From editor@telecom-digest.org Fri Sep 10 14:09:57 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id i8AI9vm12842; Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:09:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:09:57 -0400 (EDT) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200409101809.i8AI9vm12842@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #423 TELECOM Digest Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:09:00 EDT Volume 23 : Issue 423 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Wargames, Wardialing, Wardriving, Emerging Market (Monty Solomon) The FCC's Broadband over Power Line Inquiry: Considering (Monty Solomon) TXU to Link Customers' Rates to Scores (Monty Solomon) Intel Outlines Strategy for Making Internet Smarter, Safer (M Solomon) VeriSign Implements Rapid Updates to Domain Name System Files (Solomon) FCC Bolsters Children's TV Requirements (Monty Solomon) Powell Pitches 2009 DTV Date (Monty Solomon) TiVo, ReplayTV Agree to Limits (Monty Solomon) DISH Fights Calls for HD Must-Carry (Monty Solomon) Re: AT&T - What a Bad Company Are You! (Steve Sobol) Re: AT&T - What a Bad Company Are You! (Joseph) Re: AT&T - What a Bad Company Are You! (Gene S. Berkowitz) Re: My New DVR From Cable One (DevilsPGD) Re: My New DVR From Cable One (Paul Vader) Re: More Thoughts About RCA (Lisa Hancock) Cellphone That Doesn't Work at the Hotel (Marcus Didius Falco) All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address- included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome. We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. Geoffrey Welsh =========================== See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 21:55:30 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Wargames, Wardialing, Wardriving, and the Emerging Market for Wargames, Wardialing, Wardriving, and the Emerging Market for Hacker Ethics by Patrick S. Ryan 9 Va. J.L. & Tech. 7 (2004). A wardriver gets in her car and drives around a given area. Using her laptop, freely available software, a standard Wi-Fi card, and a GPS device, she logs the status and location of wireless networks. The computer generates a file and records networks that are open and networks that are closed. Once the data is collected, the wardriver may denote an open network by using chalk to mark a sign on a building, called "warchalking," or she may record the location on a digital map and publish it on the Internet. This article will explain the roots of the term "wardriving," and the cultural phenomenon of the 1983 Hollywood movie WarGames that gave birth to the concept more than 20 years ago. Moreover, this article will show that the press has often confused wardriving with computer crimes involving trespass and illegal access. There are inconspicuous ethical shades to wardriving that are poorly understood, and to date, no academic literature has analyzed the legality of the activity. This article will argue that the act of wardriving itself is quite innocuous, legal, and can even be quite beneficial to society. It will also highlight the need for wardrivers-and for anyone accessing open networks-to help establish and adhere to strict ethical guidelines. Such guidelines are available in various proposal-stage forms, and this article will review these ethics within the context of a larger movement among hackers to develop a coherent ethical code. http://www.vjolt.net/vol9/issue3/v9i3_a07-Ryan.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:01:54 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: The FCC's Broadband over Power Line Inquiry The FCC's Broadband over Power Line Inquiry: Considering Radio-Frequency Interference Rules of the Road for the Third High-Speed Communications Wire by David Tobenkin & Newton Howard 8 Va. J.L. & Tech. 10 (2003) This article examines the Federal Communications Commission's Broadband Over Power Line (BPL) Systems Notice of Inquiry proceeding, including the issues raised by the Commission with respect to the nature of this new high-speed Internet communications medium and the radio frequency interference and technical challenges it poses. Also analyzed are the filings of the numerous commenters in this proceeding. The article contends that more testing is needed to gauge precisely the degree of harmful interference posed by BPL, but that the Commission should allow deployment of BPL under the Commission's existing Part 15 rules for Carrier Current Systems operating on an unlicensed basis. Such BPL systems should, however, be subjected to careful interference monitoring and, if serious interference with licensed spectrum users results, the Commission should impose remedies such as confinement of BPL signals within certain ranges of the spectrum and notching of BPL signals within bands in which there are impacted licensed users. The Commission may also wish to segregate its regulatory treatment of BPL: The Commission may, on the one hand, wish to take actions to encourage deployment of the energy utility systems applications that are unique to BPL, while, on the other, choose not to provide advantages to BPL systems that merely provide consumer high-speed access to the Internet, given the robust competition for such high-speed access already present, or soon to develop, in many markets. http://www.vjolt.net/vol8/issue3/v8i3_a10-Tobenkin.pdf ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:12:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TXU to Link Customers' Rates to Scores DALLAS (AP) -- TXU Energy, the largest electric utility in Texas, will peg some customers' rates to their credit scores, charging them more if they have fallen behind on telephone, power or cable television bills in the past. TXU Energy's new rates, which take effect Sept. 27, will affect customers outside of North Texas who switched to TXU to save money on their electricity bills. TXU, a unit of TXU Corp., would be the first major power provider in Texas to use the strategy. Consumer advocacy groups say the rate plans are misleading and violate rules for the state's three-year-old deregulated electricity market. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43600994 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:13:57 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Intel Outlines Strategy for Making the Internet Smarter, Safer Intel Outlines Strategy for Making the Internet Smarter, Safer, More Reliable and Useful - Sep 9, 2004 12:15 PM (BusinessWire) SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 9, 2004--Intel Corporation today described the significant changes that need to be made to the Internet's architecture to make it safer, more useful, reliable and accessible. In a speech today at the Intel Developer Forum, Intel Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer Pat Gelsinger said that by adding an overlay network of computational services to the Internet -- made up of computing and storage resources -- the industry could bring greater intelligence into and across the network core. This would transform the Internet from a data transmission pipe into a vast platform for hosting a wide array of services available to the world's six billion inhabitants. Gelsinger referred to this approach as the ability to provide planetary-scale services. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43590452 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:18:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: VeriSign Implements Rapid Updates to Domain Name System Files .Com and .Net Domain Name Changes Now Functional for Viewing on the World Wide Web Within Minutes of New Registration or Modifications MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Sept. 9 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- VeriSign, Inc. (Nasdaq: VRSN), the leading provider of intelligent infrastructure services for the Internet and telecommunications networks, today announced that it has implemented a major enhancement, called "rapid updates," to its .com and .net Domain Name System (DNS) servers. With rapid updates, it is now possible for domain registrants to launch Web sites more quickly and to experience greater continuity in service when changing hosting providers or modifying their domain name registrations. Previously, VeriSign updated DNS servers for .com and .net twice each day by generating a file from its .com and .net Registry database and globally distributing it to all 13 of the .com and .net DNS servers. With new, rapid updates, VeriSign distributes updates every few seconds accommodating all changes that affect any of the more than 35 million domain names for .com or .net. With the new update process, domain registrants are now able to add a new domain name, change their hosting provider or make other changes to their domain name, and see those changes reflected in the .com and .net DNS servers within a matter of minutes. - http://finance.lycos.com/home/news/story.asp?story=43582223 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:36:36 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: FCC Bolsters Children's TV Requirements WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. television broadcasters that decide to offer more programming on over-the-air digital channels will also have to include some additional shows geared toward children, U.S. regulators ruled on Thursday. Broadcasters already have to offer three hours of educational and informational programming geared for children each week and are gearing up to add over-the-air channels with digital airwaves they received from the government. The Federal Communications Commission unanimously voted on Thursday to extend those requirements to any additional programming they send out using the digital airwaves, on a prorated basis, starting in a year. http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?storyID=6197764 By JENNIFER C. KERR The Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - Federal regulators unanimously approved rules Thursday requiring television stations that air more than one digital channel to show additional children's programming -- in some cases up to 18 hours of kids' shows a week. Currently, the Federal Communications Commission requires a broadcaster to air three hours of children's shows each week on its main analog channel. Under the new rules, a broadcaster that multicasts a digital signal to air two or more channels will be obligated to show three extra hours of kids' TV a week for each 24-hour multicast channel. With digital signals, a broadcaster could have as many as six channels. http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/entertainment/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-3/1094763246286030.xml&storylist=entertainment ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:40:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Powell Pitches 2009 DTV Date By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 9/8/2004 6:24:00 PM Federal Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell Wednesday pitched the Senate Commerce