[MLB-WIRELESS] Press Release
Clae
clae at tpg.com.au
Sun May 19 07:16:04 EST 2002
Dear Steven,
I've had a bit more of a think about your press release, and there
are a few points that concern me that I'd like to raise with you.
Firstly, although you pledged at your election to consult with the
membership, you wrote and released this without speaking AFAIK to
anyone else. At an absolute minimum, this should have been run past
WGPublicRelations, of which I am a member, which it was not.
The other concerns I have are detailed in my original reply to you
below, to which I have added a few points. I've also added your
reply about your conversation with someone at the ACA.
A telephone conversation with a public servant at the ACA is not
worth anything. Until we have a departmental ruling IN WRITING, or a
court case, as far as I am concerned our status is grey. If your
conversation with the ACA indicated otherwise, it would have been
prudent of you to let the rest of us, at least the WG, know. That
would have been exiting news to hear. But as things stand, we are
getting contradictory advice, we haven't spoken to lawyer one, and I
don't think it is wise to put melbwireless's name behind these kinds
of statements. ( See *** below)
I realise you don't actually _say_ that we are a wireless ISP. But
you definitely imply it, treading an incredibly fine, and
provocative, line in your wording.
But further, what we can get away with legally is one thing. What
you have effectively done is to throw down the gauntlet to the entire
internet industry in this country, and said that "we will compete
with you, provide services you cannot provide to your customers,
poach your existing and new customers, all without paying to enter
your domain". That is in effect what your press release says.
As stated at the previous meeting, Megalink for one sees us as a
direct threat to their business plan. And they are "merely" a
multi-million dollar operation.
This is a multi-*billion* dollar industry. They are not going to sit
still for this kind of thing. Look at the way Kerry Packer/PBL (a
player through NineMSN) have twisted the government's arm over the
last thirty years over everything from Aussat in the 70s, to the
introduction of digital television. They have consistently been able
to bring about an abortion of a regulatory regime which protects the
existing behemoths against newcomers, who are also
multi-million/billion dollar forces. Do you honestly think they
would hesitate for a nanosecond to squish some little group of hacker
weenies who meet in a scout hall once a month?
If we piss these people off enough, then one way or another they are
going to tear our arses off. They would be negligent in their duty
to their shareholders if they didn't.
Quite apart from what they could achieve legislatively - and this is
I might add extraordinarily bad timing with the current inquiry - is
what they could achieve in nuisance lawsuits, and other tactics.
Telstra, Optus et al can afford to throw lawyers at you until the
heat death of the universe. And whether their cases have any merit
or not, you will still be required to defend yourself ($) or forfeit
(more $). Are you really willing to stand up against that kind of
onslaught?
And right now, because we have not incorporated yet, melbwireless is
effectively YOU. And possibly myself and Tyson as office bearers.
Thanks. One of the things incorporation protects us against is legal
and financial liability of directors.
It doesn't have to be Telstra lawyer blitzkrieg either. It could be
Megalink. It could be the ISP industry group. Or new and adverse
legislation coming out of the inquiry. Or it could be an official
departmental ruling that doesn't go our way. One signature, from
someone more senior than whoever it was you spoke to. A few long
lunches and a word in someone's ear.
When you were elected president, you agreed to the duties of that
office, which we all voted on. That was a legal and moral contract
between yourself and everyone else. This action contravenes the
letter of that agreement, let alone the spirit. And it would be a
failure of my duties as secretary, responsible for the regulatory
compliance of the association, not to raise this with you.
Clae David Gason
Secretary,
Wireless.org.au
----------------
*** Licensing Issues
----------------
Clae wrote:
>Steven Haigh wrote:
>
>>in fact any member of the public
>
>not according to the legislation
http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~mesh/doc/2001-10-25-aca-answer.txt
have a good look at the last part of the questionnaire at the bottom
of http://www.wireless.org.au/wiki/?TheEvolvingFAQ .
---
Carriage licensing questionnaire
/snip/
Question 2: Is/are the network unit(s) used to provide carriage
services to the public?
Question 3: Is/are the network unit(s) solely used for the purpose
of providing carriage services on a non-commercial basis?
Further action
If you reached Question 3 and answered NO to that question THEN YOU
NEED TO APPLY FOR A CARRIER LICENSE (my emphasis)
---
so that means: Free public access = carrier licence. End of story
until we are told otherwise IN WRITING.
--------------------------------
From: "Steven Haigh" <netwiz at optushome.com.au>
To: "Media Releases" <glenvale at glenv.com.au>
Subject: Melbourne Wireless Press Release - For Immediate Release!
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 19:39:12 +1000
Organization: Melbourne Wireless
MELBOURNE WIRELESS
Free community based network for the public
President
Steven Haigh
89 Casey Drive
Lalor Vic 3075
Australia
Email: president at wireless.org.au
Phone: 0421 288 488
MEDIA RELEASE
For Immediate Release!
17 May 2002
Melbourne Wireless to Fight Increasing Limits to Broadband Access
The main broadband carriers in Australia are tightening their belts again.
This means more limits, more speed restrictions and more limited access.
This will all change if Melbourne Wireless, a non-profit community based
organization achieves its aims.
Melbourne Wireless has been building its member base for the past 12 months,
and currently consists of over 400 registered nodes throughout Victoria. It
aims to offer high-speed broadband using off the shelf 802.11 WiFi network
cards, which operate in the 2.4Ghz ISM band and do not require a licence to
operate.
