Dear Friends of Wireless Messaging,

Greetings from Southern Illinois where it is still Fall — Winter has not arrived here — as it has in many other parts of the country. I hope everyone is staying warm and dry.

I have finished reading the Steve Jobs biography and once again would like to recommend it as "required reading" for anyone who is interested in technology and building a business. This book will give you a thousand good ideas and a thousand bad ones too.

I have closely followed the life and career of Steve Jobs for many years and I thought I knew a lot about him, until now. This book — skillfully written — reveals him as a creative genius and at the same time, a flawed person with some deep-rooted mental issues.

It will teach you things that you can't learn in business school. Like why "intuitive thinking" works sometimes when "logical thinking" doesn't.

One thing that I particularly liked, was Jobs' disdain for Market Studies and Focus Groups . When Jobs was asked what his customers wanted, he said that his customers didn't know what they wanted until Apple had shown them something so new and so cool that they had to have it. He built the world's most valuable company by making products that were designed to be insanely great with little regard to their cost.

If people want something bad enough they will find a way to pay for it.

As a salesman, I was told many times by engineers, "give us your customer's specifications and we will build the product for them." Then the Marketing people would want to know how many I was going to sell before they would approve the new product.

Steve Jobs didn't think that way. Thus his famous slogan, " Think Different ."

My highest recommendation!

Steve Jobs bio: 379,000 U.S. sales and counting

By Darrell Etherington
Nov. 2, 2011, 8:56am PT

Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs biography has clearly been a success, topping best-seller lists ahead of its Oct. 24 release, but new numbers from Nielsen BookScan (via The BookSeller) put a finer point on just how well it’s doing. The 656-page book has sold around 379,000 copies in its first week of public availability, according to the BookScan data.

That’s better than the next best-selling book, The Litigators by John Grisham. Three times better, in fact. And it already makes the biography the 18th best-selling book of the year. Despite all that success, however, it isn’t a record-breaker, but it is the fastest-selling book since Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Ugly Truth and Decision Points, George W. Bush’s memoir; both sold over 430,000 copies last year during the week ending Nov. 13. Nielsen BookScan uses point-of-sale data from about 12,000 retail locations across the U.S. for print book data, as well as online retailers, and also charts e-book data from “all major e-book retailers.”

I’d hazard a guess that the biography still has higher heights to climb. It is one of the fastest selling U.K. non-fiction books on record as of earlier Wednesday, for instance, with 37,244 copies sold in week one, which is very high for a biography that isn’t self-authored and being actively promoted by the writer/subject themselves. Isaacson’s book is sure to be under a Christmas tree or two this coming holiday, so we’ll see how the upcoming shopping frenzy affects its sales.

There is a very interesting report today on the movement to "Stop Smart Meters" in the "Granola State." (California) I don't understand where the motivation comes from for all these "movements." Could be the smog affecting people's brains, I guess. This one seems ridiculous to me. People generally fear what they don't understand. Thanks to Barry Kanne for sharing this article.

Now on to more news and views.

Wireless Messaging News
Emergency Radio Communications Wireless Messaging Critical Messaging Telemetry Paging VoIP Wi-Fi WiMAX Location-Based Services	WIRELESS MESSAGING

This newsletter is brought to you by the generous support of our advertisers and the courtesy of iland Internet Solutions Corporation . For more information about the web-hosting services available from iland Internet Solutions Corporation , please click on their logo to the left.

There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. Readers are a very select group of wireless industry professionals, and include the senior managers of many of the world's major Paging and Wireless Messaging companies. There is an even mix of operations managers, marketing people, and engineers — so I try to include items of interest to all three groups. It's all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology. I regularly get readers' comments, so this newsletter has become a community forum for the Paging, and Wireless Messaging communities. You are welcome to contribute your ideas and opinions. Unless otherwise requested, all correspondence addressed to me is subject to publication in the newsletter and on my web site. I am very careful to protect the anonymity of those who request it.

Editorial Opinion pieces present only the opinions of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Critical Messaging Association, or its sponsors.

Brad Dye, Ron Mercer, Allan Angus, and Vic Jackson are friends and colleagues who work both together and independently, on wireline and wireless communications projects. Click here for a summary of their qualifications and experience. They collaborate on consulting assignments, and share the work according to their individual expertise and their schedules.

If you would like to have information about advertising in this newsletter, please click here . Your support is needed .

Please click here for a list of used paging infrastructure and test equipment for sale from Ray Primack in Vancouver. Pagers, a big UPS, and other equipment as well. Check it out!

Welcome to Critical Messaging Association

The Critical Messaging Association is the national association dedicated to representing and advancing the critical messaging industry. In a crisis situation, having a reliable and efficient communications system for emergency responders and hospital personnel is often a matter of life and death. Critical messaging networks utilize a proven point to multi-point protocol via simulcast technology to reinforce reliability. In addition, greater broadcast power, longer battery life, and simplicity are imperative for critical communications. Period.

Join the Critical Messaging Association and receive these excellent benefits:

A positive voice working to promote the health of the critical messaging industry. Monitoring and timely notification of FCC decisions and actions that affect the critical messaging industry. Member list serve to facilitate technical and business discussions and informal assistance between members. Training and education opportunities for member owners and employees to help run your business more profitably. Significantly reduced registration fees for the upcoming conference, March 27–29 at the Hyatt Regency Austin Hotel in Austin, Texas. Regular updates on opportunities and threats to help your business adapt and grow. Technical committees to assist in the development of common standards and business practices to help improve and maintain the service quality of the entire industry.

Not on the list below? Click here: http://criticalmessagingassociation.org/ssl/CMA/Members/NewMember.asp

Company Members:

• A-1 Wireless
• A.V. Lauttamus Comm, Inc.
• American Messaging
• Anser-Quik Enterprises, Inc.
• Critical Alert Systems d/b/a Northeast, UCOM & Teletouch Paging
• Carolina Mobile Communications, Ltd.
• Commercial Telephone Exchange, Inc.
• Communication Specialists Company, LLC
• Comserv Services, LLC
• Contact Communications
• e*Message W.I.S. Deutschland GmbH
• Indiana Paging Network, Inc.
• Kanoy Communications
• Kodiak Radio Inc.
• Mid-Atlantic ProTel, Inc.
• Midwest Paging
• Mobile Communication Service, Inc.
• Mobile Phone of Texas, Inc.
• Mobile Radio Communications, Inc. d/b/a Mobilfone
• Mount View Communications, Inc.
• MPW Paging
• MTCO Communications
• Page 1 of WV
• Page One of Wyoming, Inc.
• Page Plus, Inc.
• ProPage, Inc.
• Radio Communications of Virginia, Inc.
• Redi-Call Communications Co.
• Schuylkill Mobile Fone, Inc.
• SelectPath, Inc. d/b/a Contact Wireless
• Tele-Page
• Teletec Communications
• TWR Communications
• Valley Communications of Moses Lake d/b/a Tele-Waves

Vendor members:

Premier Vendor	Prism-IPX Systems LLC
Silver Vendors	Method Link, LLC Unication USA
Bronze Vendors	Critical Response Systems, Inc. Daviscomms (S) Pte. Ltd DX Radio Systems Hark Technologies InfoRad ISC Technologies Microspace Communications Corporation RF Demand Solutions Swissphone Telecom United Communications Corporation WiPath Communications

Advertiser Index

Microsoft pushes out emergency fix to block Duqu zero-day exploit

By Sean Gallagher
ARS Technica
11/4/111

Last night, Microsoft released a workaround to block a Windows kernel vulnerability recently found to be exploited by the installer for the Duqu virus, a Stuxnet-like worm discovered in October. The attack, discovered by Hungarian researchers , exploits a vulnerability in Windows' TrueType font engine.

In the company's security advisory Microsoft said that attackers exploiting the TrueType vulnerability—which Duqu exploited through a Microsoft Word document—could gain access to the Windows kernel and run shell code. "The attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights," Microsoft's statement said.

As a temporary workaround, Microsoft recommends shutting off access to T2EMBED.DLL , the dynamic link library that allows applications to display TrueType fonts. While the fix will prevent attacks, it also means that fonts won't display properly in applications. But Microsoft's security team sees the threat from Duqu as limited, stating that "overall, we see low customer impact at this time."

The fix comes ahead of next week's Patch Tuesday security fixes, for which Microsoft announced some of the details yesterday . Microsoft will ship four security fixes, only one of which is rated as "critical." While Microsoft's security team did not give details on the vulnerabilities addressed, the critical fix applies only the company's more recent operating systems—Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows Server 2008.

Based in Coppell, Texas, a suburb of Dallas/Fort Worth, and located just five minutes north of the DFW Airport, PSSI receives, repairs and ships approximately 4,000 discrete units each day.

• PSSI is ISO certified and has comprehensively integrated robust lean manufacturing processes and systems that enable us to deliver timely and benchmark quality results.
• PSSI is certified for Levels III and IV repair by a wide variety of OEMs including, for example, Motorola, Nokia, Sony/Ericsson, Samsung, Stanley and LG.
• PSSI ’s service center is a state-of-the-art facility, complete with multiple wireless test environments and board-level repair capabilities.
• PSSI ’s state-of-the-art and proprietary Work-In-Process (WIP) systems, and its Material Planning and Warehouse Management systems, enable PSSI to track discrete units by employee, work center, lot, model, work order, location and process through the entire reverse logistics process. Access to this information can be provided to our customers so that they can track the real-time movement of their products.

Pager and Electronics Repair

Product Support Services, Inc.

Contact:
Product Support Services, Inc.
511 South Royal Lane
Coppell, Texas 75019
Phone:
877-777-8798 (Toll Free)
972-462-3970
info@productsupportservices.com
www.productsupportservices.com

Cell Phone Data and Expectations of Privacy

Peter A. Crusco
New York Law Journal
October 27, 2011

One can hear the din of cellular telephones everywhere: movie theaters, libraries, and restaurants, to name a few places. While cell phones keep us connected to those who are important in our lives, the technology also has the potential of exposing our movements to others. Cellular telephone transmissions record the general locations of the users through transmissions via cell towers. ¹ Over the last 50 years, Fourth Amendment doctrine has continued to evolve to keep pace with technology, endeavoring to protect the privacy and security of every individual against arbitrary intrusions by government agents. ² More recently, there have been significant though conflicting judicial interpretations concerning government access to cellular telephone records (cell site location information or CSLI), which data has been essential in many criminal investigations. This article will address these cases and the legal issues they present.

Expectation of Privacy

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or thing to be seized.

In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the landmark case of Katz v. United States , ³ which set forth a new analysis for when a Fourth Amendment search has occurred: the individual must have manifested a subjective expectation of privacy in the thing searched; and society must be willing to recognize that expectation as reasonable. ⁴ The first element addresses whether the individual's conduct has exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy which is demonstrated by whether the individual has shown that he seeks to preserve something as private. The second element looks to whether the individual's expectation, viewed objectively, is justifiable under the circumstance. A Fourth Amendment search implicates its concomitant "probable cause" standard.

Third-Party Exception

In 1979, in Smith v. Maryland ⁵ the U.S. Supreme Court articulated the third party exception to the Fourth Amendment search analysis, and held that the government's access to business records held by third parties did not implicate the Fourth Amendment. The Court determined that those who voluntarily conveyed numerical information to phone company equipment had no reasonable expectation of privacy in that transfer of information; thus, probable cause was not required for disclosure of dialed digits (also known as pen register/trap and trace data, or PRTT). ⁶ Significantly, cellular telephone PRTT data is more detailed, automatically sent to the phone company without "dialing" from the subscriber, and includes CSLI. Prospective CSLI can be used to track the location of the cell phone and its user in the future. Historical CSLI, on the other hand, can be used to track the previous movements of a cell phone and its user. ⁷ Smith v Maryland's third party exception was followed by the New York State Court of Appeals in People v. Guerra . ⁸

Case Law and Congress

In 1983, in United States v. Knotts , ⁹ the U.S. Supreme Court determined that police surveillance utilizing the placement of a warrantless beeper radio transmitter device inside a container within defendant's vehicle did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court reasoned that the beeper was a "sense augmenting device" and did not violate Knotts' reasonable expectation of privacy in his vehicle's movements on the public streets. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court left open whether a warrant may be required in a case involving "more intense surveillance techniques." ¹⁰ A year later in 1984, in United States v. Karo , ¹¹ the government monitored a beeper in the defendant's residence, which the Court determined was a Fourth Amendment search.

In the meantime, with the advent of wireless technologies, Congress enacted several measures to, among other things, regulate law enforcement's access to communications carrier records. Under the federal Stored Communications Act (SCA) of 1986, ¹² certain basic subscriber records and information such as name, address, local and long distance phone connection records, or records of session times and durations, or length of service and types of service, instrument number and means of payment, can be obtained merely by using an administrative subpoena, grand jury subpoena or trial subpoena per 18 U.S.C. §2702(c)(2). ¹³ Authorization for more detailed information other than that listed in §2703(c)(2), such as CSLI, ¹⁴ requires the government meet a higher standard, that is, a court order per subsection (d) of §2703 (a "d" order) which requires "specific and articulable facts to believe the records or other information sought, are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation." This is a higher burden than the mere attorney's certification required by the federal Pen Statute, ¹⁵ but less than the Fourth Amendment probable cause standard. ¹⁶

Debate on Access Standard

In 2010, in United States v. Maynard , ¹⁷ the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, breaking from decisions of other circuits, found that the GPS surveillance conducted by police in Maynard for four weeks of defendant's vehicle required a search warrant. During the trial the GPS evidence established a pattern in the defendant's activity and revealed the defendant's movements making the drug trafficking allegations more credible. The court found that the prolonged use of GPS surveillance violated his reasonable expectation of privacy and constituted a Fourth Amendment search. ¹⁸ The Fifth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals have upheld warrantless use of GPS tracking devices. ¹⁹ On June 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ of certiori in the companion case of United States v. Jones and specifically directed the parties brief the GPS Fourth Amendment issue. ²⁰

Several federal courts have determined that government access to CSLI requires a warrant per the Fourth Amendment. ²¹ The majority of federal courts require a warrant for the disclosure of prospective, that is, forward looking CSLI, ²² on the basis that the telephone user has an expectation of privacy in the CSLI automatically transmitted, and which was not voluntarily conveyed to the telephone company by placing the call. ²³ Recently, on Aug. 22, 2011, Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York, who previously granted similar historical CSLI applications on less than probable cause, ²⁴ denied an application by the government per §2703(d) for 113 days of historical CSLI, determining that the customer had an expectation of privacy in the records. ²⁵ Judge Garaufis opined that the growth of the capability of cellular technology to identify location information and the history of Fourth Amendment protections compelled his change of position. He determined that

the cell-site-location records sought here captures enough of the user's location information for a long enough time period—significantly longer than the four weeks in Maynard—to depict a sufficiently detailed and intimate picture of his movements to trigger the same constitutional concerns as the GPS data in Maynard.

He also stated that cell-phone users maintain a reasonable expectation of privacy in long-term cell-site-location records and that the Government's obtaining these records constitutes a Fourth Amendment search." Judge Garaufis concluded that "an exception to the third-party-disclosure doctrine should be applied to cumulative cell-site-location records."

New York State and CSLI

In People v Hall , ²⁶ the Supreme Court of New York, New York County, reviewed the legality of the Government's use of CSLI, and came to a contrary result than that determined by Judge Garaufis as described above. In Hall, the defendant was suspected of an early morning shooting of three persons at a night club. The prosecution obtained CSLI without a warrant as per 18 U.S.C. §2703(d) to determine the suspect's general location at certain times relative to the shootings. Instead, the prosecution's application for the records satisfied the lower standard per §2703(d), that is, "specific and articulable facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the records or other information sought were relevant and material to an ongoing investigation." ²⁷

The cellular carrier, T-Mobile, automatically recorded the identity of the antenna tower to which a particular cell phone was connected at the beginning and end of each call made or received by that phone, thus the records revealed the general location of the telephone user. Defendant moved to suppress the CSLI. ²⁸ The defense contended that the cellular telephone was in reality a tracking device and had to satisfy the higher probable cause standard required under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), 18 U.S.C 3117(b) for tracking devices. Additionally, defendant contended that the cell records were illegally obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment as "warrantless monitoring of an electronic tracking device in a private residence which is not open to visual inspection."

The government responded that they had complied with the appropriate law—the federal Stored Communications Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. §2703, which authorized their procuring of those records. The Court, Hon. Lewis Bart Stone, J.S.C., ordered a Mapp hearing to determine the legality of the CSLI. The hearing included testimony of a telephone company witness who explained the workings and capacities of the particular cellular telephone system as it related to the execution of the §2703(d) order.

The court determined that the cell phone was not utilized as a tracking device by police; accordingly, there was no intrusion into the defendant's home. ²⁹ Moreover, the hearing court determined that there was no Fourth Amendment infirmity in the SCA—the Fourth Amendment was inapplicable to disclosures thereunder because the information was gathered by T-Mobile for its own legitimate business purposes; and the "Fourth Amendment does not apply to the interception of electromagnetic waves outside of a person's house, so as to constitute the acquisition of such information as a search or seizure." ³⁰

In July 2011, on appeal to the Appellate Division, First Department, the court affirmed the hearing court's decision finding that a §2703(d) order, which does not require a demonstration of probable cause, was the appropriate legal vehicle to obtain the historical cell site location information. Further, the court stated that even if a cell phone could be considered a tracking device per 18 U.S.C. 3117(b), the People were not precluded from obtaining CSLI records pursuant to a §2703(d) order.

Moreover, the First Department also determined that the government did not need to obtain a warrant to access CSLI, because under the U.S. Constitution, defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy while traveling in public. Further, the court distinguished the 2009 Court of Appeals decision in People v. Weaver , ³¹ finding that Weaver did not address the matter of CSLI records.

