|Wireless News Aggregation|
Welcome Back To The Wireless Messaging News
Don't miss the LETTER TO THE EDITOR from Jim Nelson announcing that CMA-America and CMA-Europe will merge. There are some important revisions to his original letter published last week.
Our feature article this week is about surveillance and data-mining business practices by Rex M. Lee who is a privacy and data security consultant and Blackops Partners senior analyst and researcher.
I know Rex personally and have the highest level of confidence in his work.
If you have information of interest to the Paging and Wireless Messaging Communities please contribute it to the Paging Information web site and this newsletter. Don't take it to the grave with you.
We need your help. This is probably the only weekly news source about paging and wireless messaging.
Editorial Opinion pieces present only the opinions of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of any of advertisers or supporters. This newsletter is independent of any trade association. I don't intend to hurt anyone's feelings, but I do freely express my own opinions.
Prism-IPX Systems is growing and they are looking for more good software developers with communications experience. Additional information is available on their web site. Click here .
NO POLITICS HERE
This doesn't mean that nothing is ever published here that mentions a US political party—it just means that the editorial policy of this newsletter is to remain neutral on all political issues. We don't take sides.
A new issue of the Wireless Messaging Newsletter is posted on the web each week. A notification goes out by e-mail to subscribers on most Fridays around noon central US time. The notification message has a link to the actual newsletter on the web. That way it doesn’t fill up your incoming e-mail account.
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.
TIME TO HUDDLE UP
I spend the whole week searching the INTERNET for news that I think may be of interest to you — so you won’t have to. This newsletter is an aggregator — a service that aggregates news from other news sources. You can help our community by sharing any interesting news that you find.
* required field
Google CEO Sundar Pichai testifies during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on Dec. 11, 2018. (Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images) Facebook and Google Congressional Hearings: Meaningless Resolve and Phony Apologies
January 6, 2019 Updated: January 7, 2019
In 2018, I was offered the opportunity to share important information regarding surveillance and data-mining business practices employed by Facebook and Google with the Senate and House Judiciary committees
I was able to participate in several conference calls with staffers, plus provide the staffers with important information pertaining to the congressional hearings involving Facebook Chairman/CEO Mark Zuckerberg (Senate Judiciary hearing held on April 10, 2018) and Google CEO Sundar Pichai (House Judiciary hearing held on Dec. 11, 2018).
The staffers included individuals who work for Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), plus the House Judiciary Committee.
After watching the Facebook and Google hearings, I was appalled that they were more about politics than protecting citizens, teens, children, and business professionals from companies that employ harmful surveillance and data-mining business practices.
Both hearings left numerous unanswered questions regarding the harmful business practices employed by both companies, which need to be addressed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), state attorneys general, and lawmakers.
Additionally, the hearings ended with what amounted to empty apologies by both executives, while both companies continue to do business as usual.
At the Facebook congressional hearing, what was laughable was that on several occasions, lawmakers actually suggested that Facebook help write future privacy-centric legislation meant to protect consumers of smartphones and connected technology.
I have news for those lawmakers: Companies such as Google have their lobbyists write legislation, according to Eric Schmidt, the former chairman/CEO of Google and former chairman of Alphabet Inc. (Google’s now-parent company):
I was to sadly learn that hardly any of the information pertaining to the violation of consumer laws and threats that I provided to the staffers was actually addressed by lawmakers during the hearings.
During the congressional hearings that took place in 2018, Zuckerberg and Pichai implied that tech giants such as Facebook and Google don’t sell their product users’ identifiable personal information to third-parties such as advertisers.
Don’t take my word for it. See for yourself:
Android application legalese on a Samsung Galaxy Note smartphone supported by the Android OS:
I submitted that to members of the House Judiciary Committee, prior to the Google congressional hearing on Dec. 11, 2018.
During the hearing, which centered on Google’s data collection methods, not a single lawmaker challenged Pichai when it came to the knowledge that Google, and its content developers such as Facebook, can, in fact, identify telecom and tech-product users by way of uncontrollable pre-installed Android content such as smartphone apps.
Not only do intrusive Android apps enable Google and Android content developers to identify a smartphone user, but they also enable the identification of the user’s contacts, which include family, friends, business colleagues, plus other people who are listed in the user’s electronic address book.
Here’s another example of the legalese associated with the “contacts” (electronic address book) app on a Samsung Galaxy Note smartphone:
Contacts app permission and application product warning: “Allows the app to read data about your contacts stored on your phone, including the frequency with which you’ve called, emailed, or communicated in other ways with specific individuals. This permission allows apps to save your contact data, and malicious apps may share contact data without your knowledge.”
So, Google and Facebook can also track the way the smartphone user connects with his or her contacts, whether it be by phone, email, or other forms of communication.
This is beyond creepy, especially considering the number of developers worldwide who develop Android content for Google, other than Facebook.