"If you compare Australia's broadband and Internet charges with other parts
of the world, Australia looks like a joke", said Steven Haigh, President of
Melbourne Wireless. "It seems as if the major players are trying to decrease
the popularity of broadband, pushing our IT structure back to the Stone Age"
.
Distances of up to 15km have been achieved with full 11Mbps throughput and
research conducted by Melbourne Wireless shows that links over 100km at
11Mbps may well be possible.
Melbourne Wireless aims to achieve coverage of most metropolitan areas in
the coming years, and will always be dedicated to very low cost broadband
access. There will be no monthly fees associated with connecting to the
network - in fact any member of the public will be able to connect at any
time with no restrictions in speed or data usage.
The 802.11 equipment in use, can facilitate for full motion video
conferencing, high quality streaming media, and can be used for any other
network or internet based application including web pages and email.
For further information and comment, contact:
Steven Haigh
President
Melbourne Wireless
Ph: 0421 288 488
Email: president at wireless.org.au
Web: http://www.wireless.org.au
Tyson Clugg
Treasurer
Melbourne Wireless
Ph: 0408 897 662
Email: treasurer at wireless.org.au
Web: http://www.wireless.org.au
Signed,
Steven Haigh
President - Melbourne Wireless
www.wireless.org.au
--------------------------------
>Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 04:13:03 +1000
>To: "Steven Haigh" <netwiz at optushome.com.au>
>From: Clae <clae at tpg.com.au>
>Subject: Re: Melbourne Wireless Press Release - For Immediate Release!
>Cc:
>Bcc:
>X-Attachments:
>
>Dear Steve,
>
>I hope you sent this out to us for perusal and comment before you
>blitzed the media with it, because there are a number of issues I
>have with what you've written. I'll try to cover them point by
>point below.
>
>>Melbourne Wireless to Fight Increasing Limits to Broadband Access
>
>>
>>The main broadband carriers in Australia are tightening their belts again.
>>This means more limits, more speed restrictions and more limited access.
>>This will all change
Do you really think they *want* it to change?
>>if Melbourne Wireless, a non-profit community based
>>organization achieves its aims.
>
>I think it is a bad idea at this stage, inquiry and all, to put us
>up as an alternative to the existing industry players.
>we can not provide internet access to all and sundry, and it is not
>entirely clear if we can even provide it to our members.
>(personally I think we can from my reading of the reply to
>brismesh). If the industry sees us as a freebie BB _internet_
>player, or thinking/promoting ourselves as such, they are going to
>mention us in their submissions and the media and otherwise
>generally make life hard for us. we don't want to *look* like we
>are trying to break the existing law.
>
>i really think we need to position ourselves as a hobbyist group for
>the moment, as we are using an unlicensed band (cf CB) and probably
>need to lobby just to stand still in our legal position
>
>>Melbourne Wireless has been building its member base for the past 12 months,
>>and currently consists of over 400 registered nodes throughout Victoria. It
>>aims to offer high-speed broadband
>
>i know you're not *saying* internet here, but you're not *not*
>saying it either
>
>>using off the shelf 802.11 WiFi network
>>cards, which operate in the 2.4Ghz ISM band and do not require a licence to
>>operate.
>>
>>"If you compare Australia's broadband and Internet charges with other parts
>>of the world, Australia looks like a joke", said Steven Haigh, President of
>>Melbourne Wireless.
>
>see above
>
>>Melbourne Wireless aims to achieve coverage of most metropolitan areas in
>>the coming years, and will always be dedicated to very low cost broadband
>>access. There will be no monthly fees associated with connecting to the
>>network -
>
>that policy is still under debate isn't it?
>
>>in fact any member of the public
>
>not according to the legislation
http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~mesh/doc/2001-10-25-aca-answer.txt
have a good look at the last part of the questionnaire at the bottom
of http://www.wireless.org.au/wiki/?TheEvolvingFAQ .
---
Question 2: Is/are the network unit(s) used to provide carriage
services to the public?
Question 3: Is/are the network unit(s) solely used for the purpose
of providing carriage services on a non-commercial basis?
Further action
If you reached Question 3 and answered NO to that question THEN YOU
NEED TO APPLY FOR A CARRIER LICENSE (my emphasis)
---
so that means: Free public access = carrier licence. End of story
until we are told otherwise IN WRITING.
>
>>will be able to connect at any
>>time with no restrictions in speed or data usage.
>
>restriction exists for internet traffic
>
>no flameage intended, just trying to tread lightly
>
>clae.
------------------------------------
From: "Steven Haigh" <netwiz at optushome.com.au>
To: "Clae" <clae at tpg.com.au>
Subject: Re: Melbourne Wireless Press Release - For Immediate Release!
Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 18:37:06 +1000
Organization: Melbourne Wireless
see below....
Signed,
Steven Haigh
President - Melbourne Wireless
www.wireless.org.au
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clae" <clae at tpg.com.au>
To: "Steven Haigh" <netwiz at optushome.com.au>
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: Melbourne Wireless Press Release - For Immediate Release!
> >I've spent about 2 1/2 hours on the phone with the telecommunications
> >licensing section of the ACA yesterday...
>
> great!
>
> >from my discussions with them, we
> >are ok to do what we want to do without a carriers license....
>
> double great!
>
> thanks for the effort and the extra info. it seemed that way from
> the brismesh opinion, but the more people we can get to repeat it the
> better.
>
> did you discuss the "public" vs "members" access issue?
More information about the Melbwireless
mailing list