Maybe it's time to file to be a "library" or school... I'm not an ISP - I'm an informational internet research service providing services to students who are enrolled in our access program.
Ridiculous... this is all ridiculous. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:56 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi > For about 20% of my users, that is all I can do.... packets from/to my > MESH based towers I can't break down to individual users..... Some of > them can't even be broken down to individual towers... > > Doug Ratcliffe wrote: > > I agree. I see it this way too. I can't see them forcing CALEA onto > > hotspot operators like McDonalds, Starbucks, etc. Technically they're a > > WISP too. I'll operate my service just like they do. What about muni-WIFI? > > How does CALEA play into that? > > > > If this goes the wrong way, I'm going to convert all of my customers to > > prepaid hotspot users, anonymous (nothing but a card #). You take the > > equipment, install it where you want and the most I'm going to know is that > > it's on Tower B, Sector 3 and they have a 77% signal. > > > > Go find them. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "wispa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 4:48 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] calea meeting with the fbi > > > > > > > >> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:24:12 -0800, Jack Unger wrote > >> > >>> Mark and Butch, > >>> > >>> I want to thank both of you. > >>> > >>> I feared that the quality and tone of this discussion was taking a > >>> negative turn but I WAS WRONG. > >>> > >>> I've found your discussion of the CALEA issue and the ramifications > >>> to the WISP industry to be interesting, informative and valuable. > >>> I'd like to commend both of you gentlemen for having the commitment > >>> and the courage to share your opinions in this open forum. > >>> > >>> Your discussions have helped me to clarify the CALEA issues in my > >>> mind. Hopefully it will help others to clarify their thinking as well. > >>> > >>> Although your political views may not be perfectly identical to each > >>> other, I sense that you both respect the Constitution and the Rule > >>> of Law and that you both want to do what you believe is correct. > >>> > >>> Thank you again. > >>> jack > >>> > >> Thanks Jack. Pardon me while I say one last bit on this rant. > >> > >> The RIGHT way this is to be done, is for the FCC to "un" rule we're > >> telecommunications providers, the same for VOIP and so on, and let the DOJ > >> and FBI go back to Congress, who re-writes the rules, and supplies the > >> > > funds > > > >> to implement whatever it is they really want, and complies with our > >> Constitution. > >> > >> In the meantime, let them ask US how data extraction works, let US find > >> > > ways > > > >> it can be done, develop "reasonable" levels we should be required to go > >> through to attempt to recover the data they want. > >> > >> Just like CALEA did for the telcos, they can fund the software changes > >> > > and > > > >> implementation costs - Let law enforcement come meet us and ask US how > >> > > best > > > >> to get ahold of data tehy want or need. > >> > >> In the meantime, this idea of open-ended demands with obscure requirements > >> and almost laughably vague language needs to be tossed down the drain. > >> > >> Let them develop ways and means of talking IP to us, let Congress fund > >> > > that > > > >> research so THEY do the conversions, not us or someone we're supposed to > >> freaking PAY to do it for us, and then we need a target of what and how to > >> deliver data. > >> > >> Yeah, we're going to have to meeet with the FBI and DOJ and develop > >> reasonable mechanisms... but it should be them asking US, not us coming > >> around with our hat in hand saying "please don't bury us in costs for some > >> arcane type of mechanism that's not even workable on our networks" with a > >> > > big > > > >> hairy fine as a stick big enough to bury small guys like me. One single > >> > > 10K > > > >> fine and i'm bankrupt. And the rules offer no recourse. Doesn't actually > >> MATTER if you think you comply. If it doesn't work in the end like they > >> want, the fine can be levied anyway and capriciously. This is wrong > >> > > too... > > > >> Vague laws are unconstituional, we all know that. > >> > >> But most of all, it needs to be voted in Congress. Let Congress take the > >> heat like they should, when they have to vote to spy on your internet > >> > > use - > > > >> and require everyone to be "ready". > >> > >> This whole thing is a tragedy of spineless beaurocrats. Congress wrote a > >> law, the law was obsolete in a very short period of time, but rather than > >> > > get > > > >> Congress to fix its own mess, the DOJ and FBI and FCC are attempting to > >> misapply a law, and since they cannot spend federal money without Congress > >> voting it for them, they're attempting to dump the cost on us. The DOJ > >> rather than face Congress and public opinion, sought to get a shortcut > >> > > from > > > >> the FCC, who rather than demand it be done right, simply sidestepped and > >> dumped the responsibility to object UPON US, by writing patently wrong > >> > > rules > > > >> that deserve to lose instantly if legally challenged, so THEY didn't have > >> > > to > > > >> argue. And we, ( Yeah, I consider myself guilty ) did not object. Heck, > >> > > we > > > >> DIDNT EVEN KNOW BECAUSE WE WERE NOT LOOKING. > >> > >> This is wrong on so many levels, it reeks. What's worse, is that it CAN > >> > > lose > > > >> in court, it can be challenged and beaten in court, and if that happens, > >> > > then > > > >> literally, the FBI And DOJ are without the legal tools they probably ought > >> > > to > > > >> have. > >> > >> I know, this isn't supposed to be a political list...and I'm not being > >> partisan here. We're businessmen second, after we're citizens. We SHOULD > >> object when stuff is done wrong. Why do you think Congress appropriated > >> money for CALEA in the first place? Because no way could they have gotten > >> away with NOT doing it. > >> > >> It's our ( collectively... including me ) fault for not objecting long > >> > > ago... > > > >> But if we don't, we have done ourselves a disservice. We've done our > >> > > country > > > >> AND OURSELVES a disservice by letting bad law, bad precedent, bad policy > >> > > be > > > >> implemented that will eventually have bad results, probably for all > >> > > involved. > > > >> If we don't object, if we don't stand up and make it be done right, we'll > >> simply find more of the same piled on top of CALEA. And we'll have set > >> > > the > > > >> precedent that it's perfectly fine and we'll cooperate. IT WILL BE TOO > >> > > LATE > > > >> to set things right without a HUGE fight. > >> > >> We need the public on our side. We need to get with the various legal > >> > > groups > > > >> who exist to help stop this kind of abuse. We need to indicate both our > >> approval of the notion that lawful intercept is necessary and that we're > >> certainly willing to do so, but that it MUST be done right. > >> > >> We do this, and we gain stature, with the FCC, with Congress, with the > >> public. It won't be pretty, it won't be fun, and it can certainly turn > >> sour. You just can't lose when you stand up for doing the RIGHT thing. > >> > >> It just requires leadership, clear stands on principle, and the nerve to > >> actually take a stand, rather than just go along with the expedient means. > >> > >> I beg of you... Rethink... > >> > >> GROW A PAIR already. Get a backbone. Do the right thing. > >> > >> > >> -------------------------------------------- > >> Mark Koskenmaki <> Neofast, Inc > >> Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains > >> 541-969-8200 > >> > >> -- > >> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > >> > >> 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 Free Edition. > >> Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007 > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > 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 Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.8/714 - Release Date: 3/8/2007 > > -- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
