[MLB-WIRELESS] Membership fees etc. - was Fw: Public Wireless Networks Fight Back

[Geoff Hammond]

I am similarly unlawyer-ish, but this seems counter-intuitive. I've
misplaced my copy of the Act (from when I went though this with another
group), but even though an Association can write its own rules of
incorporation, it seems meaningless (bureaucratically, if not naturally) to
have an association without members.

Guess I've got some homework now... 8-)

gah

----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Park" <bpark at theage.fairfax.com.au>
To: "Geoff Hammond" <ghammond at bigpond.net.au>; "'Melbwireless (E-mail)"
<melbwireless at www.wireless.org.au>
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 5:39 PM
Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] Membership fees etc. - was Fw: Public Wireless
Networks Fight Back


> I am not  a lawyer, but how then does Linux Users of Victoria exist in the
> form it does? I am a member of the administrative majordomo, which means I
> am a member of the LUV association. I have not paid them anything.
> From the website:
>
> " RULES FOR LINUX USERS OF VICTORIA, INC.
>
> 1. Name
>
> The incorporated association is Linux Users of Victoria, Inc. (in these
> Rules called "the Association")."
>
> and
>
> "1.3. How do I join LUV?
>
> There is no official membership of LUV, and there is no joining fee.
>
> Membership of the luv-announce mailing list indicates that you are a
member
> of LUV. At last count, there were over 1000 members of the luv-announce
> mailing list."
>
> - Barry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Hammond <ghammond at bigpond.net.au>
> To: 'Melbwireless (E-mail) <melbwireless at www.wireless.org.au>
> Date: Friday, April 19, 2002 5:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] Membership fees etc. - was Fw: Public Wireless
> Networks Fight Back
>
>
> In the event that we incorporate, the legislative regulations dictate that
> members must pay a membership fee. From memory, this can be as low as
legal
> tender dictates, but in my (limited) experience is usually a couple of
> dollars.
>
> Consider the model of public radio groups such as 3PBS-FM. A Co-operative
> has been set up which comprises a bunch of shareholders (from memory, $2 a
> share with a minimum limit). They look to 'subscribers', 'patrons' and
> 'sponsors' to help pay operating expenses, but also look to people's sense
> of fair play to cough up - they do not preclude anyone from listening to
the
> broadcast. Melbourne Wireless could do the same thing (in time) - using
> bandwidth management or some other method, 'owners' or 'subscribers' could
> get a service which is in excess of Joe Public...
>
> This is free advice - worth nearly as much as it cost you.
> gah
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Paul van den Bergen
>   To: 'Melbwireless (E-mail)
>   Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 11:35 AM
>   Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] Membership fees etc. - was Fw: Public
Wireless
> Networks Fight Back
>
>
>   Hi all,
>   FWIW, I can actually see the arguement of the sydney group.  when is
free
> truely free? at what point does a volunteer group grow too big to be run
on
> a voluntee only basis?
>
>   OK, so free and not-for-profit are not the same thing.
>
>   we have just set up (at least potentially) as a NFP org, right?
>   so why are we doing that?
>   are we going to require all people who access melb wireless to abide by
> usage rules?
>   enforcement?
>   contract?
>   this implies that non-members (what ever that means) are excluded.
>   even if melbwireless owns none of the infrastructure (which I doubt will
> be totally true - eg. the web server...)
>   the club still has admin and accounting costs.... and so on
>   at what point do we cross over form being private owners of hardware and
> into the area of being a public access network.
>
>   ofcourse, like one notion before me, I have no answers to these
> questions....
>
>
>   mind you, $100 might seem a little steep and I could understand that as
a
> criticism, unless there is some hardware or similar issues we cannot see
> from here.
>
>
>   On 04/19/02 09:52 AM, lkhoo at csc.com.au wrote:
>
> Drew wrote:fee "to ensure stability in the network and to cover the cost
> ofmaintenanceand upgrading.""I probably wont be the last person to say
> "wtf?". Are they providingcustomers with access SLA's? (service level
> agreements)Then again, Telstra charge big bucks for clients to access
their
> cable andadsl networks and don't have SLA's (to end users).If they are
> charging money for access to their network  then isn't this goagainst the
> whole"non-profit" 2.4ghz usage agreement?LucasTo unsubscribe: send mail to
> majordomo at wireless.org.auwith "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of
the
> message
>
>
> --
> Dr Paul van den Bergen
> SERC
> goofey:bulwynkl
> paul at serc.rmit.edu.au
> +613 9925 1624 (RMIT)
> +613 9905 4654 (Monash-less often)
>
>
>
>
>
>
****************************************************************************
*****
> This email and any files transmitted with it may be legally privileged
> and confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email,
> you must not disclose or use the information contained in it.  If you
> have received this email in error, please notify us by return email and
> permanently delete the document.
>
****************************************************************************
*****


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