----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 12:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or NottoBreaktheLaw...That is theQuestion
> Mark, > > You made some very good points, in your response to me, and I do not > contradict them. > There is risk in all the things you bring up, when reporting. > Its part of the reason, I didn't file last year. > > The difference, is that we are on the opposite side of the coin, when > looking at the odds for good or bad commingfrom it. >From your comments, I'm not that sure we are. You are more focused on short term, me on long term. > > It is my belief that the odds are higher, that reporting will accomplish > more good than harm, after considering everything. > > I think part of the problem here, is that it is not eveident to all what the > possible benefits are that could come out of reporting. > Even if the only benefit was that our large numbers as an industry were > recognized, that benefit could be enough alone. I always hate to state the obvious, it seems so... pedantic. But why can't we find a way to accomplish the good without the bad? Yeah, I know, it's a lot of energy to expend, to be a group that stands up to buck the tide. But then again, we'd not be here if we didn't have the energy to buck the tide in the first place, would we? > > One of the things thats Ironic, is I'm more afraid of other WISPS knowing my > true statistics than the FCC or governement, knowing my statistics. Heh... I think that turning over to the feds will result precisely the people you don't want having that informating getting thier hands on it. The government can be amazingly tight with information...and at the same time, amazingly loose with it when it it expedient. > > Long term there could be negative effect of reporting, but I'm just trying > to get through today. And today, I think we need support, and reporting is > likely to gain us more support. Critical legislation is getting considered > this year, and we need the support this year, so we need to report this > year. > > I'm not compelled to report because its the law, I'm compelled to report > because I need their support, and we need to let them know we are here. One > of the things I learned the passed couple years, is somethings are worth > paying for. For example, I've weakened and ponied up to a couple property > owners for commssions, which I never would have done 3 years ago, but I was > a more profitable company this year because my job was easier and more > productive, because I paid them. If the governement gave me moresupport > this year, so the ILECS didn't wipe us out with all their proposed > legislation this year, it would be worth it in trade to pay a few taxes down > the road, ebcause at least I'd be hear to colelct the taxes. No, you'll never get a dollar. It'll go to the big guys. Telecommunications, defense contracting, space development... You name it. Not a one has small business involved when it comes to Uncle Sam paying to get something done. I'm not trying to be cynical, but the odds are with me on this. > > We have got to realize we need the FCC's and governements help to survive > long term. Doing it on our own in the shadows will only last so long. Are you sure? > Underserved America won't be there forever. What are you going to do, when > your local ILEC is given huge funds to build a wireless network to compete > against you with USF funds, because the governement won;y consider you as a > valid iption to fund, because you didn;t file, and as far as they know you > don't exist, by your own choice. They already have the money to do this if they want. I don't expect that USF funds will make much difference. > > Wireless is about to become a much more political and aware of industry. Its > not going to just be our industry anymore. The taxes will come wether we > file or not. And they'll find you regardless of wether you file, just like > the IRS finds people today. If you advertise, they will find you. And Nowhere was I suggesting that a few individuals refusing to file will have much impact. I was trying to say that we collectively tell them "The key to our existence and success is LEAVE US ALONE! This is one industry that cannot survive regulation. Heck, none of them did. We have the two classes of industry... the unregulated and the subsidized. > you'll need to advertise togrow. But the FCC isn;t going to go looking for > you to help you and give you money, there is no motive to try and help > someone that doesn;t cooperate to be helped. BUt believe me, when they want > to collect moeny from you, they'll let you know they know you exist. Yeah, they want to collect from everyone... it's just a matter of how "big" you are in relationship to how much hassle it is to get it. I'm not suggesting the FCC or any federal agency should be "kept in the dark", but I am suggesting that we at least draw a line in the sand and tell them that THIS TIME you can promote success by giving the country the tools and butting out. That may be a rather novel concept to a few folks...and there's a good chance we won't succeed. Further, although I - personally - am in wireless, this reporting does not apply to JUST wireless. It's everyone. Everywhere. I tried to make that point earlier, with my comments about the scale of this thing. If some guy just buys a connection, and hooks up everyone his block... HE"S BREAKING THE LAW TO NOT FILE, or, at least the FCC's rules, which probably aren't to be confused with 'law'. And, for that matter, he's never going to figure out he's got the target on his back until the day the regulators come and shut him down. It will not gain us recognition, because if memory serves, it does not even ask what mode we use to distribute broadband. As I said, I can't open thier .xls file. So, will this gain us any recognition if it doesn't differentiate US from everyone else? I think not. It just lumps us into the DSL, Cable, and other operators. The only way that the FCC is going to recognize US as "wireless" is that if we as an industry catalog and make definite statements about our own size, which is why, if i'm not mistaken, WISPA exists in the first place. My little fictional and pretend story wasn't just about wireless... It was the complete exit by small business in the internet provision industry. And, it made the point that as far as 'facilities based" goes, we're