has worked for you? Do any of the property owners you value so highly operate on a national level? I'd be interested to know which relationships to cultivate, and which are best nipped in the bud .. What, by the way, is the status of the notion that WISPA should provide members a treasure trove of such documents? Best,-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
I do not provide this information publically for several reason, as they are trade secrets. 1) Disclosing property owner partners opens the door for competitorsto know where to work first, toattempt compete agaisnt us in a way that does us the most harm. Its the principle of Wendy usually opens up across the street from MCDonalds. If I have a relationship with X, andthey gain a relationship with X, I also llikely lose a relationship or choices with X. We areallies, as long as they are going after other turf working with Y. I've lost as much as 100s of thousands of dollars, by being forced to fullfil first right of refusal agreements, prematurely to twart off my competition, after disclosing such information. The agreements that we have in place is what gives a significant time to market advantage, and disclosing such info publically could effect our company worth as other WISPs establish relationships with those owners, even if in other regions. However, I find that every landlord is a good one to work with, its just an issue of identifying what each others goals are, and catering to them. The diffence is that landlords that don't yet get it, just take a lot longer to work with toteach them to get it. I now can get roof approval on many building in a week compared to 6 months to a year in the past, due to sampelagreements and previous negotiations with landlords. What you will also find is that these terms are not applicable to all properties manages by the managers. The reason is that each building usually has co-owners that may not all be the same. We also find that EVERY contract is different and customer. Based on legal fees that would be taken by management companies, they almost ALWAYS insist on you using their agreement, and then you needto spend time hacking away their default agreement with your needed text. So my agreement in its entirety will rarely do you good. I also find that I have to bend on different arreas for different landlords based on whats important to them. So I could not give you just one sample agreement, I'd have to give you 30 sample agreements. And of course not all 30 have been tested in court. So as I'm not a lawyer, if I were in your shoes I probably wouldn't trust my agreement text. Lastly, I want to point out, many of the agreements are considered confidential property by the landlords, and sharing that info would be copyright violations, and possibly violations of Non-disclosures. My intent previously was to point out the concerns, so you'd think to consider them. However, if there is any specific type of agreement you are wanting to do with a property owner, Off list, I can send you a sample or two, that might be applicable for your purpose. Tom DeReggiRapidDSL Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dylan Oliver To: WISPA General List Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 10:54 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan? Tom,Thanks for the great message; I always look forward to reading your posts. Would you be willing to distribute an example of an agreement that has worked for you? Do any of the property owners you value so highly operate on a national level? I'd be interested to know which relationships to cultivate, and which are best nipped in the bud .. What, by the way, is the status of the notion that WISPA should provide members a treasure trove of such documents? Best,-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 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] Anyone know Verilan?
If your contract with a tower specifies that you hold access rights to spectrum within the bands whether you are USING THEM currently, or not using them currently, then I would suppose your exclusive rights would hold up, but am unaware of any legal precedence to show this. There was a company that had a similar contract on the BOA tower in seattle that tried using this without any success as well, when I was with another firm a few years back. Reality is there is no exclusive rights to bands within unlicensed. ( my 2 cents) - Jeff On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:23 -0600, Dylan Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Huh. What's the difference between quasi and true exclusive rights? What *would* hold up? Best, -- 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: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
If you have a lease with a landlord that grants you exclusive rights to unlicensed spectrum then that lease precludes the landlord from entering into lease with another entity that wants access to that unlicensed spectrum. While the landlord has no right to control the spectrum they can avoid offering leases based upon use of spectrum. -Matt jeffrey thomas wrote: If your contract with a tower specifies that you hold access rights to spectrum within the bands whether you are USING THEM currently, or not using them currently, then I would suppose your exclusive rights would hold up, but am unaware of any legal precedence to show this. There was a company that had a similar contract on the BOA tower in seattle that tried using this without any success as well, when I was with another firm a few years back. Reality is there is no exclusive rights to bands within unlicensed. ( my 2 cents) - Jeff On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:23 -0600, Dylan Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Huh. What's the difference between quasi and true exclusive rights? What *would* hold up? Best, -- 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: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
