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" 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/
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
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
Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:23:19 -0500, Tom DeReggi wrote > Don't misinterpret this as suggesting not to file, as I believe one > should file for various reasons. But I disagree with statements and > the reason to file are different. > > First, At a FCC/WISP meeting, I remember a very enlightening > presentation from Patrick Leary. The key statement was "Where > Wireless goes, DSL follows". Its more true than we can imagine. > Only thing is, In upcomming years its going to be, "Where Small > Wireless providers go, FIOS and/or ILEC WIMAX deployments follow". > Nobody appreciate an unserved market, until you see your > competition wanting it and profiting from it. History has proved, > you kill your competition before they grow strong enough to be a > threat. They won;t take the small WISP approach to go where no one > has served yet. They will take the Mcdonalds/Wendy's approach of > using our data to find the most profitable areas to serve, where > they can take the business from WISPs. Executive's Ego's are > involved, and they don't like to see others outshining them Provide > Form477 info publically, so competitors can see it in detail, It > will be damaging. > (Unless of course the informatioin disclosed shows no real threat in > terms of volume) You know, I see the same pattern too. In 1999 here, there was no telco DSL in 90% (terms of population) of the area I now am covering or soon to cover. Between 1999 and now, a wireless provider in the area applied for the low interest loans (and was approved) for a large amount of it. Amazingly enough, DSL sprouted up all over the place where Qwest had said "we have no plans to put it in", in all those places where public money had become available and was requested by said WISP (not me). City A has all of 1300 people, and city W has 700 people and found themselves with DSLAMS installed and stringing new cables all over town. The project was huge and kept the telco guys here for months, in a town of a few hundred people. Just up the road is a town of 6000 people, but no public funds were applied for for this town. NO DSL in that town. They're all served by Qwest. Still no plans to put in DSL in said town of 6000 people, either. Heck, they've got remote DSLAM's to serve 20 and 50 customers spread across the countryside out in the boonies... In the area were loans were approved to provide broadband > > The reason Form 477 should be filed is that its not meant for public > eyes. Its meant for the FCC, so they can make intelligent decission > with that inforamtion, to foster growth in the industry for > consumers benefit. The FCC already knows WISPs are a major player > now in theory. But they need proof to backup opinion. Form 477 > helps provide that. But if we look at this differently, the data becomes a snapshot of growth. Ready-made demographics and marketing research, all done by each of us, spending big bucks to do real life marketing, which, if it ends up being publicly available, provides a road map to every Cableco and ILEC and CLEC to show them right where they need to go. They're too big to see life "on the ground", but that information, once accumulated for a 2 or more years becomes a great roadmap that analyists can use with incredible efficiency to tell them exactly where we've cultivated markets and for them to move in on... > There is not a viable compromise on this issue. We need the FCC to > have this information, and we need the info to be held in > confidence. The Law and Fines are irrelevent as the goal is NOT to > not file. The goal is to support confidentiality. RIght... the question is: Why should having a dumb pipe delivering bits to customers make me required to risk my information in the first place? It may seem against our interests, but I really think we should be on the offensive against CPI on this in terms of "It's not really a federal case... The nation's future does not revolve around you or anyone else knowing this". 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
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
IANAL 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
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
Don't misinterpret this as suggesting not to file, as I believe one should file for various reasons. But I disagree with statements and the reason to file are different. First, At a FCC/WISP meeting, I remember a very enlightening presentation from Patrick Leary. The key statement was "Where Wireless goes, DSL follows". Its more true than we can imagine. Only thing is, In upcomming years its going to be, "Where Small Wireless providers go, FIOS and/or ILEC WIMAX deployments follow". Nobody appreciate an unserved market, until you see your competition wanting it and profiting from it. History has proved, you kill your competition before they grow strong enough to be a threat. They won;t take the small WISP approach to go where no one has served yet. They will take the Mcdonalds/Wendy's approach of using our data to find the most profitable areas to serve, where they can take the business from WISPs. Executive's Ego's are involved, and they don't like to see others outshining them Provide Form477 info publically, so competitors can see it in detail, It will be damaging. (Unless of course the informatioin disclosed shows no real threat in terms of volume) The reason Form 477 should be filed is that its not meant for public eyes. Its meant for the FCC, so they can make intelligent decission with that inforamtion, to foster growth in the industry for consumers benefit. The FCC already knows WISPs are a major player now in theory. But they need proof to backup opinion. Form 477 helps provide that. There is not a viable compromise on this issue. We need the FCC to have this information, and we need the info to be held in confidence. The Law and Fines are irrelevent as the goal is NOT to not file. The goal is to support confidentiality. Just my 2 cents. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Forbes Mercy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 10:21 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Sort of odd that last time I filed and I received no such notice to renew. Forbes I'm not particularly worried about my info getting into anyone's hands. I've got nothing to hide. We'll fill it out again. I'm far more worried about the fines than competitors learning anything useful from the 477. Someone else brought up a great point. You can't market your company and stay hidden. If anyone's looking at your area for anything at all they'll find out all about you anyway. Unless you don't want customers to ever hear about you :-). laters, marlon - Original Message ----- From: "Joe Laura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Ya, I just got a notice as well. I wonder what the response rate will be this time around? Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Hehe!!! I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will be due shortly. Cliff LeBoeuf www.cssla.com www.triparish.net -- 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.11/652 - Release Date: 1/25/2007 -- 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
Peter, You are right. (At this time people should not state publically on this list if they aren't going to file) Also, I previously spoke spontaniously without thinking the issue through, without any concept of time and due dates. I wasn't putting two and two togeather to realize the filing deadline was due more or less now, before court cases would even be battled. I will be filing, because its my obligation to, and no proven reason not to. I honestly feel that. Actually, when I think about it, we should be applauding the FCC, for taking a stand to keep information confidential. With that said, I do think it is appropriate to discuss how the Freedom of Information Act will effect the FCC to be able to maintain confidentiality. I think it also appropriate to discuss the pros and cons of filing, based on how that court battle ends up. Right now, the FCC has held firm, and we should support them back, for supporting us. But this is a serious issue. If the information that I file, gets given to a company Like Verizon, it could give them the advantage to put me out of business in a couple months, if they wanted to. If you do not think the Telcos are watching the WISP industry closely, you are fooling yourself. As a business owner, I have the right to protect the success of my business, and I have the right to protect my confidential information. I have the right to withhold information, take my stand publically, and legal fight to protect my company's interest if there is reason to do so. If my detailed information from the Report was disclosed, and it led to a competive disadvantage in my markets, I'd sue the FCC. I'd argue that it would be a Wireless Trade Association's responsibilities (such as WISPAs) to lead the fight to protect WISP's confidential information. WISPA needs to send out a consolidated united message, that if our information is disclosed, that we will feel betrayed and will take legal action as an industry to protect our interests, or not cooperate. That is being taken seriously, showing the power we have in numbers. What you will find is that initially the FCC may hold firm and not disclose information now. But when it becomes to much of a hassle and to costly to defend, they might give in. What would prevent them from giving in, is knowing that they would be opening a whole nother can of worms, headached, and costs with the WISPs that trusted the FCC. Again, I am way ahead of myself on this post. I'm just talking "What Ifs". To date there is no evidence that the FCC will disclose information, and they currently have refused to disclose it. I think we should all file, but when we file, we should each include a letter with our filing, stating that information is confidential information, that we are aware of the current case requesting information to be disclosed, and expressing our concerns and the importance that our information stays confidential. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Actually, once they post on this public, archived listserv that they will not file, it becomes a permanent record and their business becomes everyone's business. You want WISPA to be taken seriously? You don't post on the list and say I ain't filing. It reflects poorly. You don't want to file - don't file, but shut up about it. - Peter George Rogato wrote: I am not saying to anyone else tyhat they should or shouldn't, thats your business not mine. -- 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
Unlike me, you probably did yours correctly and on time! hehehehe - Original Message - From: "Forbes Mercy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 7:21 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Sort of odd that last time I filed and I received no such notice to renew. Forbes I'm not particularly worried about my info getting into anyone's hands. I've got nothing to hide. We'll fill it out again. I'm far more worried about the fines than competitors learning anything useful from the 477. Someone else brought up a great point. You can't market your company and stay hidden. If anyone's looking at your area for anything at all they'll find out all about you anyway. Unless you don't want customers to ever hear about you :-). laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Joe Laura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Ya, I just got a notice as well. I wonder what the response rate will be this time around? Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Hehe!!! I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will be due shortly. Cliff LeBoeuf www.cssla.com www.triparish.net -- 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.11/652 - Release Date: 1/25/2007 -- 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