Did you notice the Android “contacts” application legalese contains an application product warning regarding the fact that “malicious apps” may share your contact data without your knowledge?
Selling Access to Product Users
Zuckerberg and Pichai also implied that Facebook and Google product users have full control over their personal information and data, which is another half-truth or possible lie, because Facebook and Google sell access to their product users.
In 2018 alone, Facebook, Google, and telecom providers have all been caught enabling data brokers and multinational companies, including nation-state companies from China, with the ability to indiscriminately surveil their product users while collecting surveillance data (e.g. location data) and sensitive user data (“digital DNA”) from smartphone, social media, and tech-product users.
Smartphone and tech-product users are viewed by telecom and tech providers as “uncompensated information producers” who are to be exploited for financial gain by the companies that the user patronizes with their loyalty, trust, and hard-earned money.
The Facebook–Cambridge Analytica scandal brought to light that tech giants such as Facebook sell access to their product users to bad actors, including data brokers such as Aleksandr Kogan, who created surveillance and data-mining technology in the form of a personality quiz app. He later sold the data of tens of millions of unsuspecting Facebook users to Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm.
At the discretion of companies such as Google, Microsoft, and Facebook, any individual or company seems to be able to buy access to their product users by way of addictive, intrusive, and harmful technology in the form of a web browser, app, widget, or emoji.
Apple isn’t innocent, either. Apple CEO Tim Cook likes to present Apple over and above companies such as Google and Facebook when it comes to harmful surveillance and data-mining business practices, yet Apple sold out Apple product users to Google in a multi-billion dollar deal.
This means that Google is enabled by Apple to monitor, track, and data-mine Apple product users for financial gain by way of Google apps.
Many Apple product users bought Apple products years ago to get away from Google’s predatory surveillance and data-mining business practices, only to find themselves on the Apple auctioning block to be sold to Google and exploited for financial gain.
Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook product users are commodities to be sold to the highest bidder, whether or not the company that pays for access to the product user will misuse the personal and professional digital DNA acquired.
Furthermore, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint also sold their telecom subscribers’ (paying customers) personal information to data brokers such as LocationSmart and Zumigo, as reported in numerous news reports in 2018.
Content Developers or Hackers?
Smartphone, social media, and tech-product users have no control over who is gaining access to their personal and professional digital DNA by way of surveillance and data-mining technology disguised as apps.
Intrusive content developers such as Google and Facebook are nothing more than hackers who use harmful technology to exploit their product users for financial gain, even at the expense of the user’s safety, whether the user is an adult or a child.
Don’t take my word for it. Sean Parker, one of Facebook’s co-founders, explains this clearly in an interview with Axios in November 2017:
Former Google product designer Tristan Harris also validated that Google uses addictive technology in order to exploit the Google product user for financial gain.
“The average person checks their phone 150 times a day. Why do we do this? Are we making 150 conscious choices? One major reason why is the No. 1 psychological ingredient in slot machines: intermittent variable rewards. … Addictiveness is maximized when the rate of reward is most variable,” he wrote in an essay on Medium.
I pointed out the Facebook and Google admissions to the FTC, FCC, state attorneys general, and lawmakers, who to this day don’t seem to care that Silicon Valley tech giants are using harmful technology to exploit their product users for financial gain, even at the expense of the users’ privacy and safety.
News networks are still advertising smartphones, tablet PCs, and connected products that are supported by addictive, intrusive, and harmful content.
Government Fails at All Levels to Protect Citizens
The FTC, FCC, state attorneys general and lawmakers are failing to enforce existing consumer laws meant to protect citizens, teens, children, and business professionals from companies that employ harmful business practices supported by deceptive trade practices.
Kogan, Zuckerberg, and other senior executives from Facebook and Cambridge Analytica should be indicted for putting Facebook users in harm’s way, rather than allowing senior executives such as Zuckerberg to make yet another empty apology to lawmakers, Facebook users, and the American public.
Telecom providers also need to be held accountable for exposing paying customers to companies that employ harmful business practices.
The public needs to ask why tech and telecom senior executives continue to get away with negligent, harmful, and deceptive trade practices that put citizens in harm’s way.
Only after data brokers and other entities such as Cambridge Analytica are caught misusing personal and professional digital DNA do companies such as Facebook, Google, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint make phony apologies, while continuing to do business as usual with no consequences or government oversight.
If you do file formal customer complaints with your telecom or tech providers such as I’ve done, they simply respond with meaningless and nebulous information without addressing questions and concerns with detailed answers or resolve.
As I’ve stated before, it is bad enough to lose privacy but to be exploited for financial gain at the expense of your civil liberties, privacy, cybersecurity, and safety should be unacceptable and illegal. For every company that gets caught misusing digital DNA acquired from telecom and tech-product users, many other data brokers and other entities get away with misusing a person’s personal digital DNA.
The FCC, FTC, government officials, lawmakers, plus the public don’t understand surveillance and data-mining business practices regarding tech giants selling access to their users rather than directly selling the user’s identifiable personal and professional information.
