Forbes,
Did you happen to ask them if they ever sold any of their data to
commercial organizations? That might also indicate their intent and why they
are pushing so hard...just a thought.
Thank You,
Brian Webster
-----Original Message-----
From: Forbes Mercy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 1:15 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Form FCC477 - I called CPI
So I was a bit curious as to who this Center for Public Integrity (CPI) was
and who funded them and what their intent was. I looked them up and gave
the guy a call that is in charge of the lawsuit for CPI against the FCC. We
had a long chat and he referred me to their website and what they are trying
to do: http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/
Basically, according to the director of this project, they are trying to
mirror the other media provider information by providing a list by zip code
of who gives service in an area. We discussed how inaccurate the list is
for say cable where my town supposedly has five cable providers when in fact
we have two and only one by the zip code I searched. I then asked if that
is all the information they want from the FCC Form 477. He said "Yes all we
really want is the provider name". So I asked why his FOI and lawsuit
states ALL data provided in the Form 477. I explained that our competition
already has enough of an advantage but if they had their hands on the number
of customers, their speeds, etc. by zip code they would know where to spend
money to go after us specifically. Essentially telling our competition
everything about us without even the tease of an offer to by protected by an
non disclosure agreement (NDA). I think even Telco and Cable agree with us
on this potential which is why they have joined with the FCC opposing the
full disclosure request.
His answer (CPI) was that they don't expect to get the whole database and in
the end will likely compromise for just the names. I told him I have no
problem giving my name or having the FCC do that but why ask for everything,
I said, "it demonstrates intent to disclose so much more" that could damage
us. He said he knows that but it was their decision to start there and
work back to what they want. I explained how when you negotiate you don't
ask for, let's say buying a car, for $2000 off when you only want $500 off.
By doing so the salesman, in this case the FCC, has no motivation to work
with you because you made an unreasonable request. Why not just file the
Freedom of Information (FOI) request for just the provider names? He said,
"it's nice to hear a grass roots provider view but we felt this was the best
bargaining method". He made clear they are not funded by a Corporation and
are certainly not trying to help anyone but consumers.
I see one of two motivations for this: 1) They are being pushed by their
attorney to go too far which sounds about right for a lawyer who knows
he/they will get a lot more money for drawing out negotiations when he could
just make a reasonable request or, 2) CPI feels they will get more donors
and media attention by being able to make the claim they are trying to
protect the public in a big media splash saying we just want their names
while really asking for the whole cake. They are a DC organization so you
can never really trust their intent.
Forbes Mercy
President - Washington Broadband, Inc.
www.wabroadband.com
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007
--
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/
