[MLB-WIRELESS] Re: [Oz-ISP] Wireless..... ABC 7:30 report tonight. (fwd)

[sanbar]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:27:28 +1100 (EST)
From: Craig Ian Dewick <craig at lios.apana.org.au>
Cc: AUSSIE ISP <aussie-isp at aussie.net>
Subject: Re: [Oz-ISP] Wireless.....  ABC 7:30 report tonight.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Mark Newton wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 10:52:08PM +1100, Craig Ian Dewick wrote:
>
>  > Lets be sensible though. If a private person (or even say one or more of
>  > the APANA regions) sets up a 2.4 GHz wireless network, why the heck is a
>  > carrier license needed to route Internet traffic to/from the wireless
>  > network if it's not for commercial purposes?
>  > I can well understand the carrier license requirement if the wireless
>  > network is used in a commercial situation to directly generate profit for
>  > whoever's operating it and/or using it, but otherwise no way.
>
> <boggle>  Craig, nobody except APANA makes any distinction about
> whether a network is used for commercial purposes or not.  Why do
> you expect the rest of the country to look at a network element
> and see it from your (unique) point of view?

I don't. But you will find almost every consumer and perhaps most online
businesses do want to make the distinction because it's *sensible* to do
so, and if people cannot do things for their own education how is anyone
going to gain the benefit of gaining new skills, knowledge, etc.?

Apart from the one single issue about routing Internet traffic to/from a
wireless network that's otherwise operating in the approved low-power 2.4
GHz band which requires no SMA equipment licensing, there is nothing
currently illegal about it.

Anyone can set up a wireless network, connect it to their computer or
router which dials XYZ ISP Pty Ltd for net connectivity, and set up
routing so data can flow to/from the wireless network via the base
computer and modem, or router, or whatever. This is not illegal.

This then makes the carrier license requirement artificial and designed to
protect the commercial business interests of the government's 'sponsored'
carrier (ie. Tel$tra).

APANA, or any other non-profit organisation doing things with the Internet
and networking in general, can therefore set up a wireless network in any
way it likes providing it uses license-free low-power 2.4 GHz
radio equipment and this is not illegal at all. Commercial providers can
also do this, once again without any legal issues.

The problem is this - a commercial ISP obviously would be doing wireless
networking to enhance it's commercial operation, so a carrier license is a
sensible thing to have. But a non-commercial organisation should not have
to purchase a carrier license. Besides, where does a non-profit
organisation raise the $10K+ license fee from? 8-)

I am prepared to be placed in prison or taken to court if I set up a
wireless network and the ACA/ABA/SMA/whoever tries to tell me I have
broken the law because I didn't spend $10k of money I don't have to buy a
piece of paper saying I am now licensed *commercial* information carrier.
8-) Come on - it's so stupid and if Telstra had no government ownership
this situation would be totally different as wireless networks are the one
single biggest threat to Telstra's BigPond 'swamp effect' that has come up
to date.

Note that this is irrespective of my association with APANA. I don't have
to be part of any formal organisational structure (non-profit or
otherwise) to set up a wireless network and invite people to become part
of a loosely grouped wireless networking collective. But if me and all the
other people are doing it purely to experiment with the idea and get
around having to use fixed phone lines, etc. with all funds going into
paying for the gear and running it, what difference does it make whether
or not we had the network hooked up to the 'Internet' by some means if
there's no commercial use being made of the wireless network?

Does the government automatically assume that if I have a machine hosting
a personal website, and this machine connects to the internet through a
wireless network, that this is considered to be 'commercial carrier
operation' and therefore I should have to buy a commercial carrier license
just to make my website available to everyone in the world via a
radio-based local network?

For non-commercial use getting a carrier license is stupid, unaffordable,
and plain ignorant of common people's rights to do things for no
commercial gain on the Internet. If there really was a well-founded legal
reason to enforce carrier licenses for non-commercial wireless networks,
the Spectrum Management Authority would never have approved the use of
low-power 2.4 GHz radio equipment *without* an RF spectrum license...

Regards,

Craig.

-- 
  Craig Ian Dewick (craig at lios.apana.org.au). http://lios.apana.org.au/~craig
  APANA Sydney Regional Co-ordinator. Operator of Jedi (an APANA Sydney POP).
 Always striving for a secure long-term future in an insecure short-term world
   Have you exported a crypto system today? Do your bit to undermine the NSA.

----
email "unsubscribe aussie-isp" to majordomo at aussie.net to be removed.


--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at wireless.org.au with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://www.wireless.org.au/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless