<disclaimer>IANAL</disclaimer>
The problem is, that if they win the suite, I think it would be for all
the information. Regardless of what their intent it, once that case is
made, the information is there for anyone.
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
Forbes Mercy wrote:
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
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
