----- Original Message ----- From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 11:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] It's been a long road
> Mark Koskenmaki wrote: > > > When they ask you for your customer's address and IP numbers, what will > > you do? > > I see you're NOT wearing the tinfoil hat. Y'know, it works better than you > might think. :D > > > Our freedom to do business unimpeded. > > You mean you live somewhere without specific chunks of spectrum that you > can and cannot use? Without EIRP limits? I knew Oregon was a strange place > with relatively relaxed laws, but still... No, I don't have to apply to anyone to use it, I can't be told where, when, how, and to whom it can be used. I have an open framework that applies to every person and entity and we can all use or not use it, without anyone having the power to say "No you cannot". > > The fact of the matter is that WISPs are already regulated in about a > jillion ways. So are most businesses, in and out of the wonderful world of > telecom. This simply Is. Without the regulatory intervention you seem to > fear, I wouldn't have a job, because there would be no such thing as > "unlicensed spectrum." > > > Do they need our names, addresses, zip codes, and how many individuals we > > have in each, reported 2X a year? Heck no. > > Fun fact: The form doesn't ask how many customers you have in any given > ZIP code. If anyone, anywhere, reports having even one customer in a given > ZIP code, as far as the FCC is concerned, everyone in that ZIP has access > to broadband. Honestly, I think this is an oversight. (One that'd be a > pain in the ass, because it means I'd need more than a half-hour to > complete the form, but the goal of FCC477 is to get an accurate picture of > broadband coverage, and in that respect it fails miserably.) > > Anyway. > > Your argument that the FCC has no legal right to request this information > probably doesn't hold up. IANAL, but the form and its instructions do > provide a lot of impressive-looking USC references. I've skimmed most of > 'em and the law seems to be relatively clear on the point. 47 USC > generally gives a lot of authority to the FCC on, well, just about > everything related to telecommunications, so even your stated intent to > call your Internet service something other than "Internet" probably > wouldn't work too well. So, I want to see the headlines... "Internet Service Provider jailed for connecting customers". That'll get the pundits rolling. So, what, precisely, is holy about 200 kb/sec? That people above that limit fall under the FCC's jurisdiction, and those under do not? Nothing, of course. they just haven't gotten to it yet. Don't worry, theyr'e going to be asking. > > It certainly could be argued that the data on this form could be used for > Evil, but it also could be used for Good. So kick back, enjoy the > Kool-Aid, and consider waiting until you have something vaguely resembling > evidence of ill intent. When that happens, we've long ago lost our battle for survival. 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! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > dave > -- > 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/
