Double standard does not mean if a monopoly is regulated a non-monopoly needs to be regulated.
Its not about cable versus wired vs wireless!

Its about monopoly vs non-monopoly.

Just like any UNFAIR policies that help small businesses get government contracts, even though the small business can't be as compeitive as the the large super corporation.

There is many reasons to justify regulation of ILECs. Monpoly Monopoly Monpoly. Grant me the WISP monopoly status, and they can regulate me all they want.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc

----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 12:05 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Fwd: FCCexpectedtoofficially proposeDSLderegulationonThursday


<snip>
Well, for the most part we look out for each other, don't step on each
others toes, don't lock people out of our networks, ect.  We don't need
to be all regulated.  We are doing a fine job as is.  WISPs don't do the
same things the bells do.  Or maybe I don't exactly know what regulation
means.
</snip>

Er...I get almost a daily "interference complaint" from a WISP who is
looking to sue an unscrupulous competitor for "willful interference"

And how many WISPs would let a competitor on their network?

-Charles

-------------------------------------------
WISPNOG Park City, UT
http://www.wispnog.com
August 15-17, 2005

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 10:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fwd: FCC expectedtoofficially
proposeDSLderegulationonThursday




Charles Wu wrote:

How are WISPs self-regulated?

-Charles

-------------------------------------------
WISPNOG Park City, UT
http://www.wispnog.com
August 15-17, 2005

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 10:21 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fwd: FCC expected toofficially
proposeDSLderegulationonThursday


I feel that we are kind of self regulated, where as the "big boys",
when
left unregulated, go crazy.

Charles Wu wrote:



<snip>
If anyone recalls the argument I had with Charles Wu...about how I
would NEVER surrender ownership of every part of my own network, from
customer to carrier hotel if there was any way of keeping it... </snip>

So here's the caveat...

If you refuse to be regulated, then you shouldn't complain when the
FCC
rewrites the rules and stops regulating phone/cable incumbents

You can't have "double standards" - and they can always put up a
super-mesh network and trash your spectrum (in Chicago, SBC DSL modems
now come w/ WiFi access points turned on broadcasting away...sure, it's
a convenience to the consumers, but I cannot but wonder if this is an
"insidious method" of trashing 2.4 muni-wifi / wisp networks)

-Charles

-------------------------------------------
WISPNOG Park City, UT
http://www.wispnog.com
August 15-17, 2005





--
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 Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.0/63 - Release Date: 8/3/2005



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to