Editor for this issue: <>
WAIT -- please don't pass anything on or write any letters until someone gives us the date and number of the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making). In the past, the FCC has received many deluges of mail from people reacting to out-of-date, misinterpreted, or totally spurious proposals. The most infamous is the story that the FCC is about to ban all religious broadcasting (a complete hoax, started around 1975 and still circulating). Even the "modem tax" thing a couple of years ago got out of hand, with lots of misinformation circulating, and people being asked to "act immedi- ately" on very vague reports. This one may or may not be genuine. If I decide to file comments on the NPRM, I will do so after _seeing_ the NPRM. Note by the way that the FCC is not a democracy and does not simply count letters for and against a proposal -- it looks at the quality of the reasons given. If a convincing argument has been given in several letters, there is little point in trying to generate thousands more that are merely statements of opinion not backed up by argumentation. -- Michael Covington (FCC-licensed amateur radio operator N4TMI) - Michael A. Covington internet mcovingtMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueuga.cc.uga.edu - - Artificial Intelligence Programs bitnet MCOVINGT
UGA - - Graduate Studies Research Center phone 404 542-0359 - - The University of Georgia fax 404 542-0349 - - Athens, Georgia 30602 bix, mci mail MCOVINGTON - - U.S.A. packet radio N4TMI
WB4BSG -
As has been pointed out on other electronic lists, the notion that the FCC is about to charge modem users is an urban myth that pops up regularly every year or so with pretty much the same wording, including the crusading radio reporter and the myth that an earlier deluge of letters already saved us before. The deluge of letters causes the FCC to issue another weary denial. I don't really know if this is true or not, but the wording of the most recent alarm sounds awfully familiar to me. Bill CrossgroveMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1992 08:52:00 EDT From: Joan Korenman <KORENMANMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueUMBC.BITNET> Subject: RE: fcc wants to charge for modem use The memo about the FCC's wanting to charge for modem use is simply NOT TRUE! Like the Neiman-Marcus cookie story or messages about sending e-mail notes to a little boy dying of cancer, it's simply an "urban legend" that re-surfaces on the net from time to time. I've seen it before, as have members of the technical staff at UMDD with whom I checked. So please, IGNORE IT. Joan Korenman Internet: korenman
umbc2.umbc.edu Bitnet: korenman
umbc
Regarding the recent posting about the FCC's possible interest in surcharging modem use, Prof. David Stampe of the University of Hawaii has called my attention to his observation that a notice like this has been circulating on various network groups since the mid-80's. He believes it is not true. I do not have any independent evidence that it is true. I didn't hear the radio broadcast directly nor did I see the putative article in the NYTimes that the posting mentioned. David also notes that it could be true. Perhaps someone else on the list has additional information and/or verification that the FCC really is or is not proposing to surcharge modem use. Until such information is forthcoming, I guess the matter remains uncertain. Harry WhitakerMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue