>From paragraph 24 of the Consent Decree "The Parties further agree that this Consent Decree does not constitute either an adjudication on the merits or a factual or legal finding or determination regarding any compliance or noncompliance with the Communications Laws."
While we now know that the FCC did something in this case, and will likely do similar things in the future; the FCC is saying that this isn't a legal finding, it is a settlement. I wrote a blog post that goes into a bit more detail on my thoughts of the matter: http://www.wifiluke.com/2014/10/05/fcc_da_14-1444/ -Luke On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Coehoorn, Joel <[email protected]> wrote: > >. We ask our students to sign a number of agreements when they > matriculate, one of which has to do with being a good net citizen (don't > DDOS our servers or anyone else's, don't download protected content, etc). > They must agree not to use their own APs without the permission of IT* > > I'm not sure that covers it. What if Marriott adds similar rules to these > when you sign the check-in papers for your hotel room? What about > non-student guests, who haven't agreed to this and are using a MiFi to > avoid agreeing to any NAC policies? > > > > Joel Coehoorn > Director of Information Technology > 402.363.5603 > *[email protected] <[email protected]>* > > The mission of York College is to transform lives through > Christ-centered education and to equip students for lifelong service to > God, family, and society > > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Dave Flynn <[email protected]> wrote: > >> While I agree that this opens up a nasty precedent for commercial >> institutions, I don't think it's a threat to colleges or universities. We >> ask our students to sign a number of agreements when they matriculate, one >> of which has to do with being a good net citizen (don't DDOS our servers or >> anyone else's, don't download protected content, etc). They must agree not >> to use their own APs without the permission of IT*; if they do, we have the >> right to knock them off the network. Generally speaking, we prefer to do >> that by disabling the wall port(s) to which they cannot instead of >> poisoning them from our own APs, but they've agreed to follow our >> guidelines regardless of the mechanism we choose. It's a condition of being >> a student here. The Marriott situation does not apply. >> >> *Not that they don't try. We have dozens of rogue APs every Fall and it >> takes many hours to clean them up. >> >> Dave Flynn >> Manager of Systems and Infrastructure >> Carleton College >> 507 222 7836 - office >> 651 331 6323 - cell >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *"Pete Hoffswell" <[email protected]> >> *To: *[email protected] >> *Sent: *Monday, October 27, 2014 4:05:01 PM >> >> *Subject: *Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN >> quarantine features illegal >> >> My thought is that the FCC is "simply" trying to police the ISM band, as >> outlined in FCC part 15 regulations >> >> >> http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=d5df6d61f643786c6651653f0942fd73&node=pt47.1.15&rgn=div5 >> >> The 2.4GHz ISM band is free an open for everyone to use. If you >> intentionally disrupt transception, well, I think you might be breaking >> some part of part 15. I've not read part 15, nor could I even begin to >> comprehend it. >> >> But it gets grey quickly, doesn't it? If you have a rogue AP on your >> campus, and you mitigate it by sending a spoofed disassociate packet, well, >> are you "jamming"? >> >> I'm with Lee. I think the FCC jumped into a deep pond with this one. >> The rules are out of date at best. They need to clarify. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - >> Pete Hoffswell - Network Manager >> [email protected] >> http://www.davenport.edu >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Lee H Badman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Not so sure I agree- I know that Marriott’s insane fees led to this, >>> but the FCC seems to be saying “you can’t touch people’s Wi-Fi, period” >>> whether you offer a free alternative or not seems irrelevant. But then >>> again, it appears that they issued a decision and were clueless about the >>> fact that they created a lot of confusion over features that are built in >>> to equipment that they certified for use in the US. >>> >>> >>> >>> Lee Badman >>> >>> Wireless/Network Architect >>> >>> ITS, Syracuse University >>> >>> 315.443.3003 >>> >>> (Blog: http://wirednot.wordpress.com) >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto: >>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Williams, Matthew >>> *Sent:* Monday, October 27, 2014 4:32 PM >>> >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN >>> quarantine features illegal >>> >>> >>> >>> I don’t think that there’s a distinction about the location. My >>> understanding is that the issue was that Marriott was jamming the hotspots >>> to force people to pay for the hotel provided wireless network. I don’t >>> think that there would have been a lawsuit if the hotel Wi-Fi was free. >>> >>> >>> >>> Respectfully, >>> >>> >>> >>> Matthew Williams >>> >>> Kent State University >>> >>> Network & Telecommunications Services >>> >>> Office: (330) 672-7246 >>> >>> Mobile: (330) 469-0445 >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ >>> mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Kitri Waterman >>> *Sent:* Monday, October 27, 2014 4:25 PM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN >>> quarantine features illegal >>> >>> >>> >>> "Marriott Hotel Services has come to a $600,000 agreement with the >>> Federal Communications Commission to settle allegations that the hotel >>> chain "interfered with and disabled Wi-Fi networks established by consumers >>> in the conference facilities" at a Nashville hotel in March 2013. >>> >>> According to the nine-page order issued on Friday, a guest at the >>> Gaylord Opryland hotel in Nashville, Tennessee complained that the hotel >>> was "jamming mobile hotspots so you can’t use them in the convention space." >>> >>> Is this a distinction between them blocking in their "conference >>> facilities" vs. their hotel rooms? We all know that radio signal >>> propagation is not so clean cut, but I'm wondering if the lawyers are >>> seeing things differently. >>> >>> Kitri Waterman >>> Network Engineer (Wireless) >>> University of Oregon >>> >>> On 10/3/14 2:07 PM, Thomas Carter wrote: >>> >>> I suspect the clause will still be valid, but we cannot use wireless >>> countermeasures to enforce them. Telling students to turn them off, >>> disabling wired ports, student discipline, etc are outside the FCC’s >>> jurisdiction it seems to me. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thomas Carter >>> >>> Network and Operations Manager >>> >>> Austin College >>> >>> 903-813-2564 >>> >>> [image: AusColl_Logo_Email] >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ >>> mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Brian Helman >>> *Sent:* Friday, October 03, 2014 3:39 PM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN >>> quarantine features illegal >>> >>> >>> >>> I just saw this on CNN and jumped on the list to post. Using your own AP >>> is against the AUP everyone signs at our institution. Now I wonder if that >>> clause is invalid. >>> >>> -Brian >>> >>> >>> Sent from my Galaxy S4. Tiny keyboards=typing mistakes. Verify anything >>> sent. >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Frank Sweetser <[email protected]> >>> To: "[email protected]" < >>> [email protected]> >>> Sent: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 3:55 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN >>> quarantine features illegal >>> >>> I think a good chunk of the use is even more insidious than that. I've >>> been >>> in a position where I've offered university guests access to our wifi. >>> A >>> number of these users - smart, highly technical IT professionals - >>> instead >>> just said "Nah, I'll just use my hotspot." >>> >>> I suspect it's a combination of two things. First, "I paid for it, so I >>> have >>> to use it to get my money's worth". Second, "I'd have to think about >>> how to >>> set up a new wifi, or I can just turn on my hotspot by rote memory." >>> >>> In both cases, the cost (or lack thereof) and quality of any host >>> offered wifi >>> doesn't even factor into the decision at all. >>> >>> Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu | For every problem, there is a >>> solution that >>> Manager of Network Operations | is simple, elegant, and wrong. >>> Worcester Polytechnic Institute | - HL Mencken >>> >>> On 10/3/2014 3:21 PM, Philippe Hanset wrote: >>> > Everything would be so much simpler if locations would provide Wi-Fi >>> for free >>> > or at a reasonable price. >>> > When a technology is used by everyone (e.g. Electricity) like Wi-Fi, >>> just >>> > include it in the cost of doing business. >>> > Stop charging users for Wi-Fi, especially when the room is already at >>> > $200+/night. People will bring their own Mi-Fi or smartphone-hotspot, >>> > and bypass the silly cost model! >>> > >>> > At Educause this week the Vendor-floor was plagued with hundreds of >>> Mi-Fi and >>> > private Wi-Fi. >>> > The event was charging upward of $150/day for Wi-Fi to exhibitors. So, >>> many of >>> > them had their own solutions! >>> > >>> > Humans are resourceful...and if you piss them off they will read the >>> law and >>> > call the FCC (or they pirate your network ;-) >>> > >>> > Philippe >>> > >>> > Philippe Hanset >>> > www.eduroam.us <http://www.eduroam.us> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Oct 3, 2014, at 2:22 PM, Lee H Badman <[email protected] >>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> What do you all think of this? >>> >> >>> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/10/after-blocking-personal-hotspot-at-hotel-marriott-to-pay-fcc-600000/ >>> >>> >> >>> >> - Lee Badman >>> > >>> > ********** Participation and subscription information for this >>> EDUCAUSE >>> > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >>> > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> > >>> >>> ********** >>> Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent >>> Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> <http://www.educause.edu/groups/> >>> >>> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE >>> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >>> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> >>> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE >>> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >>> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> >>> >>> >>> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE >>> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >>> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> >>> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE >>> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >>> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> ********** Participation and subscription information for this >>> EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >>> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >>> >>> >> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE >> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >> >> >> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE >> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at >> http://www.educause.edu/groups/. >> >> > ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE > Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Luke Jenkins Network Engineer Weber State University ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