According to existing consumer laws enforced at the state and federal level, it’s illegal to employ business practices supported by deceptive trade practices that can result in harm to the consumer. However, officials continue to turn a blind eye when it comes to harmful business practices employed by companies such as Facebook and Google.
At this point, senior executives for the tobacco industry look innocent compared to telecom providers and tech companies that develop addictive, intrusive, and harmful content to exploit their paying customer for financial gain at the expense of the customer’s privacy and safety.
At least tobacco products are sold to adults and not to teens and children.
The Greatest Data Theft in the History of the World
While apps provide convenience for the user, the app developer is robbing the user blind by collecting the user’s digital DNA to exploit for financial gain, at the expense of the product user’s civil liberties, privacy, cybersecurity, and safety.
People who don’t care about personal privacy should care about being used and exploited for financial gain, at the expense of their civil liberties, privacy, cybersecurity, and safety, by the very telecom and tech providers they patronize with their loyalty, trust, and hard-earned money.
After all, who wants to pay money to companies that exploit their customers like that?
The public at large needs to ask why officials are allowing these companies to get away with what amounts to theft regarding personal and professional information.
We need to demand accountability from all parties concerned regarding harmful business practices employed by tech and telecom providers.
Rex M. Lee is a privacy and data security consultant and Blackops Partners senior analyst and researcher. His website is MySmartPrivacy.com
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or The Wireless Messaging News.
|Source:||The Epoch Times|
Paging Transmitters 150/900 MHz
The RFI High Performance Paging Transmitter is designed for use in campus, city, state and country-wide paging systems. Designed for use where reliable simulcast systems where RF signal overlap coverage is critical.
Built-in custom interface for Prism-IPX ipBSC Base Controller for remote control, management and alarm reporting.
Prism-IPX Systems LLC.
11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Back To Paging
Still The Most Reliable Protocol For Wireless Messaging!
Motorola Solutions Retracts CEO’s Statements on Huawei
Monday, January 14, 2019
Motorola Solutions retracted comments about prior trade secret litigations with Huawei Technologies made by CEO Greg Brown on Fox Business Network in December.
In a statement released Jan. 11, Motorola Solutions said Brown “made certain comments regarding prior trade secret litigations between Motorola Solutions and Huawei Technologies. Motorola Solutions and Huawei amicably resolved their dispute through a settlement agreement executed in April 2011. The parties then agreed to and issued a joint public statement on April 13, 2011, which is reproduced below in its entirety. In light of the joint public statement made on April 13, 2011, upon reflection, the comments on Fox Business Network should not have been made and Motorola Solutions retracts these comments.”
During the interview, Brown said that starting in 1972 when then President Richard Nixon made a call from China with a Motorola-provided satellite phone, the country was a lucrative market for Motorola. He said things began to change about a decade ago and he decided about eight years ago to get mostly out of the market. The company has no manufacturing or research and development (R&D) in China.
Brown said about 15 years ago in the height of Motorola’s business in China, the company had more than $3 billion in revenue and 15,000 people in China. It currently has $170 million in revenue from China and 170 employees there. “It’s a different game,” Brown said on the news show.
In the 2011 statement, Motorola Solutions agreed to withdraw its claims and dismiss, with prejudice, Huawei as a defendant in the litigation pending in the Chicago federal district court. Huawei agreed to withdraw its claims and dismiss, with prejudice, its lawsuit against Motorola Solutions and Nokia Siemens Networks (NSN) in the Chicago federal district court and to resolve its claims against Motorola Solutions and NSN by entering into an agreement that allows Motorola Solutions to transfer its commercial agreements with Huawei to NSN for a fee, and allows NSN to receive and use Huawei confidential information to service the networks Motorola deployed worldwide using Huawei’s products and technologies.
In 2000, Motorola and Huawei entered into an agreement during which Motorola resold certain Huawei products under the Motorola name. During the next 10 years, Motorola purchased $880 million in technology from Huawei that covered core networks and radio access networks, the statement said.
The news comes as Motorola has brought litigation during the past two years against Chinese competitor Hytera Communications in three countries including the United States. Huawei executives recently have been arrested in Canada and Poland on charges of fraud and spying, respectively.
|Source:||Radio Resource International|
I would like to recommend Easy Solutions for Support of all Glenayre Paging Equipment. This Texas company is owned and operated by Vaughan Bowden. I have known Vaughan for over 35 years. Without going into a long list of his experience and qualifications, let me just say that he was the V.P. of Engineering at PageNet which was—at that time—the largest paging company in the world. So Vaughan knows Paging.
GTES is no longer offering support contracts. GTES was the original group from Vancouver that was setup to offer support to customers that wanted to continue with the legacy Glenayre support. Many U.S. customers chose not to use this service because of the price and the original requirement to upgrade to version 8.0 software (which required expensive hardware upgrades, etc.). Most contracts ended as of February 2018.