In Weaver, the court held that under New York's Constitution, the government was barred from using a GPS tracking device to monitor an automobile's movements for 65 days in the absence of exigent circumstances without a warrant requiring probable cause. The court in Hall opined that the mere three days of monitoring did not implicate the Weaver rule. Similarly, the Hall Court also distinguished United States v. Maynard, ³² stating that although prolonged surveillance "might require a warrant under federal law, [citations omitted], we find that three days of CSLI records does not constitute a protracted surveillance." ³³

Conclusion

With the communication industry's continuing invention and expansion of advanced technologies, the legality of government's access to these advancements is fertile ground for defense challenges per the Fourth Amendment. Both the scope of an individual's expectation of privacy and Fourth Amendment doctrine continue to evolve with the development of new technologies. Accordingly, until both the New York Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court weigh in on the breadth of an individual's expectation of privacy, as it relates to the government's use of prospective and historical CSLI, attorneys involved in the practice of criminal law will continue to read the tea leaves of judicial opinions in an attempt to predict future Fourth Amendment doctrine.

Peter A. Crusco is executive assistant district attorney, investigations division, Office of the Queens County District Attorney. The views expressed herein are the author's, and do not necessarily reflect the policies or views of the office.

Endnotes:

1. For instance, cellular telephone or "wireless" networks, operated by T-Mobile, are divided into geographic coverage areas, or "cells." Each T-Mobile cell contains an antenna tower that sends a signal to cellular phones on the T-Mobile network through which such telephones may transmit and receive calls while located in such coverage area. T-Mobile cell size range from several hundred feet in some urban locations, such as portions of Manhattan, to more than 15 miles in rural areas.
2. See, e.g., Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1 (1968); People v. DeBour , 40 N.Y.2d 210, 215 (1976).
3. United States v. Katz, 389 U.S. 347, 361 (1967) (Harlan, J. concurring).
4. See also, Kyllo v. United States , 533 U.S. 27, 33 (2001).
5. Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 744-45 (1979).
6. Cf., C.P.L. Article §705.
7. See In re Application , 402 F. Supp. 2d 597, 599 (DC Maryland, 2005) (explains difference in real time and historical CSLI).
8. People v. Guerra, 65 NY 2d 60, 63-64 (1985); see also People v. DiRaffaele , 55 N.Y.2d 234 (1982) (no legitimate expectation of privacy in telephone company toll-billing); In 1988, New York enacted Article 705 of the Criminal Procedure Law requiring a court order on reasonable suspicion per §705.10 subd. 2, to deploy a pen register and trap and trace device.
9. United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983).
10. Id. at 284.
11. United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705, 713-18 (1984).
12. 18 U.S.C. §§2703 (b), 2703(c).
13. 18 U.S.C. §2703(c)(2).
14. 18 U.S.C. §3127(3).
15. 18 U.S.C. §3123(a).
16. See 18 U.S.C. §2703(c)(1)(A); 18 U.S.C. §2703(c)(1); The Pen Register and Trap and Trace Statutes, 18 U.S.C. §§3122(b)(1)-(2), 3123; Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA), 47 U.S.C. §§1001-21.
17. United States v. Maynard, 615 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
18. Id. at 563.
19. United States v. Cuevas-Perez , 640 F.3d 272 (7th Cir. 2011); United States v. Hernandez, 647 F.3d 216 (5th Cir. 2011); United States v. Pineda-Moreno , 591 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. 2010); United States v. Marquez, 605 F.3d 604 (8th Cir. 2010). Cf., State v. Jefferson, 2011 Ohio 4637 (2011) (holding that a warrant was needed for GPS monitoring).
20. United States v. Jones, 131 S. Ct. 3064 (2011).
21. See, e.g., In re Application, 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 93494 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2011); In re Application, 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 88781 (E.D.N.Y 2010); In re Application, 2006 US Dist. Lexis 45643 (N.D. Ind. 2006).
22. The majority of federal court decisions require a warrant for the disclosure of prospective CSLI. See, e.g., In re Application, 402 F. Supp. 2d 597, 604 (2005); In re Application, 407 F. Supp. 2d 134-35 (D.C. 2006) (the application alleged probable cause to believe that the CSLI would provide evidence of the target traveling to his source of supply, locations of stash sites and distribution of illegal narcotics). Court decisions not requiring a warrant for prospective CSLI are in the minority. See, In re Application , 411 F. Supp. 2d 678, 681 (W.D. La. 2006); In re Application , 632 F. Supp. 2d 202, 207-08 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (adopting the hybrid theory and declining to classify a cell phone as a tracking device).
23. In re Application, 396 F. Supp. 294 (E.D.N.Y. 2005) (CSLI requires a warrant).
24. See In re Application, 632 F. Supp. 202 (Garaufis, D.J.) (EDNY, 2008).
25. In re Application, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93494 (E.D.N.Y. 2011).
26. People v. Hall, 14 Misc. 3d 245 (N.Y. County 2011), aff'd 86 A.D.3d 450 (1st Dept. 2011).
27. Stored Communications Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. §2703(d).
28. Cf., United States v. Powell, 2011 U.S. Lexis 18957 (3d Cir. 2011) (§2703(d) affords no suppression remedy for non-constitutional violations). See In re Application , 620 F.3d 304, 313 (3d Cir. 2010) (the §2703(d) standard is a lesser one than probable cause).
29. Hall, 14 Misc. 3d at 255-56.
30. Id. at 257.
31. People v. Weaver, 12 N.Y.3d 433, 445 (2009).
32. United States v. Maynard, 615 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
33. Hall, 86 A.D.3d at 452 (1st Dept. 2011).

G-Wave Offers Solutions to Help Stay Connected

G-Wave has recently unveiled their newly designed BDA in a NEMA 4 die-cast enclosure featuring extremely low noise figure and a wide dynamic range. Local visual alarms are included in this design and the enclosure is available painted public safety red for high visibility. The robust C-Series enclosure has an integrated heat sink providing distributed heat dissipation and is economically priced to meet your budgetary demands.

South Hackensack, NJ (PRWEB) October 28, 2011

G-Wave acknowledges the inconveniences incurred when the radio frequency signal required for cellular communications with the cell tower is undependable. Signal inhibitors obstruct the direction of RF waves leaving cell phone users frustrated and without service. Some examples include, the materials in new home construction are too dense to allow the signal to penetrate; the line of sight is blocked due to dense tree coverage or skyscrapers. Recognizing these issues, solutions are available.

G-Wave designs and manufactures wireless indoor/outdoor signal enhancement systems such as: Bi-Directional Amplifiers, Tower Mounted Amplifiers, and Fiber Optic solutions; servicing the Public Safety, Government, Military, and Commercial/Private markets.

Bi-Directional Amplifiers (BDAs) enhance the coverage area of radio communications (wireless signals) in buildings and RF-shielded environments. G-Wave BDA’s are manufactured with their own proprietary components allowing for the fastest turn-around in the industry. Any system can be efficiently custom manufactured and configured to accommodate the demand of all carriers (PS 700/800/900, CELL, PCS, LTE, SMR, UHF, Paging, Tetra etc.). All products are made in the USA.

G-Wave products are operating in hospitals, shopping malls, multi-level buildings, airports, convention centers, offices, tunnels, military bases, and many other indoor/outdoor environments where coverage enhancement is required. G-Wave offers the end-to-end solution: site survey, consultation, custom design and layout (Distributed Antenna System – DAS), system equipment, technical and integration support. Customer service is extended well beyond the point of purchase.

As an ISO certified company, G-Wave is highly recognized for its integrity, quality of service and the products that are delivered. Their team has experience in a wide-range of RF designs and implementations, at both the component and system levels, that expertly meet the demands of the most challenging environments. This provides a cost-effective, high-performance solution utilizing a multitude of technology and, most importantly, uninterrupted service. To learn more about G-Wave and their products, please visit their website at: http://www.gwaverf.com .

Newsletter Supporter

CANYON RIDGE Communications

Premium Newsletter Supporter

ProPage Inc.

Newsletter Supporter

PAGE ONE OF WYOMING

Newsletter Supporter

Cook Paging

Newsletter Supporter

MethodLink

Newsletter Supporter

Newsletter Supporter

Glenayre Paging Terminals

Contact Wireless has some recently decommissioned Glenayre paging terminals it would like to sell. All parts were either in service and working as of last May, or were spares. Preference is to sell it all as a package, but we will consider other offers. There is also a MVP-E available.

Scott Forsythe, CTO
SelectPath, Inc. d/b/a Contact Wireless
303-768-9673 x673
sforsythe@contactwireless.com

Equipment List Here

hmce@bellsouth.net	Click to e-mail
Joshua's Mission	Helping Wounded Marines Homepage

PAGING & WIRELESS
NETWORK PLANNERS LLC
WIRELESS SPECIALISTS

www.pagingplanners.com
rmercer@pagingplanners.com

R.H. (Ron) Mercer Consultant 217 First Street South East Northport, NY 11731
Cell Phone: 631-786-9359

Wireless Communication Solutions

USB Paging Encoder

• Single channel up to eight zones
• Connects to Linux computer via USB
• Programmable timeouts and batch sizes
• Supports 2-tone, 5/6-tone, POCSAG 512/1200/2400, GOLAY
• Supports Tone Only, Voice, Numeric, and Alphanumeric
• PURC or direct connect
• Pictured version mounts in 5.25" drive bay
• Other mounting options available
• Available as a daughter board for our embedded Internet Paging Terminal (IPT)

Paging Data Receiver (PDR)

• Frequency agile - only one receiver to stock
• USB or RS-232 interface
• Two contact closures
• End-user programmable w/o requiring special hardware
• 16 capcodes
• POCSAG
• Eight contact closure version also available
• Product customization available

Other products

• Please see our web site for other products including Internet Messaging Gateways, Unified Messaging Servers, test equipment, and Paging Terminals.

Contact

Hark Technologies 717 Old Trolley Rd Ste 6 #163 Summerville, SC 29485

Tel: 843-821-6888

Fax: 843-821-6894

E-mail: sales@harktech.com CLICK

Web: http://www.harktech.com CLICK

HARK—EXHIBITS AT THE
NASHVILLE CONFERENCE

David George and Bill Noyes
of Hark Technologies.

TELEMETRY RECEIVERS FOR SALE

You can help the newsletter by buying these telemetry receivers from Dave Levine:

Hi Brad –

I have 50-60 Daviscomms TMR1F one-way pagers. About 10 of them have the internal antenna and the rest have the BNC connector. I would say about 40 of these have never been used — many are still in the original packaging. The reason that we are selling them is because we are hoping to transition to a cellular network. We also have around 125 flat antennas with BNC connectors. These antennas work very well — better than the duck antennas we typically saw on the units. They have an adhesive backing and can be mounted flat on top of a machine. I have attached a flyer that we made about the antennas. I would be happy with $40 OBO for the receivers and $5 OBO for the antennas — but if someone takes everything, I will sell it for $35 for the receivers and $5 for the antennas. I can take credit card or check.

---

I just went into my warehouse and inventoried the receivers and antennas. Some of the receivers have a password which I will give to the buyer. Most of them are brand new, in the original packaging. Here is the complete rundown:

 

100 Flat antennas
4 Daviscomms TMR1F with internal antenna.
61 Daviscomms TMR1F with BNC Connectors

Of the 61 TMRs with the BNC Connectors, 43 of them are still in the original packaging, the rest were lightly used. All of them have had my labels removed and just need to be reprogrammed and put back into service. Again, I would prefer to sell everything to one buyer.

Thanks –

Dave Levine
LEDXCHANGE LLC
480-332-0844
dlevine@mbmediabrokers.com

Satellite Uplink As Low As $500 /month Data input speeds up to 38.4 Kbps Dial-in modem access for Admin Extremely reliable & secure Hot standby up link components Knowledgeable Tech Support 24/7 Contact Alan Carle Now! 1-888-854-2697 x272 acarle@ucom.com • www.ucom.com

Verizon API To Give Apps 'Turbo' Bandwidth Boost

By Mark Hachman

November 1, 2011 11:36pm EST

Verizon will publish an API that could allow consumers to "turbocharge" the network bandwidth their smartphone apps use for a small fee, executives said Tuesday.

Verizon anticipates that a customer running an app on a smartphone will have the option to dynamically snatch more bandwidth for that app, if network congestion slows it down, said Hugh Fletcher, associate director for technology in Verizon's Product Development and Technology team. The app, however, must be running what Verizon referred to as the network optimization API it is currently developing, and hopes to publish by the third quarter of 2012.

Users could have the option to pay for the extra bandwidth via a separate micro-transaction API Verizon is developing and hopes to have in place by the end of 2012, Fletcher said.

At an open-house event at Verizon's Application Innovation Center in San Francisco, Verizon executives showcased several partner efforts, plus their own in-house technology development. Probably the most noteworthy was the network optimization technology, which took a high-quality video stream and simulated it running over a congested network. When a Verizon engineer pushed a "turbo button," the video's choppy frame rate and apparent quality improved.

The center, opened in August, is designed to assist developers working on apps to take advantage of the Verizon network. Verizon doesn't require an NDA or an exclusivity agreement for a developer to tap into its resources, said Larry Rau, director of network technology for Verizon. "We believe if we partner with people they'll deploy on our network, and that's been pretty true," he said.

Verizon first announced its plans to open its APIs in Sept. 2010, when it disclosed 20 location and other APIs to developers, as well as announced plans to release the API giving network access to developers. On Tuesday, Verizon executives showed off how — with permission given via SMS — Verizon users could disclose their location via the Verizon API. Fletcher postulated a future where banks could use the API to establish a customer's location as a means to determine if a credit or debit card being used nearby had been stolen.

But the demonstration Tuesday was one of the first, if not the first time, Verizon showed off the network technology publicly. Even with it LTE technology driving its fastest mobile network in the U.S. , Verizon still sees a day when congestion can impact high-bandwidth apps.

"I think one of the things that you could do is guaranteed quality of service," Fletcher said, when asked how the network optimization API could be used. "One of the things that we are right now is very democratic in terms of allocating spectrum and bandwidth to users. And just because you request a high quality of service doesn't mean you're gonna get it. [The network] will try to give it to you, but if there's a lot of congestion, a lot of people using it, it won't kick people off."

The network optimization API will likely expose attributes like jitter, latency, bandwidth, and priority to app developers, Fletcher said.

"I think you could anticipate that maybe you'll have a Skype call that starts going bad," Fletcher said. "Wouldn't you like to be able to hit the turbo button and have that come back up to be a good call?"

When asked if Verizon would put the turbo button as an option that would be presented to the customer using the phone, Fletcher replied, "Absolutely, yes."

Verizon is also developing a micro-payments or micro-transaction API. A demonstration by Vodafone, which owns about 45 percent of Verizon Wireless, showed that users could have access to and buy music from the Vodafone music store. Verizon's stance on mobile commerce between itself and consumers is very conservative, Fletcher said; subscribers can only buy $25 worth of digital goods from Verizon per month.

But the real enabler may be third-party carrier billing systems, such as eBay's carrier billing subsidiary, Zong , which has relationships with Verizon and others.

"We believe that operator carrier billing decreases the restrictions on people buying stuff and I think we're all searching for the perfect balance," Fletcher said.

"What I suspect will happen is that there are different storefronts like Google or Amazon, they'll have their own SDKs, and we may have our own SDK for Verizon apps, but I think the real play will be to integrate with those storefronts," Fletcher added.

Open Internet Network Manual

BloostonLaw has available an Open Internet or Net Neutrality Compliance Manual so that clients can meet their reporting obligations by the Nov. 20 deadline. The manual provides you with a template to be posted on your website and furnished to customers. You must describe your terms & conditions, network restrictions, and other aspects of operations to comply with the Net Neutrality rules. We are available to review the template (at our usual rates) to help ensure that your specific compliance protocol satisfies the FCC’s rules. Contact Gerry Duffy (202-828-5528); Ben Dickens (202-828-5510); or Mary Sisak (202-828-5554.

FCC Adopts Order, FNPRM To Push USF/ICC Reform

At last week’s open meeting, the FCC adopted an Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on Universal Service Fund (USF) and intercarrier compensation (ICC) reform. The text of the Order has not been released. The Order creates a new Connect America Fund (CAF) with an annual budget of no more than $4.5 billion over the next six years. This is the same level of funding for the high-cost USF program in fiscal year (FY) 2011.

(Ed. Note: This first story deals with the USF/CAF measures adopted in the Commission’s Order. The ICC reform measures are treated in the following separate story. A third story focuses on comments and reactions to the landmark Order.)

The FCC will now require all eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) to offer broadband service.

Rate-of-Return Carriers. The FCC acknowledged that although small rate-of-return (RoR) carriers serve less than 5% of access lines in the U.S., they operate in many of the country’s most difficult and expensive areas to serve. Rate-of-return carriers’ total support from the high-cost fund is approaching $2 billion annually, the FCC said. It added that its Order will reform its rules for RoR companies in order to support continued broadband investment while increasing accountability and incentives for efficient use of public resources. According to the Commission, RoR carriers receiving legacy universal service support, or CAF support to offset lost ICC revenues, must offer broadband service meeting initial CAF requirements, with actual speeds of at least 4 Mbps downstream and 1 Mbps upstream, upon their customers’ reasonable request. The Commission added: “Recognizing the economic challenges of extending service in the high-cost areas of the country served by rate-of-return carriers, this flexible approach does not require rate-of-return companies to extend service to customers absent such a request.”

