On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:51 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Apr 9, 2010, at 5:22 PM, joe mcguckin wrote:
Let me see if I understand this correctly.
People are defending the FCC?
The same FCC that ruled that any data service over 200Kbits was broadband, not "Information Service" and thus came under the purview of the FBI and CALEA - directly contravening the language and intent of the CALEA act?
Very specifically NOT the same FCC. The FCC may retain the name, but the management, political bent, philosophies, and attitude are very different from the one that made that ruling.
That said, it is entirely possible this FCC would make the same ruling. Doesn't change what I said above.
Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is just your enemy.
Sometimes. And sometimes he is neither, so it might be advantageous to work with him on the occasional project where your interest and his correlate well.
I believe you are doing a disservice to the FCC by making these inflammatory statements. There are plenty of GOOD people at the FCC, I'm guessing you may not have spent much time talking to them. (I met with the FCC about CALEA due to concerns about there being no mature 10G intercept platforms. There are vendors that are shipping devices that are not CALEA compliant, but may be compliant under other lawful intercept methods/statutes). You have to understand that there are political appointees (that must be confirmed) and the regular staffers that operate in this space. The federal register and comment process is abundant, allowing people to file comments on nearly anything the government is discussing. If you've not engaged in getting the daily notices from the Federal Register, and did not file form 445, you may want to take a look at it. Phone the FCC. Phone the DoJ and ask for the "CALEA Implementation Unit", the folks there are behind the http://askcalea.net website. As with many things, there is a lot of (mis-)information out there. (Gotta run kids are bleeding!).