[MLB-WIRELESS] A letter I got....

[KevinL]

On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 10:26, KevinL wrote:
> The catch here, to date, is that if the network is an informal agreement
> to communicate, then every bit of communication traversing anyone's node
> is third-party traffic (and thus illegal unless all parties are
> telcos).  If it's not, then we're an organisation with a network (and
> should be a telco).

> 
> The hope, as always, is that someone steps up to the plate and clearly
> says "from this day forward, community groups are allowed to do traffic
> across unlicenced spectrum wireless networks unimpeded".  I doubt
> that'll happen, if for no other reason than that every other wide-area
> network falls under the telecommunications act, which requires (amongst
> other things) interception capabilities - and the gummint isn't about to
> let that requirement slip in the current climate.

Ok, I had the document in question from the ACA pointed out to me, and
I'm officially eating my words ;)  According to the fact sheet, it looks
like melb-wireless'd be a non-commercial network and thus not have to be
a telco.  Of course, it's couched in weasel words to ensure that it's
not a legally binding ruling - but the intent is pretty clear, and it
looks a lot like melb-wireless fits, so, um, I'll shut up now ;)

Oh, that was http://www.aca.gov.au/consumer/fsheets/industry/fsi26.pdf

Good luck finding out what's required wrt interception etc.

KevinL
(sorry to all for increasing noise levels)


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