Additionally, the FCC adopted the following rules to:

(1) Establish a framework to limit reimbursements for excessive capital and operating expenses, which will be implemented no later than July 1, 2012, after an additional opportunity for public comment;

(2) Encourage efficiencies by extending existing corporate operations expense limits to the existing high-cost loop support and interstate common line support mechanisms, effective January 1, 2012;

(3) Ensure fairness by reducing high-cost loop support for carriers that maintain artificially low end-user voice rates, with a three-step phase-in beginning July 1, 2012;

(4) Phase out the Safety Net Additive component of high-cost loop support over time;

(5) Address Local Switching Support as part of comprehensive ICC reform;

(6) Phase out over three years support in study areas that overlap completely with an unsubsidized facilities-based terrestrial competitor that provides voice and fixed broadband service, beginning July 1, 2012; and

(7) Cap per-line support at $250 per month, with a gradual phasedown to that cap over a three-year period commencing July 1, 2012.

Price Cap Carriers. The FCC stated that more than 83% of the approximately 18 million Americans that lack access to residential fixed broadband at or above the Commission’s broadband speed benchmark live in areas served by price cap carriers—Bell Operating Companies (BOCs) and other large and mid-sized carriers. In these areas, the CAF will introduce targeted, efficient support for broadband in two phases.

Phase I. To spur immediate broadband buildout, the FCC said it will provide additional funding for price cap carriers to extend robust, scalable broadband to hundreds of thousands of unserved Americans beginning in early 2012. “To enable this deployment, all existing legacy high-cost support to price cap carriers will be frozen, and an additional $300 million in CAF funding will be made available. Frozen support will be immediately subject to the goal of achieving universal availability of voice and broadband, and subject to obligations to build and operate broadband-capable networks in areas unserved by an unsubsidized competitor over time. Any carrier electing to receive the additional support will be required to deploy broadband and offer service that satisfies the new public interest obligations to an unserved location for every $775 in incremental support. Specifically, carriers that elect to receive this additional support must provide broadband with actual speeds of at least 4 Mbps downstream and 1 Mbps upstream, with latency suitable for real-time applications and services such as VoIP, and with monthly usage capacity reasonably comparable to that of residential terrestrial fixed broadband offerings in urban areas,” the FCC said. In addition, the FCC reduced existing support levels in any areas where a price cap company charges artificially low end-user voice rates.

Phase II. This phase of the CAF will use a combination of a forward-looking broadband cost model and competitive bidding to efficiently support deployment of networks providing both voice and broadband service for five years. The FCC expects that the CAF will expand broadband availability to millions more unserved Americans.

In the FNPRM, the FCC seeks comment on establishing a long-term broadband-focused CAF mechanism for RoR carriers, and relatedly seek comment on reducing the interstate rate-of-return from its current level of 11.25 percent. The FCC expects that RoR carriers will receive approximately $2 billion per year in total high-cost universal service support through 2017.

In areas where the incumbent declines the state-level commitment, the FCC will use competitive bidding to distribute support “in a way that maximizes the extent of robust, scalable broadband service subject to an overall budget.” In the FNPRM, the Commission proposes a structure and operational details for the competitive bidding mechanism, in which any broadband provider that has been designated as an ETC for the relevant area may participate. As noted above, the second phase of the CAF will distribute a total of up to $1.8 billion annually in support for areas with no unsubsidized broadband competitor. The FCC expects that the model and competitive bidding mechanism will be adopted by December 2012, and disbursements will ramp up in 2013 and continue through 2017.

CAF Mobility Fund. Mobile broadband carriers will receive significant legacy support during the transition to the Mobility Fund, and will have opportunities for new Mobility Fund dollars, the FCC said. It added that the providers receiving support through the CAF Phase II competitive bidding process will also be eligible for the Mobility Fund, but carriers will not be allowed to receive redundant support for the same service in the same areas. Mobility Fund recipients will be subject to public interest obligations, including data roaming and collocation requirements.

Phase I. The FCC says it will provide up to $300 million in one-time support to immediately accelerate deployment of networks for mobile voice and broadband services in unserved areas. Mobility Fund Phase I support will be awarded through a nationwide reverse auction, which the FCC expects to occur in third quarter 2012. The agency said that eligible areas “will include census blocks unserved today by mobile broadband services, and carriers may not receive support for areas they have previously stated they plan to cover. The auction will maximize coverage of unserved road miles within the budget, and winners will be required to deploy 4G service within three years, or 3G service within two years, accelerating the migration to 4G.” The FCC is also establishing a separate and complementary one-time Tribal Mobility Fund Phase I to award up to $50 million in additional universal service funding to Tribal lands to accelerate mobile voice and broadband availability in these remote and underserved areas.

Phase II. To ensure universal availability of mobile broadband services, the FCC said the Mobility Fund will provide up to $500 million per year in ongoing support. “The Fund will expand and sustain mobile voice and broadband services in communities in which service would be unavailable absent federal support. The Mobility Fund will include ongoing support for Tribal areas of up to $100 million per year as part of the $500 million total budget,” the FCC said. In the FNPRM, the FCC proposes a structure and operational details for the ongoing Mobility Fund, including the proper distribution methodology, eligible geographic areas and providers, and public interest obligations. The FCC says it expects to adopt the distribution mechanism for Phase II in 2012 with implementation in 2013.

Identical Support Rule. The FCC eliminated the identical support rule that determines the amount of support for mobile, as well as wireline, competitive ETCs. The FCC froze identical support per study area as of year-end 2011, and phased down existing support over a five-year period beginning on July 1, 2012. The FCC said the gradual phase down, in conjunction with the new funding provided by Mobility Fund Phase I and II, will ensure that an average of over $900 million is provided to mobile carriers for each of the first four years of reform (through 2015). The phase down of CETC support will stop if Mobility Fund Phase II is not operational by June 30, 2014, ensuring approximately $600 million per year in legacy support will continue to flow until the new mechanism is operational, the FCC said.

Remote Areas Fund. The FCC allocated at least $100 million per year to ensure that Americans living in the most remote areas in the nation, where the cost of deploying traditional terrestrial broadband networks is extremely high, can obtain affordable access through alternative technology platforms, including satellite and unlicensed wireless services. The FCC proposed in the FNPRM a structure and operational details for that mechanism, including the form of support, eligible geographic areas and providers, and public interest obligations. The FCC expects to finalize the Remote Areas Fund in 2012 with implementation in 2013.

Reporting and Enforcement. The FCC established a national framework for certification and reporting requirements for all universal service recipients to ensure that their public interest obligations are satisfied, that state and federal regulators have the tools they need to conduct meaningful oversight, and that public funds are expended in an efficient and effective manner. The FCC emphasized that it did not disturb the existing role of states in designating ETCs and in monitoring that ETCs within their jurisdiction are using universal service support for its intended purpose. In the FNPRM, the Commission seeks comment on whether and how it should adjust federal obligations on ETCs in areas where legacy funding is phased down. As a safeguard to protect consumers, the FCC said, it provides for an explicit waiver mechanism under which a carrier can seek relief from some or all of our reforms if the carrier can demonstrate that the reduction in existing high-cost support would put consumers at risk of losing voice service, with no alternative terrestrial providers available to provide voice telephony.

BloostonLaw will analyze the details of the FCC’s Connect America Fund and Intercarrier Compensation Order and the Further Notice of Proposed Rule-making when the text of the Order and FNPRM is released. In the meantime, clients are invited to share their initial concerns with our offices.

Please contact: Ben Dickens (202-828-5510); Gerry Duffy (202-828-5528); or Mary Sisak (202-828-5554).

FCC Aims To Phase Out Intercarrier Compensation

The second part of the FCC’s Order focuses on Intercarrier Compensation (ICC) reform. In general, the Order addresses the following:

• Access Stimulation. The FCC adopted rules to address the practice of access stimulation, in which carriers artificially inflate their traffic volumes to increase ICC payments. The FCC said its revised interstate access rules generally require competitive carriers and RoR incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs) to refile their interstate switched access tariffs at lower rates if the following two conditions are met: (1) a LEC has a revenue sharing agreement and (2) the LEC either has (a) a 3-1 ratio of terminating-to-originating traffic in any month or (b) experiences more than a 100% increase in traffic volume in any month measured against the same month during the previous year.
• Phantom Traffic. The FCC adopted rules to address “phantom traffic,” i.e., calls for which identifying information is missing or masked in ways that frustrate intercarrier billing. Specifically, the FCC required telecommunications carriers and providers of interconnected VoIP service to include the calling party’s telephone number in all call signaling, and required intermediate carriers to pass this signaling information, unaltered, to the next provider in a call path.

Bill and Keep. The FCC adopted a uniform national bill-and-keep framework as the ultimate end state for all telecommunications traffic exchanged with a LEC. Under bill-and-keep, carriers look first to their subscribers to cover the costs of the network, then to explicit universal service support where necessary. Nevertheless, the FCC said that states will have a key role in determining the scope of each carrier’s financial responsibility for purposes of bill-and-keep, and in evaluating interconnection agreements negotiated or arbitrated under the framework in sections 251 and 252 of the Communications Act. The FCC also said it will address concerns expressed by some commenters about potential fears of traffic “dumping,” and seeks comment in the FNPRM on whether any additional measures are necessary in this regard.

Multi-Year Transition. The FCC said it will focus initial reforms on reducing terminating switched access rates, which are the principal source of arbitrage problems today. It added that this approach will promote migration to all-IP networks while minimizing the burden on consumers and staying within the FCC’s universal service budget.

First, the FCC required carriers to cap most ICC rates as of the effective date of its CAF/ICC Order. To reduce the disparity between intrastate and interstate terminating end office rates, the FCC will next require carriers to bring these rates to parity within two steps, by July 2013. Thereafter, the FCC will require carriers to reduce their termination (and for some carriers also transport) rates to bill-and-keep, within six years for price cap carriers and nine for rate-of-return carriers .

The framework and transition are default rules and carriers are free to negotiate alternatives that better address their individual needs. Although the Order begins the process of reforming all ICC charges by capping all interstate rate elements and most intrastate rate elements, the FNPRM seeks comment on the appropriate transition and recovery for the remaining originating and transport rate elements. The FCC said that states will play a key role in overseeing modifications to rates in intrastate tariffs to ensure carriers are complying with the framework adopted in this Order and not shifting costs or otherwise seeking to gain excess recovery. The FNPRM also seeks comment on interconnection issues likely to arise in the process of implementing a bill-and-keep methodology for ICC.

New Recovery Mechanism. The FCC adopted a transitional recovery mechanism to mitigate the effect of reduced intercarrier revenues on carriers and facilitate continued investment in broadband infrastructure, while providing greater certainty and predictability going forward than the status quo .

The FCC will permit incumbent telephone companies to charge a limited monthly Access Recovery Charge (ARC) on wireline telephone service, with a maximum annual increase of $0.50 for consumers and small businesses, and $1.00 per line for multi-line businesses, to partially offset ICC revenue declines. The FCC adopted a strict ceiling that prevents carriers from assessing any ARC for any consumer whose total monthly rate for local telephone service, inclusive of various rate-related fees, is at or above $30. Although the maximum ARC is $0.50 per month, the FCC expects the actual average increase across all wireline consumers to be no more than $0.10-$0.15 a month, which translates into an expected maximum of $1.20-$1.80 per year that the average consumer will pay.

Additionally, the FCC said that the ARC will phase down over time as carriers’ eligible revenue decreases, and the FCC prevents carriers from charging any ARC on Lifeline customers or further drawing on the Lifeline program, so that ICC reform will not raise rates at all for these low-income consumers. The FCC also seeks comment in the FNPRM about reassessing existing subscriber line charges (SLCs), which are not otherwise implicated by this Order, to determine whether those charges are set at appropriate levels.

The FCC adopted a cap on the combination of the ARC and the existing SLC to ensure that multi-line businesses do not bear a disproportionate share of recovery and that their rates remain just and reasonable. Specifically, carriers cannot charge a multi-line business customer an ARC when doing so would result in the ARC plus the existing SLC exceeding $12.20 per line.

The FCC adopted measures to ensure that carriers must apportion lost revenues eligible for ICC recovery between residential and business lines, appropriately weighting the business lines ( i.e., according to the higher maximum annual increase in the business ARC) to prevent carriers that elect not to receive ICC CAF from recovering their entire ICC revenue loss from consumers. Carriers may receive CAF support for any otherwise-eligible revenue not recovered by the ARC. In addition, carriers receiving CAF support to offset lost ICC revenues will be required to use the money to advance the FCC’s goals for universal voice and broadband.

The FCC limited carriers’ total eligible recovery to reflect the existing downward trends on ICC revenues with declining switching costs and minutes of use. For price cap carriers, baseline recovery amounts available to each price cap carrier will decline at 10 percent annually. Price cap carriers whose interstate rates have largely been unchanged for a decade because they participated in the Commission’s 2000 CALLS plan will be eligible to receive 90% of this baseline every year from ARCs and the CAF. In those study areas that have recently converted from rate-of-return to price cap regulation, carriers will initially be permitted to recover the full baseline amount to permit a more gradual transition, but will decline to 90% recovery for these areas as well after 5 years. All price cap CAF support for ICC recovery will phase out over a three-year period beginning in the sixth year of the reform.

For RoR carriers, recovery will be calculated initially based on rate-of-return carriers’ fiscal year 2011 interstate switched access revenue requirement, intrastate access revenues that are being reformed as part of the CAF/ICC Order, and net reciprocal compensation revenues. This baseline will decline at 5% annually to reflect combined historical trends of an annual three percent interstate cost and associated revenue decline, and ten percent intrastate revenue decline, while providing for true ups to ensure CAF recovery in the event of faster-than-expected declines in demand. The FCC said that both recovery mechanisms provide carriers with significantly more revenue certainty than the status quo, enabling carriers to reap the benefits of efficiencies and reduced switching costs, while giving providers stable support for investment as they adjust to an IP world.

Treatment of VoIP Traffic. The FCC adopted a transitional framework for VoIP intercarrier compensation. The FCC determined that default charges for “toll” VoIP-public switched telephone network (PSTN) traffic will be equal to interstate rates applicable to non-VoIP traffic, and default charges for other VoIP-PSTN traffic will be the applicable reciprocal compensation rates. Under this framework, all carriers originating and terminating VoIP calls will be on equal footing in their ability to obtain compensation for this traffic.

CMRS-Local Exchange Carrier (LEC) Compensation. The FCC clarified that certain aspects of commercial mobile radio service (CMRS)-LEC compensation in order to reduce disputes and address existing ambiguity. The FCC adopted bill-and-keep as the default methodology for all non-access CMRS-LEC traffic. To provide RoR LECs time to adjust to bill-and-keep, the FCC adopted an interim transport rule for RoR carriers to specify LEC transport obligations under the default bill-and-keep framework for non-access traffic exchanged between these carriers.

The FCC also clarified the relationship between the compensation obligations in section 20.11 of the Commission’s rules and the reciprocal compensation framework, thus addressing growing concerns about arbitrage related to rates set without federal guidance. Further, in response to disputes, the FCC made clear that a call is considered to be originated by a CMRS provider for purposes of the intra-MTA rule only if the calling party initiating the call has done so through a CMRS provider. Finally, the FCC affirmed that all traffic routed to or from a CMRS provider that, at the beginning of a call, originates and terminates within the same MTA, is subject to reciprocal compensation, without exception.

IP-to-IP Interconnection. In the FNPRM, the FCC seeks comment regarding the policy framework for IP-to-IP interconnection. It also makes clear that even while the FNPRM is pending, the FCC expects all carriers to negotiate in good faith in response to requests for IP-to-IP interconnection for the exchange of voice traffic.

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

Reactions to FCC’s Order On Reforming USF/ICC Regime

At last week’s open meeting, all four FCC Commissioners voted for the new Universal Service Fund (USF) and intercarrier compensation rules. Chairman Julius Genachowski said that “over the next year, the Connect America Fund will bring broadband to more than 600,000 Americans who wouldn't have it otherwise. Over the following five years, millions more rural families will be connected.” He said that the Order “puts us on the path to get broadband to every American by the end of the decade – to close the broadband deployment gap which now stands at close to twenty million Americans. We are also extending the benefits of mobile broadband coverage to tens of thousands of unserved road-miles, areas where millions of Americans work, live, and travel. These are areas of frustration and economic stagnation for so many people – where mobile connections are needed but unavailable, where small businesses lose out on customers and productivity, and where people in traffic accidents can’t reach 9-1-1.” He also noted that the Order makes “mobility an independent universal service objective for the first time, providing dedicated support through the world’s first Mobility Fund. Over the next three years, we will provide almost $1 billion in funding per year for universal mobility.”

Commissioner Michael Copps said that the FCC “is repairing two broken systems and putting in place a more credible and efficient framework that will benefit consumers, carriers and the country. We are approving a framework for allocating limited resources to mitigate serious communications shortfalls. It is a framework that should give all stakeholders a clearer picture of how these systems will work going forward and that will provide predictability for rate-payers, businesses and policy-makers. I would have much preferred a higher budget for the Fund—a budget that I believe consumers would accept because of its importance to putting the nation back to work and providing our kids with the tools they need for their futures. That being said, we set out down a good and welcome road here with steps that will make a huge difference, and that is why I am able to approve the item even though it is not, in several respects that would come as a surprise no one, the precise item I would have written.”

But, Copps said his “enthusiasm here is tempered by the fact that end-user charges (under the label of ‘Access Recovery Charges’) are allowed to increase, albeit incrementally, for residential consumers. My first preference was to prevent any increase. Alternatively, we could require individual carriers to demonstrate their need for additional revenues before imposing the ARC. Perhaps some of the largest and most profitable companies should not be able to charge the ARC. However, the Commission does adopt some important measures to protect consumers even as it allows additional charges. In particular, consumers already paying local phone rates of $30 or more cannot be charged the ARC. The use of this ceiling recognizes that some early adopter states have already tackled intrastate access rates, and their citizens may already be footing a reasonable part of the bill. In the end, I am grateful that, at the very least, additional charges to end-users are not as great as they might have been, are spread over a longer period of time, and should be offset (and hopefully more than matched) by savings and efficiencies realized because of the more rational programs we begin to put in place. And I am hopeful the Commission will do everything it can to assure that these savings are passed on to consumers, although I continue to lament that the fact that we don’t have a more competitive telecommunications environment that would better ensure consumer-friendly outcomes.”

Commissioner Robert McDowell said: “Of course, there is nothing we can do to prevent future Commissions from voting to comprehensively alter what we have done and spend more money later. That would be true as a matter of law whether we called our fiscally prudent action today a ‘definitive budget,’ ‘cap,’ ‘beret’ or ‘sombrero.’ If the FCC of tomorrow wants to undo what we have done today, however, good luck with that. You’re going to need it. If history is our guide, the alacrity with which the Commission can accomplish comprehensive USF reform is nothing short of glacial. Nonetheless, I hope future Commissions will keep their caps on out of respect for fiscal responsibility and the consumers who pay for these subsidies.” McDowell added that “we are only addressing the high cost program of the distribution side of the Universal Service Fund. We are not addressing the entire Universal Service Fund, which currently distributes over $8 billion per year. To put that figure in context, USF is larger than the annual revenues of Major League Baseball. In separate proceedings, we will also reform the other USF spending programs. I cannot stress enough that all of the fiscal efficiencies that we will realize in the wake of today’s reforms will be lost if similar fiscal discipline is not applied to all Universal Service programs as well.”

Commissioner Mignon Clyburn said that an underlying theme of the Order “is shared sacrifice for the common good. After all, we are talking about the people’s money. We are accountable to them, and I am confident that the adjustments being made to the legacy USF support, and the funding mechanisms being adopted for the new Connect America Fund, are sensible. These reforms will put both the USF and ICC regimes on a sounder footing, so we may better accomplish our goal and Congress’ mandate, to serve more Americans with advanced communications networks—no matter where they live, work, or travel in this great nation.”

Clyburn added that “services cannot be truly available, if consumers cannot afford to purchase them, the devices they need to access them are not available, or if they cannot attain the skills they need to know how to use these services. I appreciate those who have called for us to address these consumer needs today, and I agree with you that we need to do more in this area. Our broadband adoption task force is working diligently to find solutions to these issues, and I fully expect that we soon will be addressing the proposal in our Lifeline proceeding to adopt pilot projects for broadband adoption to benefit low-income Americans who qualify for the Lifeline program. I look forward to our continued work with our task force, including finishing the Lifeline proceeding before the end of the year, so that we can make more headway on this significant issue for low-income consumers.”

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said: “For too long, this system has been focused on supporting the technology of the last generation—basic voice telephone service. I am pleased it will now also tackle the challenge of the digital age—bringing high-speed Internet and wireless service everywhere in this country. I recognize that reform means that some stakeholders will be unhappy because they prefer the status quo, but our Nation's communications infrastructure is too important to delay reform any longer. Our economy cannot afford missing out on the opportunities broadband enables, such as expanding business, fostering innovation, increasing access to education and health care, and even transforming entertainment. And consumers deserve more than a support system built only on the technology needs of the past.”

In a joint statement, the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association (NTCA), Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (OPASTCO), and the Western Telecommunications Alliance (WTA) said they are hopeful that the Order “will help restore some measure of regulatory certainty and predictability in support for rural carriers by resolving a number of key issues, but must reserve judgment until complete details of the order can be analyzed. Questions surrounding the precise nature of transitions, impacts on rural consumers and service quality, and recovery of investment must still be examined and addressed.” Positive aspects of the Order “appear to include the FCC’s action to confirm that VoIP traffic falls within the ICC framework and to resolve long-standing concerns about so-called ‘phantom traffic’ and other arbitrage schemes,” the associations said. They said they are also pleased that the FCC appears to have recognized the need for an ICC restructure mechanism to help carriers of last resort continue providing affordable services in rural America.

The associations, however, “remain concerned that parts of the current reform package will have substantial adverse impacts on rural consumers and the small, community-based carriers of last resort committed to serve them. For example, the caps that the FCC plans to adopt on certain supported costs have yet to be defined. These caps could create drastic adverse impacts on companies and their customers if they are developed and implemented incorrectly. There are also indications that the FCC may depart in some ways from rate-of-return cost recovery mechanisms in the order, even if it will maintain these mechanisms as a whole. Existing rate-of-return cost recovery mechanisms have been proven effective and efficient in promoting broadband-capable investment. While the order appears to retain many of these mechanisms, it is not clear yet how the adjustments that the FCC has adopted will affect the ability of small carriers to continue investment in sustainable rural broadband.”

CTIA-The Wireless Association said that “aiming only 11% of the fund at mobile does "not appear to fully take into account the significant consumer migration to mobile broadband services."

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

OBAMA NOMINATES ROSENWORCEL, PAI TO FCC: President Obama has nominated Jessica Rosenworcel and Ajit Pai to the FCC. Rosenworcel is currently an adviser to Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.). She would replace Commissioner Michael Copps, when his term expires at the end of the year. Rosenworcel previously worked for Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) from 2007-2008, and was Copps’ legal adviser from 2003-2007. Pai is a partner in the law firm of Jenner and Block. He would fill the seat vacated by Meredith Atwell Baker earlier this year. Pau previously served as chief counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on civil rights, and as senior counsel for the Office of Legal Policy at the Justice Department. He has also served as general counsel for Verizon. BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and John Prendergast.

MetroPCS APPEALS FCC’s “NET NEUTRALITY” RULES: MetroPCS has filed a Notice of Appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to challenge the FCC’s “Net Neutrality Order.” MetroPCS said the Commission's Order purports to modify and condition the FCC licenses of all wireless service providers, including those Commission licenses held by MetroPCS, by imposing certain requirements on mobile broadband Internet access services and providers, relying on its authority to "change the license ... terms," and "to impose new requirements on existing licenses beyond those that were in place at the time of grant.” MetroPCS seeks relief on the grounds that the Order: (1) exceeds the Commission's statutory authority; (2) is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act; (3) violates MetroPCS' constitutional rights; and (4) is otherwise contrary to law. MetroPCS joins Verizon, Free Press, People’s Production House, Media Mobilizing Project, and Access Humboldt in challenging the Net Neutrality rules (BloostonLaw Telecom Update, October 5 and 12). BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and John Prendergast.

FCC PROPOSES ADOPTING 2011 ANSI STANDARD FOR HAC HANDSETS: The FCC has proposed adopting the 2011 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard as an applicable technical standard for evaluating the hearing aid compatibility (HAC) of wireless phones. In a Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), the FCC tentatively concluded that adoption of this new technical standard would not raise any major compliance issues or impose materially greater obligations with respect to newly covered frequency bands and air interfaces than those already imposed under Commission rules. The FCC also seeks comment on whether adoption of the 2011 ANSI Standard would impose new or additional costs on handset manufacturers. Comments in this WT Docket No. 07-250 proceeding will be due 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, and replies will be due 15 days thereafter. BloostonLaw contacts: Hal Mordkofsky, John Prendergast, Cary Mitchell, and Bob Jackson.

COMMENT DATES SET FOR NPRM IN BASIC SERVICE TIER ENCRYPTION PROCEEDING: The FCC has asked for comments on its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding compatibility between cable TV systems and consumer electronics. In the NPRM, the Commission requests comment on whether to retain the basic service tier encryption prohibition for all-digital cable systems if the cable operator complies with consumer protection measures for a limited period of time to minimize subscriber disruption. Comments in this PP Docket No. 00-67 proceeding are due November 28, and replies are due December 12. BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

COMMENT CYCLE SET FOR PROPOSED RULES GOVERNING VRS PROVDERS: The FCC has set a comment cycle for its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) clarifying that certified video relay service (VRS) providers may rollover VRS traffic to another eligible provider only when unable to handle an unexpected and temporary surge in call traffic due to exigent circumstances, such as in the event of a natural disaster or other comparable emergency that is outside the provider's control. Specifically, the Commission proposes to provide that a certified provider may subcontract with another certified provider for, or otherwise authorize the provision by another certified provider of, communications assistants (CA) services or call center functions only in the event of an unexpected and temporary surge in call traffic due to exigent circumstances, and seeks comment on this proposal. The purpose of this rule change is to better ensure the integrity of VRS by requiring that it be provided by qualified, stand-alone providers who operate their own call centers and employ their own CAs. In all other circumstances, certified providers must provide the core components of VRS using their owned facilities and their full- or part-time employees. The Commission finds this proposed modification to be consistent with its stated VRS program goals. The Commission seeks comment on the specific types of exigent circumstances that would warrant subcontracting or similar arrangements between eligible providers. Transfer of call traffic between eligible providers should not routinely occur, but rather should be the rare exception that occurs only in exigent circumstances. Comments in this CG Docket No. 10-51 proceeding are due November 30, and replies are due December 30. BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

FCC ACTS TO MODERNIZE TV BROADCAST PUBLIC INSPECTION FILES: The FCC has taken action to modernize the way television broadcasters inform the public about how they serve their communities. The Commission adopted (1) an Order on Reconsideration that vacates a 2007 Report and Order (R&O); and (2) a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), which proposes a new approach that would require commercial and noncommercial television stations to submit documents to an online public file hosted by the Commission. The 2007 R&O largely replaced a decades-old requirement that television stations maintain a paper public inspection file in their main studio with one that required the files be available on their stations’ Internet website, if they have one. Those rules were never put into effect because of legal challenges. The FNPRM seeks comment on proposals that would reduce burdens on the broadcast industry. The Further Notice proposes to streamline the information broadcasters will need to provide, by requiring the Commission to import information already filed with the FCC, and exempts certain items from being posted online such as letters and emails from the public. It further seeks comment on posting sponsorship identification information, now disclosed only on-air, and shared services agreements online as part of the public inspection file hosted by the Commission. Comments in this MM Docket No. 00-168 proceeding will be due 30 days after publication of the item in the Federal Register, and replies are due 15 days thereafter. BloostonLaw contact: Hal Mordkofsky.

OPEN RANGE FILES FOR BANKRUPTCY: Open Range, a Greenville, Colo., company supported by $267 million in Rural Utilities Service (RUS) loan commitments, has filed for bankruptcy. Open Range had planned to use cutting-edge technology to bring high-speed Internet service to remote rural areas, according to the Washington Post. It added that lawmakers have asked that Open Range be included in the House investigation of failed solar-panel company Solyndra, which recently filed for bankruptcy after receiving some $535 million in loan guarantees. The Post noted that Open Range’s loan was originally granted by the Bush administration. In 2008, the then-RUS Administrator James Andrews praised Open Range’s unique plan to get broadband to neglected areas by using a network of satellites owned by Globalstar. Open Range and Globalstar needed a special waiver from the FCC to partner on the project. The Post reported that three of the FCC Commissioners approved the request, saying they wanted to support the RUS loan. Those who disagreed said it was inappropriate to give one company special favors. Problems at the companies quickly emerged. An equipment partner provided shoddy technology, according to Open Range’s bankruptcy filing. The RUS money was dispersed slowly and inefficiently, the filing said. Globalstar also ran into delays in launching its satellites and failed to meet deadlines set by the FCC. On several occasions, Globalstar asked for more time. In September 2010, as it looked increasingly clear that the FCC was not going to give the venture an extension, then-RUS Administrator Jonathan Adelstein sent a letter to Genachowski warning that its entire loan was at risk if more time was not granted. The FCC turned the request down a few days later. That led the USDA to slash its original loan commitment of $267 million to Open Range in half. In a prepared statement, Adelstein said that he was “disappointed” Open Range went bankrupt, and that 99% of all RUS broadband loans are paid back.

COURT RULES AGAINST SAN FRANCISCO CELL PHONE WARNING LAW: U.S. District Judge William Alsup has blocked San Francisco's ordinance requiring retail outlets to inform consumers about the alleged effects of cell phone radiation, according to CNN. The ordinance was challenged by CTIA-The Wireless Association, which claimed the ordinance's requirement that retailers post messages about cell phone safety violated the First Amendment. Judge Alsup agreed, adding that the ordinance also failed to pass scientific muster. "Whether or not cell phones cause cancer is a debatable question and, at this point in history, is a matter of opinion, not fact. San Francisco has its opinion. The industry has the opposite opinion," wrote Judge Alsup. The fact-sheet required by the ordinance is "misleading and must be corrected," he noted. "Although each factoid in isolation may have an anchor in some article somewhere, the overall message of the fact-sheet (and the poster, for that matter) is misleading by omission in two important ways. The overall impression left is that cell phones are dangerous and that they have somehow escaped the regulatory process." CNN noted that the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a report that seemingly supported San Francisco's position in May when it labeled cell phones "possibly carcinogenic," meaning that there is "limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals." But results of a massive, 15-year-long study released earlier this month showed absolutely no link between cell phone use and cancer, echoing the findings of numerous other studies. The judge stayed the effectiveness of the cell phone warning law until November 30 to allow the parties time to appeal his ruling. CTIA said it respectfully disagrees with the judge's determination that the City could compel distribution of the revised fact sheet as discussed in the court's opinion. CTIA is considering its options regarding further proceedings on this issue.

This newsletter is not intended to provide legal advice. Those interested in more information should contact the firm.

Intelligent Solutions for Paging & Wireless Data

WiPath manufactures a wide range of highly unique and innovative hardware and software solutions in paging and mobile data for:

• Emergency Mass Alert & Messaging Emergency Services Communications Utilities Job Management Telemetry and Remote Switching Fire House Automation
• Load Shedding and Electrical Services Control

PDT3000 Paging Data Terminal

• FLEX & POCSAG Built-in POCSAG encoder Huge capcode capacity Parallel, 2 serial ports, 4 relays
• Message & system monitoring

Paging Controlled Moving Message LED Displays

• Variety of sizes Indoor/outdoor
• Integrated paging receiver

PDR3000/PSR3000 Paging Data Receivers

• Highly programmable, off-air decoders Message Logging & remote control Multiple I/O combinations and capabilities
• Network monitoring and alarm reporting

Specialized Paging Solutions

• Emergency Mass Alerting Remote telemetry switching & control Fire station automation PC interfacing and message management Paging software and customized solutions Message interception, filtering, redirection, printing & logging Cross band repeating, paging coverage infill, store and forward
• Alarm interfaces, satellite linking, IP transmitters, on-site systems

Mobile Data Terminals & Two Way Wireless  Solutions

Contact
Postal Address:	WiPath Communications LLC 4845 Dumbbarton Court Cumming, GA 30040
Street Address:	4845 Dumbbarton Court Cumming, GA 30040
Web site:	www.wipath.com CLICK
E-mail:	info@wipath.com CLICK
Phone:	770-844-6218
Fax:	770-844-6574
WiPath Communications

SEE WEB FOR COMPLETE LIST:
www.preferredwireless.com/equipment CLICK HERE

Too Much To List • Call or E-Mail

Rick McMichael Preferred Wireless, Inc. 10658 St. Charles Rock Rd. St. Louis, MO 63074 888-429-4171 or 314-429-3000 rickm@preferredwireless.com CLICK HERE www.preferredwireless.com/equipment OR HERE

From: Gary Brake < gb@brakere.com >
Subject: Re: CMA Wireless Messaging News for Gary Brake
Date: October 31, 2011 8:32:54 PM CDT
To: Brad Dye <brad@braddye.com>

Brad, although I have not been in wireless for a couple of years, I was in it for 25 years.  I miss the paging people and the conferences and good times.  I would like to thank you for sending me the newsletter and keeping me in touch with the industry.  Your newsletter is fantastic and very informative.  Thanks again.

Gary Brake

From: "Steve - TKO Networks" < steve@tkonetworks.com >
Subject: From the Paging Information Web Site
Date: November 2, 2011 10:06:08 AM CDT
To: "Brad Dye" <brad@braddye.com>

No atta-boys, no e-mails.....  Well here is an e-mail!!!!

Strangely enough, lately I've been not getting my newsletter every other week or so.

So I have to go to the directory and pull up last friday's newsletter. No big deal.

I would also point out that a Monday morning delivery might work better than a friday afternoon, since sometimes friday afternoon's may turn out to be real busy at work, or in someone's personal life :)

I still read every week, and business has it's cycles, just hang in there the next big thing for paging could be right around the corner.  I saw a huge apartment complex in Columbia, MO that had paging activated utility shutoff's on every air conditioner compressor in the entire complex last month. 

They were not there before.

And I still wear my Motorola Advisor Gold [12 years old] on my right hip daily.  It is still an awesome 8 second alert device I can't seem to give up :)

Thanks Brad,

Steve Donohue
Tkonetworks
Posnetss, LLC

From: robert.thoelen@rtcubed.com
Subject: Paging status
Date: November 2, 2011 9:35:51 AM CDT
To: brad@braddye.com

Brad,

I'm subscribed to your newsletter through rthoelen@gmail.com, but this e-mail is easier for me to send you a message right now.  As you might remember, I live in CT, and we have been hammered by the snow storm and power outages.

Just wanted to let you know that as far as I can tell with a scanner, all the paging carriers I know of in this area are working, even when most cell towers are not (except for Verizon — they have stayed up throughout the whole mess).  I sent a note to UCOM, my primary paging carrier, and let them know how appreciative I was of the paging service.  I changed my cell voicemail to indicate calling the pager, since that is the only reliable way to reach me at the moment.

We are expected to have power this Sunday at my house.  Even though my cell phone still has spotty coverage, its nice to know I can shut it off and save power, knowing that if someone needs me, they will call the pager, then I can power the phone up and call them back.

There is still a place for paging in a family's emergency planning.  

73, Bob KD1ZD

—
Robert Thoelen III
RTCubed Consulting
Phone: (860) 849-1101
Email: robert.thoelen@rtcubed.com

“People are often unreasonable and self-centered. Forgive them anyway. If you are kind, people may accuse you of ulterior motives. Be kind anyway. If you are honest, people may cheat you. Be honest anyway. If you find happiness, people may be jealous. Be happy anyway. The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good anyway. Give the world the best you have, and it may never be enough. Give your best anyway.”

—Mother Teresa