Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not to Break theLaw...That is theQuestion
OK, I can't take this anymore Guys, you all already pay taxes, have phone numbers, business licenses etc. It's not like anyone that wants to cause trouble can't find ya easlily enough. I came up with the most common 4 questions that have been asked here and shot them off to Ellen at the FCC. I'll forward what she sends back. The long and short of it is this. Some rules can be played with some can't. No one cares what antennas you use. They DO care about power levels. The form 477 seems to be more like a power level issue. Do it or else. I'm not sure what or else is but if congress told them to go get the data you can bet it'll have all the teeth it ever needs. laters, 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: Sunday, February 05, 2006 9:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not to Break theLaw...That is theQuestion There is going to have to be a compromise here guys. We will not be putting together the composite subscriber data for the FCC. There are no provisions for it. We can ask but then quite frankly I am not too keen on telling them that most of our members here seem to be reluctant to tell them who they are. We have to determine how the form has created this belief among you that the FCC is going to use it for harm. I want to see real answers here and not just conspiracy theories. If the FCC did not ask for the source of the information then what would stop us from telling them we had 10 times more customers than we had? There is no accountability if the data cannot be verified. Why is it assumed by all of you that the same organization who created unlicensed spectrum policy is now going to find some way of destroying the industry that was created by that policy:? Scriv Brian Rohrbacher wrote: Let's just get clear right up front... It appears you believe that if we all appear to be good boy scouts and have feel-good politics, we're more likely to get what we want considered. I disagree. I dont' think it'll get us even 3 seconds reconsideration. But I do believe if we make forceful and logical, and well-reasoned arguments, it far outweighs whether or not some of us are more than just a little atagonistic toward being counted, filed, folded, spindled, and reported. If we start rolling over now, they will ask for more and more and more... If all they want is the number of subs, then lets all turn info into WISPA and WISPA can give the lump number. Why do they freakin need to know if I wear boxers or briefs? Ever heard of http://www.fire-the-senate.com/ It's time for... http://www.fire-the-fcc.com/ -- 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] To Break the Law or Not to Break theLaw...That is theQuestion
http://rcrnews.com/news.cms?newsId=25545 What do you think Mark? Brian -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not to Break theLaw...That is theQuestion
It's unclear whether the user fee tax would be paid by equipment vendors or end users The above quote from the article leads me to believe that this idea is half-baked at best. What happens to the myriad of devices already out there in people's homes? Forget about what we do for a moment. The airwaves are loaded with consumer trinkets. Im not sure how those get handled. We will start taxing all consumer devices that use spectrum? There is no way to tax the end user of certain types of equipment. WE can be taxed, I suppose, but who pays the tax on my son's walkie talkies? Does this mean he has to fill out a form too? I imagine some very large equipment manufacturers will take a rather dim view on having the tax pushed back on them either. Guarantee Sony and Sanyo wont cotten to the idea. I imagine they have pockets enough for K street. Might be a good time to work real close with the folks that make our gear. That stupid SOB is grasping at straws. (the president, not my son- he has a sippee cup) chris http://rcrnews.com/news.cms?newsId=25545 What do you think Mark? Brian -- 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] To Break the Law or Not to Break theLaw...That is theQuestion
- Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 9:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not to Break theLaw...That is theQuestion There is going to have to be a compromise here guys. We will not be putting together the composite subscriber data for the FCC. There are no provisions for it. We can ask but then quite frankly I am not too keen on telling them that most of our members here seem to be reluctant to tell them who they are. Why is that? Why are you afraid to say Most WISP's range from somewhat to vehemently opposed to detailed registration of thier business details with you, and we believe that this will result in highly inaccurate data. Do they really think that John Q Wispy is going to call them up and say Hi, I'm john Q W, and I'm refusing to register because...? WISPA, and even Part-15 are the only credible folks who CAN say that a significant number of those whom they obtained opinions from are so adamantly opposed they may not register. Gee, John, if they think that WISPA's going to lie to them, then they think each of US is going to lie to them. This is why I asked if you were prepared to reveal your customer list to them, as verification. We have to determine how the form has created this belief among you that the FCC is going to use it for harm. I want to see real answers here and I'ts real simple. The more of us there are, the more likely they're going to see us a source of revenue.Thus, the more of us there are, the more likely we're going to see detailed or extreme intrusions... Things like per customer taxes, universal coverage mandates etc, etc.If they think they have a handle on who each of us are, and have cowed us into compliance with that, they will so difficulty in imposing such things on us. If they realize they herding cats, instead, the effort involved in enforcing such ideas will appear as monumental as it really is, and will definitely be delayed or actually never done. What will you do when they issue demands that every customer be easily tapped and the technology they wish employed to do that exists with only ONE hardware solution? And it's not yours? Can you rebuild your network in 90 days?I can't. Even if I were at my goal of 400 to 500 customers I could not finance that and would have to close up shop.Do they freaking care if some microscopic operator leaves? Heck no, they only care if you got 5 or 10 million customers (voters) or more. not just conspiracy theories. We don't need any paranoid conspiracy theories. We see arbitrary, capricous and very damaging (to fledgling industries) rules coming out of them AT THE PRESENT - witness the absurd and impossible to carry out demands over E911 for VOIP! So why did Vonage, 8x8, and so on, get along without it so long? Simple, they didn't get on the radar until the big players started to get into it and it is likely THEY who whined about the unfair competition from those who didn't have all the investment into such things. Giving 911 services to consumers as they stated, is just so much steaming cow dung. That's political speak for it was the only excuse we could think of. If the FCC did not ask for the source of the information then what would stop us from telling them we had 10 times more customers than we had? There is no accountability if the data cannot be verified. Which is precisely why they're going to be asking you for your customer list. What will you do when they want addresses and IP numbers?Or, they're going to try to demand that we become regulated as a telecom provider, so that the states will take over the job and our state agencies will pursue us with myriad regulation / registration issues. Then the state comes in and watches over your shoulder and you have to fill out forms in triplicate to change a switch in your NOC. none of this is conspiracy theories, it's plain old common sense and logical deduction from watching thier present behavior. Why is it assumed by all of you that the same organization who created unlicensed spectrum policy is now going to find some way of destroying the industry that was created by that policy:? They dont' need to find some way of destroying, thier normal behavior does that all by itself. That's why there's no real competition for phone service, no new startup phone companies, and why ILEC's own the world, so to speak. The very nature of being regulated does this. That's why we don't see Spokane, WA have at least 3 competing, local, facilities-based providers of dialtone.Regulation has made this impossible to do for a wide array of reasons. If we get under thier thumb, probably only a handful of the larger ones will survive... and of course, that is actually PRECISELY what some of the readers to this list want, too. I have had THAT argument before. Or isn't any of this obvious?