Sort of odd that last time I filed and I received no such notice to renew. Forbes I'm not particularly worried about my info getting into anyone's hands. I've got nothing to hide. We'll fill it out again. I'm far more worried about the fines than competitors learning anything useful from the 477. Someone else brought up a great point. You can't market your company and stay hidden. If anyone's looking at your area for anything at all they'll find out all about you anyway. Unless you don't want customers to ever hear about you :-). laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Joe Laura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 > Ya, I just got a notice as well. I wonder what the response rate will be > this time around? > Superior Wireless > New Orleans,La. > www.superior1.com > - Original Message - > From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:02 PM > Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 > > > Hehe!!! > > I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will > be due shortly. > > Cliff LeBoeuf > www.cssla.com > www.triparish.net > -- > 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.11/652 - Release Date: 1/25/2007 <>-- 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 have filled all previous requests, and plan on filing this one too. I was just 'poking fun' at the CONFIDENTIAL issue at hand... Cliff LeBoeuf www.cssla.com www.triparish.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 8:53 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Actually, once they post on this public, archived listserv that they will not file, it becomes a permanent record and their business becomes everyone's business. You want WISPA to be taken seriously? You don't post on the list and say I ain't filing. It reflects poorly. You don't want to file - don't file, but shut up about it. - Peter George Rogato wrote: > > I am not saying to anyone else tyhat they should or shouldn't, thats > your business not mine. > -- 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
Actually, once they post on this public, archived listserv that they will not file, it becomes a permanent record and their business becomes everyone's business. You want WISPA to be taken seriously? You don't post on the list and say I ain't filing. It reflects poorly. You don't want to file - don't file, but shut up about it. - Peter George Rogato wrote: I am not saying to anyone else tyhat they should or shouldn't, thats your business not mine. -- 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
We will be filing ours again also. 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 Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 11:11 PM To: Joe Laura; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 I'm not particularly worried about my info getting into anyone's hands. I've got nothing to hide. We'll fill it out again. I'm far more worried about the fines than competitors learning anything useful from the 477. Someone else brought up a great point. You can't market your company and stay hidden. If anyone's looking at your area for anything at all they'll find out all about you anyway. Unless you don't want customers to ever hear about you :-). laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Joe Laura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 > Ya, I just got a notice as well. I wonder what the response rate will be > this time around? > Superior Wireless > New Orleans,La. > www.superior1.com > - Original Message - > From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:02 PM > Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 > > > Hehe!!! > > I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will > be due shortly. > > Cliff LeBoeuf > www.cssla.com > www.triparish.net > -- > 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/ -- 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'm not particularly worried about my info getting into anyone's hands. I've got nothing to hide. We'll fill it out again. I'm far more worried about the fines than competitors learning anything useful from the 477. Someone else brought up a great point. You can't market your company and stay hidden. If anyone's looking at your area for anything at all they'll find out all about you anyway. Unless you don't want customers to ever hear about you :-). laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Joe Laura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Ya, I just got a notice as well. I wonder what the response rate will be this time around? Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Hehe!!! I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will be due shortly. Cliff LeBoeuf www.cssla.com www.triparish.net -- 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] Form FCC477
The way I see it is, I already gave them this information, whats the use of now saying no you can't have it again. So I'll file again, why subject myself to possible liabilities. I just went through something similar with the oregon PUC and our clec status. And I alsmost lost my status because of a mistake on their part, Another situation where they claimed we hadn't filed, even though we did. I don't want to have to deal with the FCC because of a missing form. I am not saying to anyone else tyhat they should or shouldn't, thats your business not mine. David E. Smith wrote: Tom DeReggi wrote: Yeah, I think I'll wait to see the results of how the legal battle turns out before I file. The current form is due on March 1st, and the odds of the case being tied up before then are asymptotically close to zero. Besides, you're probably required to file either way. David Smith MVN.net -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org http://signup.wispa.org/ -- 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
Tom DeReggi wrote: Yeah, I think I'll wait to see the results of how the legal battle turns out before I file. The current form is due on March 1st, and the odds of the case being tied up before then are asymptotically close to zero. Besides, you're probably required to file either way. David Smith MVN.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] Form FCC477
Yeah, I think I'll wait to see the results of how the legal battle turns out before I file. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 3:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Hehe!!! I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will be due shortly. Cliff LeBoeuf www.cssla.com www.triparish.net -- 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
Ya, I just got a notice as well. I wonder what the response rate will be this time around? Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: "Cliff Leboeuf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 Hehe!!! I just received my reminder that my new 'confidential' FCC 477 form will be due shortly. Cliff LeBoeuf www.cssla.com www.triparish.net -- 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/