I've known Keith for more than 2 decades, and H. Hossein for 15 or 16 years. They're both good engineers and great guys. However, only a foole would ask an application processing engineer to interpret rules. In my time, they would ask Maggie or when he was the other attorney-advisor at branch, my good friend Terry Hardy to interpret the rules. I could find the loopholes -- using Commission precedent, practice or merely the rules -- in many of the positions put forward by Maggie or Terry. I also read every document they issued; even the letters that only appeared in the "correspondence" files or the original license file (not the duplicate license file, when there was such a thing) that for LPTV was only kept in the branch. Of course neither Keith or Hossein would tell you that the Commission owns mistakes in the granting of construction permits, because they were directly or indirectly responsible for the error or omission.It's why people hire communications counsel to -- at least assist them before the commission. Everything there is due process, and an attorney would most likely have told you that he or she could have sucessfully defended you if you were to act on the commisison's cp grant and operate using COFDM Keith and Hossein are advocates for the FCC; you needed more knowledge and weight on your side. If you had had an effective advocate on your side of the table, the conversations would have been more focused and more to your liking. My LPTV was on the air for more than three weeks BEFORE we applied for a construction permit for our actual location. Technically, that was a violation of the authorization and the rules and could have resulted in a recission of the grant, but I also knew precedent and practice and procedure and that the LPTV branch had never done such a thing in the past, even going back to Wetherell in Alaska in the early 1970's. I can say, as a result of my "tardiness", the license was granted in almost record time after receipt by the commission. Once I figured out -- with helpful hints -- the maximum power I could use at the new location. I'd have to read all the authorizations and correspondence and bone up on the rules and decisions to be really confident, but it seems to me that your going to the Commision and asking questions, rather than having a well-known counsel making statements to the Commission alongside you, cost you a great deal here. Let me give you an example. When my application was the winner in the April, 1984 LPTV lottery, I was opposed by a Pat Robertson front organization represented by one of the larger DC law firms with a communications practice. The attorneys, on the clock and with nothing to work with, opposed the grant because they said that I was not a minority, and that we were not financially qualified. If I had hired an attorney, rather than knowing the rules and social environment myself, he or she would have responded within a month with a sheaf of papers trying to disprove the points. I responded first by giving the opposing attorney's paralegal (not a friend, but an acquaintence of mine) with a draft reply full of invective and ad-hominem attacks. Then, I went home (I lived then less than 2 blocks from the commision; closer than most law firms) and honed the reply. I noted that my mother's maiden name was Ruiz, that her first language was Spanish, and under the applicable rules, I was a minority if I was recognized as such in my home town. I described how people would come up to me in San Diego and speak to me in Spanish if I hadn't shaven for a day or two. Also, the commission staff knew me and of my latin temperament. As to the financial qualifications, I didn't constructively respond. I cited the letter the Commision had written to Mountain TV network, described how the staff wanted to investigate the finances of this organization that filed thousands of LPTV applications, but the commisison reversed that position. "If the Commission won't investigate the finances of Mountain TV Network with hundreds of (unbuilt) grants, it CANNOT investigate the finances of Civic Light Television. My early invective provided to opposing counsel ended up with a better effect than I could have planned; their counsel, despite it being not permitted in the rules, overreached by providing a reply to my reply. That made it look like big, stupid Pat Robertson was ganging up on little minority John Willkie. Step 1: learn everything you can BEFORE you meet with the commision. Before scheduling your meeting, define your strategy and figure out your tactics. Game plan how you'll respond to the predictable responses of the other side. The only questions one should ask are "what is your name", or if you're not happy with a response, ask 'why.' Otherwise, advance your position. DON'T ASK QUESTIONS; make statements and give answers. Oh, yeah -- use any likely commission proceeding to advance your position, but don't do so wildly or daintly. Look at their questions, and rationalize between what you want and what the Commission is likely to be interested in, within their resources. In the commission's lottery proceeding, they asked how long filing windows should be open. Most people -- interested in graceful, high-billing proceedings, said for 30 days -- so nobody needed to rush, and they could charge several clients for the same work. Little old minority-controlled Civic Light Television responded that the windows initially should be open for no more than 30 days, but once the application backlog was behind them, they could have windows open for as little as 1 day. THAT is EXACTLY what the Commision has done, and the practice has also informed the auction proceedings. Your tack seems to be to whine and ask questions. To me, that's "being a victim." Nowadays, I use communications counsel in my limited dealing with Commission matters. He knows more than I, and can coalesce things that I cannot, since Tijuana is so far from "the eighth floor." Anudder too long post. Ah, well, time to get back to EtherGuide Ferret, my PSIP test and measurement system. First pre-alpha build went out earlier this evening to a select few. John Willkie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Miller" <bob@xxxxxxxxxx> To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 8:52 PM Subject: [opendtv] Re: Must carry fiasco > John Willkie wrote: > > >Geez, Bob. I tend to not believe you. > > > >Let me see, I'll try an easy one. Who -- I want names -- at the FCC told you that a grant with no respect to modulation was a mistake? Did you know that the FCC can only correct a grant within 30 days of release, unless the grantee permits the correction? > > > > > Keith Larson, and no I did not know. I was told by Keith that the > license was a mistake, had no modulation listed and that we could not > use COFDM or go digital with it. > > >Who -- I need a name again -- at the FCC told you that you could not transmit using COFDM on an LPTV? Did, they actually refer you to a rule > >section? Have you actually read the rules, and -- more importantly -- the FCC Record decisions on licensing and modulation matters? > > > > > Keith Larson and Hashemzadeh Hossein many times. Wrestled with this for > a number of years. > > >And, just what's wrong with using an STA? They're good for more than 6 months these days? (Experimental or Experimental-developmental > >authorizations prohibit one from airing commercial programming, but that's not an issue with STAs.) > > > > > We have used both an STA and an experimental on lower 700 MHz spectrum > with COFDM. We never tried with LPTV in earlier years since we didn't > have to. By the time we might have we were already working with Channels > #54 and #59 non LPTV. > > >I suspect that what happened is more in the world of social engineering; somebody at the FCC -- perhaps a few somebodies -- didn't like you and > >realized they could fool you. > > > >It's been more than a few decades since anybody there tried that with me; but then I don't ask them in person to interpret the rules; I always knew the rules in advance, and only asked them abou t the unwritten "practice and procedure." When they said that something couldn't be done, I usually could come up with instances where it had been precisely been done the way they said was proscribed. Not everybody liked me, but they quickly learned that the wool would seldom stick to my eyes. > > > > > I have read the rules, new and old, many times. Could not find a > loophole that would allow the use of COFDM. Would love to know more. > > Bob Miller > > >John Willkie > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Bob Miller" <bob@xxxxxxxxxx> > >To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:52 PM > >Subject: [opendtv] Re: Must carry fiasco > > > > > > > > > >>John Willkie wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>You obviously weren' paying attention. > >>> > >>>LPTV STATIONS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BROADCAST USING 8-VSB EXPLICITLY SINCE > >>> > >>> > >MID > > > > > >>>1994. > >>> > >>>LPTV STATIONS CAN BROADCAST USING COFDM TODAY BY FILING A SIMPLE NOTICE > >>> > >>> > >WITH > > > > > >>>THE FCC. > >>> > >>>"Media Professionals" at one time offered an "inland marine" insurance > >>> > >>> > >line > > > > > >>>for broadcast liability protection. I'm not sure if the NAB still offers > >>>the package, but NAB associate members at one time could get coverage > >>> > >>> > >based > > > > > >>>on their highest spot rate. > >>> > >>>John Willkie > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>You say it but all the facts that I know say otherwise. One of my > >>friends got a digital license on his LPTV station two years ago with no > >>mention of modulation. When I took a copy to the FCC they told me it was > >>just a big mistake. > >> > >>We have had three meetings with the FCC on this subject alone. No way > >>could you go digital on LPTV or COFDM except as an experimental or STA > >>and even that would have been iffy after 1999. The rules for going > >>digital on LPTV have been passed, they have been recorded in the record. > >>But there is no mechanism at the moment for an LPTV station to actually > >>apply for such a license. The FCC needs some software written or > >>possibly it has been written but they need to pay $20,000 for it and > >>they do not have the money. Any month now we can apply for digital for > >>LPTV. Any donations please? > >> > >>Could you give a pointer as to where you get such information? I have > >>been dealing with Keith Larson, Hashemzadeh Hossein and Bruce A. Franca > >>for the last six years. Seriously if you have any information on how > >>COFDM could be used on LPTV I would love to hear about it. > >> > >>Bob Miller > >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: > > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org > > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.