Rick and All,

I agree. Thank you to everyone that has helped put this whole
organization together and stuck it out even when the membership and
lists get restless and cranky.  ;-)

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

On 4/8/06, Rick Harnish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll tell all of the wispa list members something.  JOHN SCRIVNER is on of
> the best allies any of us have.  His untiring devotion to the WISP industry
> is amazing.  MARLON SHAFER also has but endless hours of volunteer time into
> this effort.  These two gentlemen deserve a standing ovation from around the
> country.
>
> I have been relatively absent from the list the last few months building new
> systems and rebuilding old systems.  I owed my staff, my business and my
> customers some time dedicated to them.  Hopefully, I can start getting more
> involved again to help stimulate this legislation.
>
> Thanks to all who have sent letters and commented on this legislation.  Lets
> all keep it up.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rick Harnish
> President
> OnlyInternet Broadband & Wireless, Inc.
> 260-827-2482 Office
> 260-307-4000 Cell
> 260-918-4340 VoIP
> www.oibw.net
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Scrivner
> Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 10:58 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Cc: Frannie Wellings
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]
>
> Thanks Dawn. I was in a bit of a panic when I asked for the contact info
> for the fist press release. I went back and re-read your post after that
> and contacted the TIA press agent directly. I copied this list on that
> message asking for them to correct the information.
> Thanks all and so sorry,
> Scriv
>
>
> Dawn DiPietro wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > I guess at this point I am at a loss of words. The original press
> > release with contact info was posted in my first email.
> > Did the contact person at the TIA ever get back to you about the press
> > release? What should be done in the future
> > to avoid a situation like this?
> >
> > I was under the impression there were people on this list to make
> > corrections when the media passes on misinformation.
> > We do need to thank Frannie for clearing this up.
> >
> > Below is a link to explain why 608-614 Mhz spectrum cannot be used for
> > wireless broadband.
> >
> http://www.medical.philips.com/us/products/patient_monitoring/products/phili
> ps_telemetry_system/index.html
> >
> >
> >               "Philips Telemetry System (608-614 MHz)
> >                Fresh capabilities for our proven system (operating at
> > 608-614 MHz)
> >                Philips classic telemetry systems are installed in
> > thousands of healthcare facilities around the world, and they have
> > proven both
> >                durable and adaptable for over a decade. Upgraded
> > transmitters combine standard and EASI derived 12-lead ECG* monitoring
> >                on a single device, run on AA batteries, and provide
> > audio feedback for many tasks. They're also upgradeable to run on our
> > cellular
> >                telemetry system."
> >
> > Apologies to all,
> > Dawn DiPietro
> >
> > John Scrivner wrote:
> >
> >> We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was
> >> wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for
> >> ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is
> >> wrong with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I
> >> am sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the
> >> purpose of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have
> >> happened. Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information
> >> on the press outlet that sent out the previous information? It is
> >> time for us to SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let
> >> me know but apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the
> >> wrong position on this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I
> >> will never again send out any notices to all of you for action prior
> >> to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is.
> >> I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.
> >> Scriv
> >>
> >>
> >> IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
> >>
> >> Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced
> >>
> >> the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on
> >>
> >> *
> >>
> >> A BILL
> >>
> >> *
> >>
> >> To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and
> >>
> >> expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and
> >>
> >> other areas, and for other purposes.
> >>
> >> //
> >>
> >> /Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /
> >>
> >> //
> >>
> >> /tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> *SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *
> >>
> >> This Act may be cited as the ''American Broadband
> >>
> >> for Communities Act''.
> >>
> >> 2
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> *SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> *FOR WIRELESS USE. *
> >>
> >> Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934
> >>
> >> (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
> >>
> >> the following:
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> *''SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> *MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *
> >>
> >> ''Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the
> >>
> >> band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other
> >>
> >> than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-
> >>
> >> Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-
> >>
> >> cluding wireless broadband devices.''.
> >>
> >> **
> >>
> >> *SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *
> >>
> >> Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this
> >>
> >> Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall-
> >>
> >> (1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in
> >>
> >> ET Docket Nos. 02-380 and 04-186 to facilitate
> >>
> >> the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made
> >>
> >> available under section 342 of the Communications
> >>
> >> Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,
> >>
> >> including wireless broadband devices; and
> >>
> >> (2) establish rules and procedures to-
> >>
> >> (A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-
> >>
> >> cluding broadcast television and public safety
> >>
> >> equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses
> >>
> >> 3
> >>
> >> from harmful interference from such unlicensed
> >>
> >> devices;
> >>
> >> (B) address complaints from licensed
> >>
> >> broadcast stations that an unlicensed device
> >>
> >> using such spectrum causes harmful inter-
> >>
> >> ference that include verification, in the field, of
> >>
> >> actual harmful interference;
> >>
> >> (C) require manufacturers of unlicensed
> >>
> >> devices designed to be operated in this spectrum
> >>
> >> to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy
> >>
> >> actual harmful interference to the extent that
> >>
> >> harmful interference is found by the Commis-
> >>
> >> sion which may include disabling or modifying
> >>
> >> the unlicensed device remotely; and
> >>
> >> (D) require certification of unlicensed de-
> >>
> >> vices designed to be operated in that spectrum
> >>
> >> to ensure that they meet the technical criteria
> >>
> >> established under paragraph (1) and can per-
> >>
> >> form the functions described in subparagraph
> >>
> >> (C).
> >>
> >> March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> *From:* John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> *Sent:* Fri 07/04/2006 15:07
> >> *To:* Frannie Wellings
> >> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] TV spectrum
> >>
> >> I need a copy of this bill right away.
> >> Scriv
> >>
> >>
> >> Frannie Wellings wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hey John,
> >> >
> >> > The Inslee bill is a good bill - it doesn't do what you're saying
> >> > here. I'm not sure what you've read, but it opens up spectrum between
> >> > 54-698 MHz (except 608-614) for unlicensed use just like one of the
> >> > Senate bills. He's introduced it as a House companion bill. The only
> >> > difference is a bit of additional language about protection from
> >> > interference.
> >> >
> >> > This is legislation we need to support. Can you review the bill and
> >> > get back to me? If you don't have the text I can send it over. I'm out
> >> > of town, but could get a copy to send to you.
> >> >
> >> > Best, Frannie
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> > ---
> > ---
> >
> --
> 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