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

[sanbar]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 14:02:18 +1030 (CST)
From: Jamie Lovick <jalovick at doof.org>
To: aussie-isp at aussie.net
Subject: Re: [Oz-ISP] Wireless.....  ABC 7:30 report tonight.

On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Saliya Wimalaratne wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Jamie Lovick wrote:
> 
> > As quoted from someone I know that has been looking into the rules:
> > 
> > Actually a few things that are legal regardless, if it's under 500m or 5km
> > using relay, and if all network units belong to the same person, or
> 
> foo.
> 
> http://www.aca.gov.au/licence/index.htm
> 
> "Telecommunications licences must be held by a carrier. A carrier is
> an owner of network units used to supply carriage services to the
> public. In summary, network units are line links exceeding 500 metres,
> or designated radiocommunications links, such as mobile service base
> stations, or satellite based facilities."

Ok, thanks.

> the distance rule applies to 'line links' not 'radiocommunications
> links' from my reading of the above. 'the public' is where you might
> be able to scrape through on a technicality (though this has been
> refuted by the ACA when we asked about it, you're welcome to try :)

Yes, I have been curious about the definition of "public", and if it would
apply to "members" of an assocation (which logically are members of the
"public" outside of the association).

> > The ACA does state that a carrier licence is not required for providing
> > carrier services on a non-commercial basis.
> 
> >From the same URL:
> 
> "Under the Telecommunications Act 1997, the owner(s) of network units
> that are used, or proposed to be used, to supply carriage services to
> the public must hold a carrier licence, unless there is a nominated
> carrier declaration in force in relation to the network unit(s)."
> 
> One of these statements is incorrect, isn't it...

Aparently, on the carrier application (bad scan of it can be viewed here -
http://www.sydneywireless.com/papers/aca-carrier-qnaire.jpg) in Attachment
B, Question 3, which requires a Yes/No response, it asks:

"Is/are the network units used for the sole purpose of supplying carriage
services on a non-commercial basis?"
..
"If you answered no to this question, please read below. If you answered
yes to this question, no further action is required"

Now, I would love to know what the definition of "non-commercial" is
according to them. I am also curious, assuming that this statemetn allows
exemption, of how that effects the "carriage service provider" rules, and
the "content service provider" rules, if at all.

> > There are people out there that are taking the time to research, and
> > establish the realities of the law when it comes to wireless networks.
> 
> Rest assured; if it's legal to deploy wireless networks *without* a
> carrier licence someone will find a way; and that way will be the way
> for the rest of us to do so also :)

Personally I'd like to see alot more people working through the government
regulation, and perhaps with the government to fix what regulation is/may
be broken.

Regards

Jamie

--
Jamie Lovick    <->  IT Consultant    <-> +614 1479 1681
Hobby   : Doof.org                     -> jalovick at doof.org
Director: Drastic Solutions Pty Ltd    -> jalovick at drasticsolutions.com.au


----
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