about the last stand for small business. I think we could get a TON of allies in the "leave us alone" category outside of wireless, when it comes to the filing issues. Heck, we might even get the big boys on our side, sicne for them, it's a lot of work and paperwork to accomplish. But hey, what do I know... I"m just a hick from the sticks... :) North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Koskenmaki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 2:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not toBreaktheLaw...That is > theQuestion > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 10:53 AM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not to BreaktheLaw...That is > > theQuestion > > > > > >> John, > >> > >> I support your view. > >> We can not assume that the FCC's intent for Wireless is evil, just > >> because > >> there is huge lobby efforts by our competitors (Cable and Telephone) and > >> Lots of debate at the FCC to address equality issues regarding VOIP, that > >> has generated much hippocracy and trouble in the FCC and Governement. > >> For > >> example, I don't think there is any evidence that gathering Data on WISPs > > is > >> for the purpose to establish a basis for Taxing. > > > > Tom, you're misunderstanding what people are saying here. Nowhere have I > > said that the present intent is "evil". The stated goal is PROBABLY what > > they say it is. Assuming the "given" that is what it is, that does NOT > > preclude future use for things that will harm us. It is the NATURE OF > > GOVERNMENT REGULATION TO HARM BUSINESS. They regulate for political > > purposes ( Does "We'll give them 911 service" ring any bells?) and we, the > > small guys, get whipsawed into bankruptcy. > > > > A database doesn't have to be gathered for the purpose of taxing. It > > merely has to exist, to be USED for taxing, for regulating, for mandates. > > Nothing mysterious about that. And as we can see, mandates arrive without > > any public request for them, taxes arrive without ANY recourse or warning. > > > > Intent isn't even an issue. I don't care what the "intent" is, that is > > irrelevant. It's what it can be used for that matters, because they WILL > > use it for that, history has made this as clear as sunrise in the desert. > > > >> The support of Wireless has been nothing but possitive from the FCC and > > ALL > >> their officials. Even with lacking support for 700Mhz, its not because > >> of > >> lack of support for WISPs, but because the strength of the counter view > >> broadcasting industry. Its important that Wireless provider show proof > > that > >> they are a large enough size to be considered part of the solution. The > > only > >> way wireless providers are going to start getting grand money and funds > > from > >> governements to help them grow, is for them to show their possitive > >> unique > >> contributions. The ONLY reason, I could see that reporting would be a > >> negative thing, is that if most WISPs actually have fewer subscribers > >> than > >> they represent, and they don't want to let the FCC know the truth, > >> because > >> if they do, they won't be recognized adequately because their small > >> scale, > >> and WISPs do not want to lie and create a record of untruth. > > > > Wrong. We don't want "The hammer" coming to smash us. Giving them that > > much knowledge is fatal. period. Doesn't matter if that's not what they > > want it for, doesn't matter if the knowledge itself will "give" us other > > things. They will take far more than they give - that is indisputable. > > We have the history of every industry that becomes regulated. > > Eventually, > > it evolves to one or a few monopolies. And it took how many years of > > lawsuits to break up Ma Bell? Gee, ISP's fought tooth and nail to get > > UNE's and then lost it in a court fight. > > > > I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO LIVE IN THAT ENVIRONMENT, where my fate hangs NOT > > in my own initiative and creativity, but at the whims of someone I granted > > power over me. > > > >> > >> Wireless is not a young indistry at this point. It took DSL 5 years to > > reach > >> mass penetration. I personally have been in this industry for 5 years, > >> and > >> haven;t met mass penetration yet :-) Why are we growing so slowly. > > Showing > >> a small subscriber base, could tell the FCC they need to favor companies > >> that have quicker growth potential, like the ILECs and Cable companies > > that > >> are taking on millions of customers. Give them the spectrum to deploy > >> quicker than small WISPs can do. Thats my fear. > > > > Then fear away. Registering WISP's will not affect that future one tiny > > smidgeon. > > > >> > >> But the truth is, if numbers are low, that has to be shown, so we can > >> make > >> cases to the FCC why the numbers are low, and how they can help us get > > past > >> the barriers that are slowing us. Does the FCC realize that Wireless > >> providers in teh Urban america have such slow growth because lack of > >> easements? Do Otard rules need to be expanded? Are higher power levels > >> needed in spectrum, etc. Manufacturers have to much pull with the FCC, > >> because they can backup their requests with billions of dollars in sales. > >> Can we the WISP community? > > > > If the hammer comes to smash us, certainly not. We won't even exist, and > > we, the operators, and our customers, will be the only mourners. > > > >> > >> I think we have to try. We need EVERY SINGLE PERSON REPORTING making our > >> numbers higher. Because we need to be recognized as a group that NEEDS > >> assistance, Because we are helping Society today. IF more people had > >> reported, maybe we would ahve had more favoratism with the 700Mhz > >> debates? > > > > We might. But the loss will far outweigh any gains. > > > > > > North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 > > personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net > > sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net > > Fast Internet, NO WIRES! > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > - > > > > > >> > >> Tom DeReggi > >> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > >> Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 12:06 PM > >> 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/ > > > > -- > > 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/