If you are at all concerned about future support of Glenayre products, especially the “king of the hill” the GL3000 paging control terminal, I encourage you to talk to Vaughan about a service contract and please tell him about my recommendation.
The Wireless Messaging News
The Board of Advisor members are people with whom I have developed a special rapport, and have met personally. They are not obligated to support the newsletter in any way, except with advice, and maybe an occasional letter to the editor.
Can You Help The Newsletter?
You can help support The Wireless Messaging News by clicking on the PayPal Donate button above. It is not necessary to be a member of PayPal to use this service.
Newspapers generally cost
A donation of $50.00 would certainly help cover a one-year period. If you are wiling and able, please click on the PayPal Donate button above.
|Voluntary Newsletter Supporters By Donation|
Premium Newsletter Supporter
Premium Newsletter Supporter
Canyon Ridge Communications
Premium Newsletter Supporter
e*Message Wireless Information Services Europe
Donate to have your company's logo added.
Incyte Capital Holdings LLC
|Product Support Services, Inc.|
Repair and Refurbishment Services
Product Support Services, Inc.
Click on the image above for more info about advertising here.
INTERNET Protocol Terminal
The IPT accepts INTERNET or serial messaging using various protocols and can easily convert them to different protocols, or send them out as paging messages.
An ideal platform for hospitals, on-site paging applications, or converting legacy systems to modern protocols.
Prism-IPX Systems LLC.
11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Paging Data Receiver PDR-4
The PDR-4 is a multi-function paging data receiver that decodes paging messages and outputs them via the serial port, USB or Ethernet connectors.
Designed for use with Prism-IPX ECHO software Message Logging Software to receive messages and log the information for proof of transmission over the air, and if the data was error free.
Prism-IPX Systems LLC.
11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Wireless Network Planners
Remote AB Switches
ABX-1 switches are often used at remote transmitter sites to convert from old, outdated and unsupported controllers to the new modern Prism-IPX ipBSC base station controllers. Remotely switch to new controllers with GUI commands.
ABX-3 switches are widely used for enabling or disabling remote equipment and switching I/O connections between redundant messaging systems.
Prism-IPX Systems LLC.
11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Next-Generation iPhone XR Said to Feature 4x4 MIMO Antenna Design Enabling Faster Data Speeds
Thursday January 17, 2019 6:01 am PST by Joe Rossignol
The next-generation iPhone XR will feature a 4x4 MIMO antenna design, according to a Barclay's research note obtained by MacRumors.
4x4 MIMO, short for multiple-input, multiple-output, has the potential to significantly improve LTE transmission by increasing the number of data paths between cellular towers and a mobile device to four. Simply put, the next iPhone XR would feature four antennas, allowing for faster data speeds.
iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max models feature Gigabit-class LTE with a 4x4 MIMO antenna design, while the current iPhone XR supports 2x2 MIMO.
A few months ago, PC Magazine reported that the iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max have "significantly better" LTE performance than the iPhone XR based on testing conducted by Cellular Insights and Rohde & Schwarz. The difference was especially noticeable in weak signal conditions, the results indicated.
Of course, regardless of how many antennas an iPhone has, data speeds can be affected by factors such as network congestion, distance from the tower, physical obstructions, environmental conditions, and interference.
FCC Order Easing Buildout Regs Upheld By Tenth Circuit Court Ruling
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth circuit denied a motion last Thursday to stay the FCC's September 2018 5G order that addressed state and local rules governing the deployment of wireless infrastructure. Inside Towers reported on the initiation of the petitions in October (“Munis Vow Legal Action Against FCC Over Small Cell Order”).
The FCC mandate becomes effective today. The case pitted various cities, San Jose, New York City, Seattle and more versus the FCC. The Court issued the stay order stating the petitioners “failed to meet their burden of showing irreparable harm if a stay is not granted.”
“Needless regulatory roadblocks won’t prevent the build out of next-gen networks,” FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said following the court’s decision. “It ensures that needless regulatory roadblocks will not prevent our country’s hard-working telecom crews from building the next-generation networks needed to support 5G,” Carr said.
Carr estimates that the September order cut about $2 Billion in costs that threatened to stifle the deployment of small cells and other next-generation wireless infrastructure necessary for 5G. A similar legal challenge is pending in the Ninth Circuit Court, considered a more friendly venue for the municipalities. The Tenth Court granted a motion to transfer the petition back to the Ninth.
|Source:||Inside Towers newsletter||Courtesy of the editor of Inside Towers.|
Selected portions [sometimes more — sometimes less] of the BloostonLaw Telecom Update and/or the BloostonLaw Private Users Update — newsletters from the Law Offices of Blooston, Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy & Prendergast, LLP — are reproduced in this section of The Wireless Messaging News with kind permission from the firm. The firm's contact information is included at the end of this section of the newsletter.
