inline...
>-----Original Message----- >From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2007 10:52 AM >To: 'WISPA General List' >Subject: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces > >Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves: > >1. The FCC is not a baby sitter. >2. Mature operators (and industries as a whole) follow the rules as a >matter of course and expected cost of business. >3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially >benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users should >thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum. >4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to complain >about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum, etc. > >As someone who has argued for WISP compliance for years, I've certainly >been alarmed by what I see as a new level of non-compliance. WISPs are >now commonly assuming the FCC's lack of enforcement is tantamount to its >approval of abuse. The general attitude is now that there is but one >rule: "Don't exceed the power limitations." Everything else has become >fair game. > >Here is a list of things I see that lend anecdotal evidence, if not >actual, that abuse is reaching new levels: > >- many WISPs now believe it is no big deal to use 4.9 GHz to carry some >commercial traffic (Hey, there's excess capacity so what's the big deal, >right?...) >> Many disagree with my view on things, but this is clearly wrong. 4.9 GHz is >> a licensed band for PUBLIC SAFETY ONLY. If know somebody that is using it >> illegally, they are a criminal. If you don't do something about it, you are >> an accessory to the crime and just as guilty. >- use of STA's to commercially use spectrum is openly being advocated >(this is partially responsible for an over 6 month wait in STA filings) >- illegal vendors now operate in the clear with prominent U.S. >distribution (They must be legal if they have a store front and it only >hurts other vendors anyway...) >- "build your own base station" type Google ads are rampant > >Call me an alarmist, but this accelerating trend is disturbing and such >attitudes easily even have the potential to infect safety issues (hey, >OSHA rules must not be that big a deal either). > >We must all appreciate that many violating the rules do so out of >ignorance, but that as an excuse. Groups like WISPA should take firm >stands on subjects like this. You should strongly encourage compliance, >lead the way and educate. You should fight the ignorance that allows for >relativism and "creative interpretation" of the rules. You should also >not cave to the hard luck excuses that "I'm a small guy and can't afford >to follow the rules." (Your response to such should be to point to >funding sources/advice or otherwise tell them that there is a minimum >cost to legally participate in this business and that following FCC >rules is a minimum expectation as responsible stewards of the public's >free spectrum.) And finally, WISPs should not treat knowingly illegal >operators as equals because in fact they are liabilities to you and the >industry at large. > >And yes, of course I have skin in the game but that in no way alters >anything here or devalues my comments. If anything, as a legal vendor >with a long professional reputation of compliance and scores of legal >operator partners, and as an individual who has been beating this drum >for 7 years, it should only increase the weight of my comments. > >Sincerely, > >Patrick Leary >AVP WISP Markets >Alvarion, Inc. >o: 650.314.2628 >c: 760.580.0080 >Vonage: 650.641.1243 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro >Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 9:26 AM >To: WISPA General List >Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces > >All, > >Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look > >bad. >Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules. > >Regards, >Dawn DiPietro > > >Patrick Leary wrote: > >>I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that >>the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of >>WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the >>lines of "Damn it, these things are not guidelines." >> >>>From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the >>usual, "if you just stay within the power no one cares" to now where >>people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access >>to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. >> >>Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that >>will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. >> >>The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and >>discouraging the slippery slope. >> >>Patrick Leary >>AVP WISP Markets >>Alvarion, Inc. >>o: 650.314.2628 >>c: 760.580.0080 >>Vonage: 650.641.1243 >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>Behalf Of Jack Unger >>Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM >>To: WISPA General List >>Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces >> >>Steve, >> >>I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt >white >> >>space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. >> >>jack >> >> >>Steve Stroh wrote: >> >> >>>Jack: >>> >>>Consider... >>> >>>To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a "we'll >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity" manner >>> >>> >>is >> >> >>>the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been >>>steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels >>>70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels >>>52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful >>>terrestrial broadcasting to "share" spectrum with low-power >>>license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they >>>are "bending" towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space >>> >>> >> >> >> >>>may serve to "pollute" the remaining television broadcast spectrum >>>sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another >>>decade or so). >>> >>>Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as >>>advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast >>>spectrum. >>> >>> >>>Thanks, >>> >>>Steve >>> >>> >>> >>>On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Likelihood of unlicensed??? >>>> >>>>My guess is that the established communications carriers and the >>>>broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this >>>>space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most >>>>effectively. >>>> >>>>-- >>>>Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. >>>>Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 >>>>Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" >>>>True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting >>>>Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html >>>>Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>>--- >>> >>>Steve Stroh >>>425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > >-- >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > >************************************************************************ >************ >This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & >computer viruses(190). >************************************************************************ >************ > > > > > > > >************************************************************************ >************ >This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & >computer viruses(42). >************************************************************************ >************ > > > > > > > > >************************************************************************************ >This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer >viruses. >************************************************************************************ > > > >-- >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/