using them currently, then I would suppose your exclusive rights would hold up, but am unaware of any legal precedence to show this. Thats correct. Its still a grey area. In our case, they settled before going to court, based on the likeliness we'd win. I also am not aware of any case that did not hold up, based on the fact that the spectrum used was unlicensed spectrum. In all cases that didn't hold, there was some other deficiency that caused it not to hold up. Technicalities like unclearly written contracts or definitions. When attempting to license unlicense spectrum, there are many approaches to do it. There is a subtle difference, but its a big difference, in what ways will hold up or not. FCC rules can't be prejudice between providers of broadband. But it doesn't define unlicensed spectrum as broadband. The spectrum could be used for any of many purposes. So the rules don't apply. Until they expand OTARD to include shared common area controled by property owners, licensing the exclusive use of unlicensed spectrum from their controlled areas will in fact hold. Of course I can't prove it without going to court. Obviously I can't share detailed information pertaining to our case and agreement, as that would not bewise, as some day I may need to defend our agreements in court. All I can tell you, is if that day comes, we are well prepared to defend our case, and plan to win it. Now you could find a tenant on the 24th floor of the building, and put an AP in their window, and with their permission be able to broadcast, and the landlord or WISP with exclusive rights wouldn't be able to do anything about it. When there is a will there is a way. The point is how much hassle is it, how fast can you move, and which way offers the best overall value proposition. If I can broadcast from the roof, and get 10 extra DBs on a links, to survive interference better, its worth paying for and worth having. There was a company that had a similar contract on the BOA tower in seattle that tried using this without any success as well, when I was with another firm a few years back. Reality is there is no exclusive rights to bands within unlicensed. ( my 2 cents) I fully disagree. You don't license unlicensed spectrum. You license the right to operate equipment of a specific type from the property controlled by property owner. You can't control what spectrum is in the air, but an agreement can clearly control who has the right to put something on a roof and of what type. The landlords won that battle years ago, battling Teligent. And if for any reason I'm wrong, which I'm not, the right agreement would still result in ability to get injunctive relief, until the issue made it through court for a final ruling. Easilly able to keep it tied up in court for years, accomplishing the same benefit to keep the competition from using your broadcast sites, for a long period of time, while you install customers and the opportunity passes them by. There were a number of ISPs that thought, they'd move into my markets, to deploy Wireless. As you will see, not any of them that tried, are still in my markets. They learned it didn't do any good to have wireless gear deployed from the wrong places. Broadcast site was everything, to get coverage. If you didn't ahve coverage, marketing didn't work and sales people got pissed off and quit. I'm banking that my agreements will hold, and I am confident it is what is going to make the biggest difference in me getting the buy out terms, that I am holding out for, when the day comes that I sell. When someone can't steal your assets, they either go away, or they buy them (the assets). When someone controls the market to some extent through a unique asset, it can easilly double their worth. If it went to court, you bet that the Property owners would lobby hard to also protect the right, that they've fought so hard to keep the right to control whats on their roof over the years. Because they resell that right to people like me, and make a small fortune off it. They clearly have made a lot more off my business than I have :-) I'd argue, that it would be worth a couple million (at the right time) to buy me out, even if I didn't include one customer in the sale, based on the fact that I have so many prime locations under contract, that could speed deployment, and by default is creating a ton of intererence, chewing up spectrum, for anyone trying to deploy new in my areas. I'm not attentially doing so (creating interference), I deploy in a way to optimally try to avoid causing interference, I just have deployed a lot of prime sites deployed to expand my network, to optimize my change to have LOS to my customers.. My point is it doesn't matter wether the agreements will hold up in court. Because they exist, and it needs to be proven that they wouldn't hold up in court, before they can be gotten around, and it will cost
Re: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
they tried to sue us :)-JeffOn Jan 23, 2006, at 11:35 AM, Mark Koskenmaki wrote: http://www.verilan.com/ I was hoping to have a closer additional source for things (I always try to have more than one) and these people have some stuff I use listed for sale at decent prices. But, over the course of about 3 days, and approximately 30 phone calls to thier number, I never managed to reach a live person. I tried accounting, tech support, sales, etc. I lost track of the number of times I called, but I called everywhere between morning, after 5, mid-day, etc. I realize this isn't saying much positive about them, I was just wondering if anyone else had heard of them or done business with them. Thanks North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot netsales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot netFast Internet, NO WIRES!--- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 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] Anyone know Verilan?
Oh shit. I just realized that both Primaverity and Verilan contain the element veri. Maybe they'll sue me, too! They own the Local Area Network of Truth!.. But I've got got the Original claim to Truth. On 1/31/06, Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: they tried to sue us :)-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
Proceed cautiously here. chris Anyone touch Cisco's mesh gear? Or Tropos' or Skypilot's? Any fans of mesh (Sascha aside) at all? All I hear is StarOS, Mikrotik, and Tranzeo in the WiFi space. Earthlink is doing the Philly project with Tropos and Canopy 5.8 PtMP for backhaul. How much is a Tropos 5210? Best, -- 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: [WISPA] Anyone know Verilan?
It was over some tower and access rights issues regarding spectrum. They signed some quasi exclusive rights agreement with a tower company, which didnt hold up so they dropped the suit.-JeffOn Jan 31, 2006, at 12:14 PM, Dylan Oliver wrote:Oh shit. I just realized that both "Primaverity" and "Verilan" contain the element "veri". Maybe they'll sue me, too! They own the Local Area Network of Truth!.. But I've got got the Original claim to Truth. On 1/31/06, Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: they tried to sue us :)-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 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/