FCC Shutdown Continues
As we reported in a previous edition of the BloostonLaw Telecom Update, the FCC shut down on January 3 as a result of the current lapse in federal government funding. On January 2, the FCC issued a Public Notice announcing how filing and database systems, filing deadlines, regulatory and application fee payments, and transaction shot clocks will be affected. Please refer to the January 2 edition of the BloostonLaw Telecom Update for more information.
Please note that Auction 101 continues as scheduled. Other items reported below may also be affected by the shutdown.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, John Prendergast, and Sal Taillefer.
CAF Oversight Bill Introduced in House of Representatives
On January 10, Congressman Doug Collins (R-Ga.) introduced H.R. 427, the Connect America Fund (CAF) Accountability Act of 2019. If enacted, this bill would require additional speed testing information in existing FCC reports, add additional considerations for USAC in initiating CAF audits, and make the results of CAF audits public. As currently drafted, the bill would apply to CAF recipients that provide fixed broadband Internet access service.
According to a section-by-section summary of the bill, covered CAF recipients would be required to include additional information in the speed and latency reports already required to be provided to the FCC. This additional information includes the method of performance testing they chose to undertake each quarter (Measuring Broadband America, ping testing (off the shelf), or self-testing.) Further, a covered recipient that chooses to use self-testing software for performance testing would be required, once every three years, to report information on its self-testing algorithms and/or processes to the FCC.
Covered recipients that test one or more customer locations more than twice during a calendar year would be required to report those customer locations to the FCC. To encourage the use of representative sampling in speed testing, the bill reportedly requires recipients to ensure that each test includes a representative number of residences and businesses in the CAF service area in each report.
A second section of the bill requires USAC, in determining whether or not to conduct an audit of a covered recipient, to consider the number and frequency of complaints submitted to the FCC for the broadband service. This section also requires that audits conducted by USAC in connection with CAF be made available to the public.
“For years, Northeast Georgians have consistently struggled to gain access to reliable broadband speeds. Congress has taken significant steps toward expanding rural broadband infrastructure in recent years, including securing federal funding to providers in rural areas. However, some carriers – particularly in Northeast Georgia – have failed to provide adequate broadband speeds to consumers despite collecting taxpayer dollars,” Rep. Collins said.
“Improving broadband access and increasing reliability continues to be a top priority, which is why the CAF Accountability Act is the first bill I’m introducing this Congress. This legislation institutes specific tools to hold providers accountable for accurate reporting while ensuring households and businesses throughout our rural communities have access to the broadband services required to compete in the 21st-century economy.”
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, Mary Sisak, and Sal Taillefer.
Nationwide Carriers Promise to Stop Selling Location Data to Third Parties
Earlier this week, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile variously issued statements indicating they would stop selling their customers’ phone location data to third parties, after Motherboard reported that it was able to hire a bounty hunter to track a specific phone on the T-Mobile network for $300. According to the article, the bounty hunter was able to provide a screenshot of Google Maps indicating the phone’s current location, which turned out to be “just a couple of blocks from where the target was.” The article describes the channels through which the location data was obtained – it appears that it was not obtained directly from the carrier, but rather from a series of aggregators and bail industry sources.
Since its article, Motherboard has received communications from the three nationwide providers indicating they would stop selling location data to aggregators, though they companies indicate it will negatively impact their ability to provide certain roadside assistance and fraud prevention services. Motherboard also reported that Verizon recently told the Washington Post that it was closing its own remaining location aggregator contacts as well.
A spokesperson for Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) told POLITICO that the FTC "must investigate these clear abuses of Americans' personal data." Wyden, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel also called on the FCC to look into the matter.
JANUARY 31: FCC FORM 555, ANNUAL LIFELINE RECERTIFICATION FORM. Lifeline service providers are required to re-certify each of their Lifeline customers by the customer’s anniversary date – i.e., 12 months from the customer's service initiation date, or the date when their eligibility was last verified – each year. Form 555 reports the results of the annual rolling recertification process and includes data accuracy certifications. BLOOSTONLAW TELECOM UPDATE 3 January 16, 2019 Form 555 is due January 31 to USAC, the FCC, and state regulatory commissions. Due to hurricanes, certain carriers have extensions of this filing requirement, per the FCC’s Hurricane Relief Orders applies.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy, Mary Sisak, and Sal Taillefer.
FEBRUARY 1: FCC FORM 499-Q, TELECOMMUNICATIONS REPORTING WORKSHEET. All telecommunications common carriers that expect to contribute more than $10,000 to federal Universal Service Fund (USF) support mechanisms must file this quarterly form. The FCC has modified this form in light of its decision to establish interim measures for USF contribution assessments. The form contains revenue information from the prior quarter plus projections for the next quarter. Form 499-Q relates only to USF contributions. It does not relate to the cost recovery mechanisms for the Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) Fund, the North American Numbering Plan Administration (NANPA), and the shared costs of local number portability (LNP), which are covered in the annual Form 499-A that is due April 1.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.
FEBRUARY 1: FCC FORM 502, NUMBER UTILIZATION AND FORECAST REPORT. Any wireless or wireline carrier (including paging companies) that have received number blocks--including 100, 1,000, or 10,000 number blocks--from the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA), a Pooling Administrator, or from another carrier, must file Form 502 by February 1. Carriers porting numbers for the purpose of transferring an established customer’s service to another service provider must also report, but the carrier receiving numbers through porting does not. Resold services should also be treated like ported numbers, meaning the carrier transferring the resold service to another carrier is required to report those numbers but the carrier receiving such numbers should not report them. Reporting carriers are required to include their FCC Registration Number (FRN). Reporting carriers file utilization and forecast reports semiannually on or before February 1 for the preceding six-month reporting period ending December 31, and on or before August 1 for the preceding six-month reporting period ending June 30.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.
MARCH 1: COPYRIGHT STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FORM FOR CABLE COMPANIES. This form, plus royalty payment for the second half of calendar year 2018, is due March 1. The form covers the period July 1 to December 31, 2018, and is due to be mailed directly to cable TV operators by the Library of Congress’ Copyright Office. If you do not receive the form, please contact the firm. BloostonLaw Contact: Gerry Duffy. MARCH 1: CPNI ANNUAL CERTIFICATION. Carriers should modify (as necessary) and complete their “Annual Certification of CPNI Compliance” for 2019. The certification must be filed with the FCC by March 1. Note that the annual certification should include the following three required Exhibits: (a) a detailed Statement Explaining How The Company’s Operating Procedures Ensure Compliance With The FCC’S CPNI Rules to reflect the Company’s policies and information; (b) a Statement of Actions Taken Against Data Brokers; and (c) a Summary of Customer Complaints Regarding Unauthorized Release of CPNI. A company officer with personal knowledge that the company has established operating procedures adequate to ensure compliance with the rules must execute the Certification, place a copy of the Certification and accompanying Exhibits in the Company’s CPNI Compliance Records, and file the certification with the FCC in the correct fashion. Our clients can forward the original to BloostonLaw in time for the firm to make the filing with the FCC by March 1, if desired. BloostonLaw is prepared to help our clients meet this requirement, which we expect will be strictly enforced, by assisting with preparation of their certification filing; reviewing the filing to make sure that the required showings are made; filing the certification with the FCC, and obtaining a proof-of-filing copy for your records. Clients interested in obtaining BloostonLaw's CPNI compliance manual should contact the firm.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy
MARCH 1: FCC FORM 477, LOCAL COMPETITION & BROADBAND REPORTING FORM. This annual form is due March 1 and September 1 annually. The FCC requires facilities-based wired, terrestrial fixed wireless, and satellite broadband service providers to report on FCC Form 477 the number of broadband subscribers they have in each census tract they serve. The Census Bureau changed the boundaries of some census tracts as part of the 2010 Census. Specifically, three types of entities must file this form: (1) Facilities-based Providers of Broadband Connections to End User Locations: Entities that are facilities-based providers of broadband connections – which are wired “lines” or wireless “channels” that enable the end user to receive information from and/or send information to the Internet at information transfer rates exceeding 200 kbps in at least one direction – must complete and file the applicable portions of this form for each state in which the entity provides one or more such connections to end user locations. For the purposes of Form 477, an entity is a “facilities-based” provider of broadband connections to end user locations if it owns the portion of the physical facility that terminates at the end user location, if it obtains unbundled network elements (UNEs), special access lines, or other leased facilities that terminate at the end user location and provisions/equips them as broadband, or if it provisions/equips a broadband wireless channel to the end user location over licensed or unlicensed spectrum. Such entities include incumbent and competitive local exchange carriers (LECs), cable system operators, fixed wireless service providers (including “wireless ISPs”), terrestrial and satellite mobile wireless service providers, BRS providers, electric utilities, municipalities, and other entities. (Such entities do not include equipment suppliers unless the equipment supplier uses the equipment to provision a broadband connection that it offers to the public for sale. Such entities also do not include providers of fixed wireless services (e.g., “Wi-Fi” and other wireless ethernet, or wireless local area network, applications) that only enable local distribution and sharing of a premises broadband facility.) (2) Providers of Wired or Fixed Wireless Local Telephone Services: Incumbent and competitive LECs must complete and file the applicable portions of the form for each state in which they provide local exchange service to one or more end user customers (which may include “dial-up” ISPs). (3) Providers of Mobile Telephony Services: Facilities-based providers of mobile telephony services must complete and file the applicable portions of this form for each state in which they serve one or more mobile telephony subscribers. A mobile telephony service is a real-time, two-way switched voice service that is interconnected with the public switched network using an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless handoff of subscriber calls. A mobile telephony service provider is considered “facilities-based” if it serves a subscriber using spectrum for which the entity holds a license that it manages, or for which it has obtained the right to use via lease or other arrangement with a Band Manager.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.
MARCH 1: HIGH COST UNIVERSAL BROADBAND PORTAL FILING. Carriers participating in Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II, Alternative Connect America Cost Model (A-CAM), Rural Broadband Experiments (RBE), Alaska Plan, and Connect America Fund-Broadband Loop Support (CAF-BLS) programs must file broadband deployment data with USAC where they are building out mass-market, high-speed Internet service. This information includes latitude and longitude coordinates for every location where service is available.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Sal Taillefer.
MARCH 31: FCC FORM 508, CAF-BLS PROJECTED ANNUAL COMMON LINE REQUIREMENT. Each rate-of-return incumbent telecommunications carrier that does not elect voluntary model-based support to provide information needed to calculate the projected annual cost and revenue data for each of its study areas in the upcoming funding year to USAC. This information must be submitted on March 31st of each year, in order for the carrier to be eligible to receive Connect America Fund-Broadband Loop Support (CAF-BLS).
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy, Mary Sisak, and Sal Taillefer.
MARCH 31: FCC FORM 525, CETC LINE COUNTS. Competitive eligible telecommunications carriers (CETCs) are eligible to receive High Cost support if they serve lines in an incumbent carrier’s service area, and that incumbent carrier receives High Cost support. CETCs are eligible to receive the same per-line support amount received by the incumbent carrier in whose study area the CETC serves lines. Unlike the incumbent carriers, CETCs will use FCC Form 525 to submit their line count data to USAC. Form 525 is due by March 31 each year.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy, Mary Sisak, and Sal Taillefer.
Per the FCC’s shutdown policy, all FCC submissions that would be due during a suspension of operations will be due on the second day of normal operations. Deadlines affected by this policy are marked “TBD” below.
|LETTERS TO THE EDITOR|
Thank you for reporting the news of the paging and critical messaging industry for many, many years. Your newsletter has been the main source of information for the industry and an important advertising and news outlet for the paging Associations even as they have changed names and direction to better represent the intended membership as the markets and user evolve.
Accordingly, it’s very appropriate that I make this announcement in your Newsletter regarding the current paging industry association as it changes once more.
Since 2012, Critical Messaging Association-America and Critical Messaging Association-Europe have been working together to expand our image as a unified entity. Because many of our members have traveled the world promoting the use of paging technology for critical messaging situations, CMA has become more widely recognized as an authority in the industry.
With this recognition from all corners of the world comes a realization that we have achieved our goal we set when we signed the Cooperation Agreement in Stockholm in 2012. Therefore, on behalf of the CMA-A Board of Directors, I’m pleased to announce that CMA-America and CMA-Europe will merge into one global Critical Messaging Association, effective January 1, 2019, which will be headquartered in London, England.
Uniting efforts will allow us to continue our advocacy in a more concentrated, organized manner while also controlling costs as the industry has evolved to more private paging and critical messaging systems. Changes are required to let us focus on these markets and the Members that service them.
The new association will operate under a board comprised of CMA board members representing many countries who support the Association. Member services will be determined by the global CMA Board and will be administered by the London office which is managed by its Chairman, Derek Banner.
While the number of commercial paging services dwindle, we see significant opportunities for new uses of paging technology combined with other IoT technologies. Innovative device and system providers provide the new focus of critical messaging which will strengthen CMA as it moves ahead.
We also look forward to expanding CMA’s presence in other countries where new opportunities and uses of paging technology are developing. CMA’s role is to bring together system operators and equipment manufacturers to share ideas and promote new uses of the most reliable technology ever created for critical messaging.
As we see many times each year, all over the world, paging technology-based systems continue to work when all other systems fail, and even in good times it still supplements other wireless systems as the 2nd channel, a backup method of critical messaging, and the most economic system deployment when compared to others.
Today, in the US, many public safety and related emergency services are moving from their P25 and traditional mobile radio systems to FirstNet’s dedicated spectrum combined with AT&T’s large cellular network with largely expanded data and video services. These qualified registered users will also receive prioritized service over non-qualified users. While we recognize the need and support the initiative to provide public safety with all necessary resources, and applaud FirstNet and AT&T on this initiative, we believe this prioritization will increase the probability that other critical messages will be delayed or even go undelivered as currently happens with many SMS and other mobile application text messages.
Paging systems have repeatedly been proven to be the most reliable and cost-effective method for emergency services. Even system operators who have been misled by false claims about the reliability of messaging apps on cellular phones continue to come back to paging. The need for paging technology based critical message systems is still as relevant today as it has always been.
To the many members who have continued to support CMA-America, thanks for your membership as you have helped make CMA the uncontested voice for critical messaging. Current members are the kind of innovative and progressive business people that lead development and create new opportunities. We look forward to what happens next.
As my final action, I want to say It has been my pleasure to serve as a Member, Director, Vice President and President of CMA-America for many years and I look forward to working with all of you as a member of CMA’s Board of Directors.
Best wishes and Happy New Year to all.
I have been following your site for the last couple years and consider it a treasure trove of information. I am not in the paging industry but have been a paging customer since I got out of College in 1967. I also have been in public safety in my spare time since then as (at various times and for various lengths of time) a reserve police officer, vol EMT, vol firefighter, Red Cross Disaster vol and supervisor).
Also, In most of that time I have been involved in local, state, and national communications committees. One example of this: I met Jimmy Quello in 1969 when he was general manager of WJR Radio in Detroit and I was a member of a volunteer group that he generously gave space to and put up repeater antennae for on the 26th floor of the Fisher Building. During that time, I also discovered that he and my dad went to grade school together in a little town in the Keeweenaw Peninsula in the upper peninsula of Michigan in the mid 1920's. As a result of that connection, I maintained an acquaintance with him throughout his tenure as an FCC commissioner. I used to visit with him throughout the years whenever I got into Washington.
In 1986 when I was serving in the position of fire commissioner in Burlington, Vt I met Brian Fointes who served as special assistant to Jimmy. When he found out I was both into the fire service and public safety communications, he recruited me to serve on the NPSPAC committee in the New England Region.
Notwithstanding the above, I have two reasons for writing. 1) when I was living in the Chicago area in the 1970's I met a guy who was a journalist in the Navy assigned to the Public Affairs office at Great Lakes Naval training center. One day he told me that their CENTREX phone exchange was one digit away from Victory Hospital in Waukegan and they got phone calls for each other occasionally. He said he was sitting in the office one morning when the phone rang. He said he answered it and the woman on the other end of the line asked for admissions. He said his response was "Lady, this is Public Affairs. We don't admit to anything."
Finally, hope you are well on your way back to complete health.
An appreciative follower,
I have run across your name SEVERAL times in my amateur radio career while I would look up the nitty-gritty on Motorola radios, Securenet, and the like. Your articles have always been informative, and have often been just the key i needed to unlock the "next level" when I would get stuck on something... Thank you so much!
I recently came in to possession of a Motorola Nucleus II paging station with remote receive. I am told its on 900 MHz and is featuring a 300 watt transmitter, which comports with what I have read on your page. I have a nice site in town which has hard line run (1" 3/4 hardline I believe) and is atop a water-tower (which I have access to.)
I am playing around with the idea of sliding it into the ham band and bringing paging to the ham community here. (currently there is none.)
I'm thinking that I would like to have a 2M packet PBBS interface so local area hams can access and send pages via Packet radio (why not get this old mode a little new life?) while also providing alerting capabilities to local RACES / ARES / EMCOMM / SKYWARN groups, and perhaps for good measure, add in a capcode group for DX spotting...
I'm uncertain if anyone has played with this yet, but don't want to re-invent the wheel if it has already been invented... Perhaps with the Raspberry Pi there is already a simple solution and easy wiring that can be done to accomplish my idea?
I have read briefly about the German DAPNET which uses the Pi and local gateway interfaces, i think, but I don't think they interface with the Nucleus II....
If you have the time, and could assist me or at least point me in the right direction I would greatly appreciate it... I believe there is the potential to really serve the local ham community ESPECIALLY with the DX Cluster paging service...
Please reply when you have the time.
Thank you so much!
Current member or former member of these organizations.
|THOUGHTS FOR THE WEEK|
My Latest Workshop Project
This is an acoustic amplifier for a smartphone. It doesn't need electric power to operate and there are no moving parts. I works like a megaphone (speaking-trumpet, bullhorn, blowhorn, or loudhailer). Everyone that I have shown it to has said something like “Wow, I want one of those!” So I am building a few of them.
Of course there are more “Hi-Fi” ways to listen to audio on your smartphone but who would want to plug an elegant smartphone into some cheap, plastic gadget? Or even use Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, which are a pain in the neck to set up, even on a smartphone.
These will be made with hardwood bases and some of them will be exotic hardwoods with interesting grain patterns. The horns are polished brass — made from mostly old horns that had rubber bulbs on the ends and were used in “times gone by” by taxis and even clowns in circuses. These horns have been re-purposed, reshaped, and re-polished.
Of course when not listening to music or other interesting audio, you can appreciate it for its beauty, it looks just plain cool. This is a work of art.
Sorry to say that I didn't design this myself. It was designed by Daniel Jansson in Sweden. He is a graduate of Umeå Institute of Design with an MFA degree in Interactive Design.
P.S. The first production run has already been spoken for.
|VIDEO OF THE WEEK|
|Source:||YouTube||P.S. I like classical music too.|
|Well . . . if you read this far, you must have liked it?|
|Home Page||Directory||Consulting||Newsletters||Free Subscription||Products||Reference||Glossary||Send e-mail|