----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or NottoBreaktheLaw...That is
theQuestion


> Mark,
>
> >Heck, none of them did.  We have the two
> >classes of industry... the unregulated and the subsidized.
>
> Some truth to that. However, I'd argue, that thats not the way I'd prefer
> companies to be seperated by.

Well, I wish there wasn't any truth to that, but...  it sure seems that way.

> As proud as I am to say I'm self funded, self built, and taken no hand
outs
> from no one, its not an easy road for success.
> I would like to see more subsidees for the unregulated. Regulation is not
a
> requirement to receive subsidees.

"regulation" is how "accountability" for government money is established,
from a regulator's POV.    There is no free money, ever.

> Just like the governement jump started wired internet with ArpaNet, and
> create monopolies and franchises to assist cable and telecom providers,
> similar efforts should be offered to wireless infrastructure providers. At
> minimum tax incentives offered.

Why?  I think we can do just fine on our own.   Tax breaks?   Sure, but
everyone, everywhere needs that.


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 4:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or NottoBreaktheLaw...That is
> theQuestion
>
>
> > ----- 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/
>
> -- 
> 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/

Reply via email to