[WG-PR] Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] Press Release

[dwayne]

Steven Haigh wrote:
> 
> These possiblity of press releases has been spoken about and generally
> approved at a number of WGStructure meetings. 

1: define "generally"
2: right, I'm going to all of them from now on, no matter how ill I am.
3: if the working group approved such a press release, they're as silly
as you are for writing it.
4: that's not their mandate, if anyone's it'd be WG-PR and I'm not sure
we have formalised procedures for sending PR out yet.


> We generally agreed that we
> would try and have a press release ready for release when a major ISP
> drastically changed their policies or had price increases. The timing of
> this was a little rushed, but still fits in with what we want to do - and
> raising awareness about Melbourne Wireless and it's aims.

Well, look, we'll see what happens but from where I sit you just drew a
big line in the sand in front of the telcos and said "I dare ya!"

We'll just leave it as read that some of them are the biggest
corporations and individuals in Australia.
 
> I spoke to Garry Fraser (not sure about the last name spelling) at the
> ACA... His department deals exclusivly with the telecommunications law,
> licensing and specifically 802.11. As a respresentative of the ACA and being
> in the department that enforces and regulates licensing, he is in a position
> to speak for the ACA when it comes to these matters. After about 1 1/2 hours
> talking with Garry, I fully believe that Melbourne Wireless is allowed to
> operate as long as no access or membership fees are charges... On a side
> note, I'm not sure how this would rest with the ACA folks, as they are
> charging a membership fee, which is not covered - therefore they may not be
> exempt from a carriers license...


Can you get this in writing, please?

Until I see it in writing it amounts to exactly zero to me.
This is all legal stuff and I absolutely will not do something
potentially illegal on a verbal assurance.
So, can you call him back and ask him to post (not fax or email) a
summary of your conversation to you, or us?

Not that I don't believe you, i'd be pretty boggled if you were making
this up, but it's just hearsay until it's in writing on paper with a
letterhead above it and a signature under it.




Feel free, anyone else, to point out if I'm overreacting here.

 

> > 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.
> 
> Correct. I don't want to rule out the fact that we may connect to the
> Internet as some time in the near future. We can offer the same services at
> the moment, and could in fact hook up to the Internet, as long as that
> access is free. Something that we have problems finding people to donate :)

Steve, what exactly was your purpose in this press release?

Please be specific.


I was just thinking "fair enough" to the above comment, but, really, why
send it out? Do we need more members? Will it help the public to know
about us before we can provide them with anything?  Pressure the telcos
into reconsidering their policies? 

What were you thinking when you thought "I might write a press release"?

Obviously, not being at the working group meeting, I have no clue as to
why this was sent out, so I'd like to know.

> > 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.
> 
> Not exactly. The press release focuses on the fact that there is an
> alternative to paying for more restricted and more expensive Internet
> access. 

How is this not throwing down the gauntlet?

> We can offer the same services. 

How is this not throwing down the gauntlet?

> We just don't have global
> connections and as far as I'm concerned, still in the testing stages.

How is this not throwing down the gauntlet before you have put on your
armour?
 
> This was discussed at the last WGStructure meeting. 

[kicks self. really hard]

> We all agreed that it
> would not be worth their time 




Okay, for the record, you guys do not have the right to take such
decisions on our behalf.
Unless we agreed to it at that monthly meeting, but I don't recall this
being the case.



> - just think of all the bad media etc that
> their companies would get when trying to smudge out a small community
> group... 

Gee, let's see, BHP sued Greenpeace over something they knew they were
in the wrong over, and so did Greenpeace.  Greenpeace won, BHP appealed.
This went on and on, BHP knowing they had the money behind them.

Eventually Greenpeace could not afford the next appeal, at which point
*they had no choice* but to settle them out of court. This cost
Greenpeace their legal budget for the year, eventually most of their
operating budget, and the old-guard hippies were forced out of
Greenpeace and the new, fiscally-conscious suits took over, and we now
have Greenpeace selling raffle for houses in Queensland to raise funding
(which is when i dropped my membership).

Nope, they'd not go after us, it'd be bad for their PR.


Steve:  consider Telstra. Consider how they deal with their customers. 

I'm sure they are worried about their PR. Totally.


> It simply wouldn't be worth their time. 

But if it is worth their money it will be worth their time, and you are
saying we will poach your customers.

> We don't have any assets
> for them to try and take, except for about $130 in the groups funds - which
> is nowhere near what it would cost them - that's if a court would even take
> their case.

Okay, it's harshness time:

Steve, from where I sit, Melbourne Wireless does not legally exist and
they will go after YOUR assets. Do you own your own house?

I mean, we're a mailing list and some meetings.  That press release had
*your* name on it.

> Bottom line, Yes. If Optus or Telstra or whoever decided to sue us (if they
> deemed it needed), then I would "fight to the death" to defend Melbourne
> Wireless.

Excellent. I won't. 
I'll piss off and start a new group which isn't under attack. Enjoy your
fight.

We'll sing songs about your heroic last stand at pub meets sometimes or
something.

> From what we've voted on at the last WGStructure meeting, we may be
> incorporated by 21st June.


[notices legs have broken into a kicking frenzy. Frantically attempts to
stop kicking self to death]
 
You are of course going to run this by the WG mailing list, or this one,
or something, right?

> This would also contravene the authority of Garry to talk on behalf of the
> ACA - if they can't get their own stories right, then what use are they to
> the general public? Discussions held with the ACA are bonding, as the
> representative is employed by the ACA, and it is therefore their duty to
> correctly advise the public.



writing. 
when we have this in writing we'll all be happier and we have something
to cover us (especially you) with.

> The legislation in the Telecommunications Act 1997 does give an exemption
> for non-commercial activities when it comes to carrier licenses... What is
> not defined, is the term "non-commercial". The fact stands that if we do not
> charge any money, then we cannot possibly be a commercial entity. This would
> exclude us from needing a carrier license. When I talked to Garry regarding
> a cost-recovery method of supplying Internet connectivity, this is where
> there was some gray areas. Free access cannot be taken as a commercial
> activity, and therefore allows us to operate without a carriers license.

This was explained to you in the call or you have gleaned it from the
Act? If from the call, rah rah writing rah rah.
 
> Media release pruned - it's at http://www.wireles.org.au/media/press anyhow


http://www.wireless.org.au/media/press   <--- fixed.

Dwayne

hey by the way Steve, I think you're a nice guy, so don't get all pissy
about this, I just think you tend to leap ahead -way- too much.

To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe wgpublicrelations" in the body of the message