Committee on his digital-TV transition proposal to set 2009 as a hard date for return of the analog spectrum. He told the committee that would give all parties fair warning so that they could plan accordingly. The issue before the committee was the recommendation by the 9/11 Commission to speed the return of broadcast spectrum for public safety uses. A proposed bill would set the give-back date of spectrum for channels in the 700 Mhz band now used by 75 TV stations at Jan. 1, 2007. Powell argued that if Congress decided to make that a hard date, it should also set the 2009 hard date too in order to minimize the inequity of making one group of broadcasters give up their channels before the rest. http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA451695?display=Breaking+News&referral=SUPP ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 22:45:51 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: TiVo, ReplayTV Agree to Limits TiVo, ReplayTV agree to limits PAY-PER-VIEW WOULD BE SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS By Dawn C. Chmielewski Mercury News The makers of TiVo and ReplayTV digital video recorders have agreed to limit how long consumers can keep pay-for-view movies stored on future versions of the VCR-like devices. The new technology also will allow Hollywood movie studios and broadcasters to regulate how often movies purchased through pay-for-view services can be watched. Digital video recorders that recognize these new copy restrictions will begin appearing in the spring of 2005. But it could be years before entertainment companies begin to take advantage of the technology, according to ReplayTV President Bernie Sepaniak. Max Ochoa, associate general counsel of San Jose-based TiVo, said consumers won't be ambushed by the copy restrictions. Their television screen will display warnings that a pay-per-view movie a viewer is about to rent comes with certain restrictions. The limitations are the trade-off for advanced services, such as video-on-demand, he said. http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/9616558.htm?1c ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 23:03:21 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: DISH Fights Calls for HD Must-Carry In comments filed this week, EchoStar urged the Federal Communications Commission to reject the idea of imposing HDTV must-carry obligations on pay-TV distributors as a way to speed the switch to digital television. The satellite TV company told the FCC that any high-def must-carry regime is infeasible for DBS services, could be unconstitutional and is irrelevant to the proceeding in which the suggestion surfaced. EchoStar's comments are part of the FCC's look into how to best serve consumers after the digital TV transition takes place. http://www.skyreport.com/viewskyreport.cfm?ReleaseID=1480#Story2 ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: AT&T - What a Bad Company Are You! Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:58:35 -0700 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com Critica Todo wrote: > I know what you do. You purposely let people to forget about their > bills and then charge them $25.00 for activation. I know it is > purposely because you have the technology to send us a text message or > an automatic phone call of what you are about to do. If this behavior > is not legally improper at least should be morally improper. If you can't remember on your own when your bills are due then you probably shouldn't use luxury items like cell phones. I know AT&T Wireless has had a lot of problems with their systems in the past year, but getting upset because they didn't send you a bunch of reminders that your bill is due is silly. Heaven forbid you should actually take responsibility for remembering when your bills are due. > Second, your customer services is a joke. After many many minutes of > waiting, finally you get to talk to a representative. No soon enough, > the phone call goes dead. Then perhaps you shouldn't be calling from your cell phone. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Joseph Subject: Re: AT&T - What a Bad Company Are You! Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 19:53:04 -0700 Reply-To: JoeOfSeattle@yahoo.com On 8 Sep 2004 13:05:51 -0700, critica_todo@yahoo.com (Critica Todo) wrote: > AT&T what a bad company are you! Are you talking about AT&T or AT&T Wireless? If you're talking about AT&T Wireless they're not even officially part of AT&T any longer and just have license to use the brand AT&T. > You are but a blood sucker. Yes, that's what you are. > First, those $25.00 reactivation fees is really adding to your button > line. No good faith earnings: just your bad customer services is what > keeping you alive. But not to worry. Your bad faith will catch up to > you. > I know what you do. You purposely let people to forget about their > bills and then charge them $25.00 for activation. I know it is > purposely because you have the technology to send us a text message or > an automatic phone call of what you are about to do. If this behavior > is not legally improper at least should be morally improper. Oh puhleez! Since when is it a company's responsibility to remind you that you owe money for your service. Be a responsible person and keep track of what bills you pay. If you have had any service for any length of time you already know that by a certain date the bill will come due for charges. If you cannot manage that perhaps you need to have someone manage your bills and pay them for you so you don't get behind on your bills and possibly ruin your credit standing. > I wonder how many people have you killed when in an emergency > customers reach for their phones and find out, maybe too late, that > you want to make an extra $25.00 locking their phones. If you have an emergency you can still call 911 (if you're talking about AT&T Wireless.) You evidently do not know the difference between AT&T Wireless and AT&T. If you need something like a doctor you should pay your bill and you'll have service with which to call a doctor. ------------------------------ From: Gene S. Berkowitz Subject: Re: AT&T - What a Bad Company Are You! Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:01:27 -0400 In article , critica_todo@yahoo.com says: > AT&T what a bad company are you! > You are but a blood sucker. Yes, that's what you are. > First, those $25.00 reactivation fees is really adding to your button > line. No good faith earnings: just your bad customer services is what > keeping you alive. But not to worry. Your bad faith will catch up to > you. > I know what you do. You purposely let people to forget about their > bills and then charge them $25.00 for activation. I know it is > purposely because you have the technology to send us a text message or > an automatic phone call of what you are about to do. If this behavior > is not legally improper at least should be morally improper. ... and somehow NOT paying your bills on time, i.e. being a deadbeat, is a morally superior position? > I wonder how many people have you killed when in an emergency > customers reach for their phones and find out, maybe too late, that > you want to make an extra $25.00 locking their phones. ... any working mobile phone can make a 911 call, whether it is paid up or not. > Second, your customer services is a joke. After many many minutes of > waiting, finally you get to talk to a representative. No soon enough, > the phone call goes dead. You might think customer services will call > you to continue where you left it. NO. Why not? They got your > phone. That it's the first thing they asked you. No. You have to > call back, wait again your 20 or so minutes and start all over. And > maybe finish your business with them. If not this process could > repeat at least three or four times. > AT&T; I hope you die. ... and I'm sure they hope you'll find another phone company. --Gene ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: My New DVR From Cable One Reply-To: bond-jamesbond@crazyhat.net Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy! Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:53:26 GMT In message Barry Margolin wrote: > In article , DevilsPGD > wrote: >> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On my unit the off/on switch seems to >> work (and of course) so does unplugging it from the wall. But if it >> gets unplugged it winds up taking a long time (maybe thirty minutes) >> to rebuild the TV Guide listings and the details about the >> channels. PAT] > On ReplayTV, the on-off switch just controls the output to the TV and > the live buffering. It continues to perform scheduled recordings when > it's off. My PVR turns off the output and the live buffering immediately, and the drive shortly thereafter (once it finishes some housekeeping) when you turn it off. FWIW, it's a BEV 5100, similar/identical to a DISH 501 I believe. It will still power up for recordings, it's not a hard "off" switch, it still receives and processes the satellite signal (Which is necessary because it takes anywhere from 60 to 300 seconds to synchronize up to the satellite signal again) Microsoft: Putting the PR into proprietary. ------------------------------ From: pv+usenet@pobox.com (Paul Vader) Subject: Re: My New DVR From Cable One Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 15:16:54 -0000 Organization: Inline Software Creations > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, we do not have nearly the features > found on TiVo or ReplayTV nor the costs involved for same, nor, for > that matter, the channel lockouts (against recording) found on TiVo, What in hades are you talking about? Tivo has no 'channel lockouts' on recording. The only thing vaguely in that category is the inability to push the 'record' button to immediately start recording a music channel, but that's because the music channels never end, and tivo wouldn't know when to stop recording. You can set up a manual recording on one just fine. * * PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something like corkscrews. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was told by CableOne (and perhaps I should have questioned them further, but it didn't really matter to me) that most or all 'conventional, over the cable recording systems such as TiVo' would not allow recording of many or most movies which had restrictions on them.' Now I know from my own limited experience in making 'shows' using 'Real Producer' (one of the products from Helix and the Real Player people in Seattle) that if I (as a producer of sorts) do not want someone to have the ability to copy some audio-visual thing I had put on the internet I can trip a certain flag prior to starting the recording which would have the effect of never allowing it to be copied by anyone else, by 'greying out' the 'record' button on their screen and making it unresponsive. I *assumed* (apparently incorrectly) that the CableOne representative's statement was correct. My first thought on learning how to use the remote control unit was to record classical music I wanted for my own library. And *you* made an incorrect assumption in saying the 'music channels cannot be recorded'. It can be recorded via the box, at least the CableOne box, at least on the 'temporary' or 'scratch pad' recording which is done automatic- ally each time you punch in a channel, at least mine works that way. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com (Lisa Hancock) Subject: Re: More Thoughts About RCA Date: 10 Sep 2004 06:46:58 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Julian Thomas wrote: >> P.S.S. RCA made an attempt in computers; it scared the heck out of >> IBM because RCA had far more electronics skills than IBM did in the >> early 1950s. However, RCA did not have the customer support skills >> of IBM and eventually RCA -- after losing big money -- sold its >> businss to Univac. > Nor did they have the mechanical skills that IBM had from their earlier > EAM business. Peripherals -- especially tape drives -- suffered as a > consequence. The Campbell-Kelly book "Computer" says that IBM's very popular 1401 was popular because of its excellent printer -- a mechanical device -- rather than the CPU electronics. It took a heck of a long time for other manufacturers to come up with a line printer that matched the IBM 1403 printer's quality. In the Watson autobiography, he says Sarnoff came to IBM to get patents (that the govornment ordered IBM to release). So, RCA used IBM know-how. Also, RCA's Spectra was a copy of S/360. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 01:05:46 -0400 From: Marcus Didius Falco Subject: Cellphone That Doesn't Work at the Hotel There are also some passive ways of blocking cell phone signals. Window screening in the walls, grounded to the building frame, is supposed to work. There are also specially designed wall panels to block signals. But many modern buildings have so much electrical and electronic equipment that cell phones and even radios won't work. I have often had very bad reception on my Walkman when in a hospital, sometimes even on upper floors. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/07/business/07jamming.html http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/07/business/07jamming.html?pagewanted=print&position= By CHRISTOPHER ELLIOTT As a frequent guest at a Salt Lake City Hampton Inn, Murray Trepel often finds himself powering down his cellphone and picking up the house phone. "My cellphone seldom works anywhere near the hotel," said Mr. Trepel, the senior manager for a call-center service provider in Logan, Utah. "Not just in my room, but in the parking lot as well." What is going on? Mr. Trepel, like many business travelers who depend on uninterrupted service from their wireless company, has a long list of probable culprits -- including the building's architecture, the area's geography and the cellphone industry's erratic coverage. But another theory is starting to gain traction among business travelers: hotels are blocking the signals. They would certainly have the motive. Cellphones have taken a huge bite out of their earnings. Thanks largely to the preponderance of portables, the profits from in-room phones dropped 76 percent in four years, sliding from $644 an available room in 2000 to $152 last year, according to the hotel consulting firm PKF in San Francisco. Analysts say the high fixed cost of maintaining in-room phones increased the losses. The downturn accounted for 10 percentage points of the hotel industry's 36 percent decline in profits during the same period. "Hotels are unhappy about that lost profit," said Robert Mandelbaum, PKF's director of research. But are they so unhappy that they are biting back? No way, say hotel representatives. For starters, they point out, cellphone-blocking devices are illegal in the United States. "It would also hurt our customers, and it's something we would never do," said Courtnie Widerburg, the general manager of the Salt Lake City Hampton Inn. Besides, her property already offers free local calls and high-speed Internet access, and its franchise agreement limits how much it can bill for long-distance service, she said. Not only that, but hard evidence is scant that hotels are using jammers -- at least in the United States. Last year, a Scottish newspaper reported that phone jammers were being sold to hotels in the United Kingdom as tools for increasing revenue from in-room phones. "Harassed by mobile phones or hotel phone system not being used?" asked one of the promotional leaflets distributed to the properties. "Then look no further. Purchase a mobile phone jammer for your hotel, restaurant and bar. Small and discreet." A reporter from the newspaper, The Record, posed as a bed-and- breakfast owner and bought a jammer and a battery pack for about $135. The man who sold the gadget to him, the reporter said, told him, "I've sold quite a few to hotels and bed and breakfasts." Loreen Haim-Cayzer, the director of marketing and sales for Netline Communications Technologies in Tel Aviv, acknowledged that her company had sold hundreds of cellphone jammers to hotels around the world. But asked if any of them were in the United States, Ms. Haim-Cayzer said she could not disclose the identity of clients. Still, suspicions persist. Joseph Palermo, a corporate pilot for a home-improvement company, spent almost a month at a Courtyard property in Secaucus, N.J., recently, and he wondered whether it might be using a jammer. "While I was there, my cellphone worked terribly," he said. "Sometimes I would have to dial three or four times to place a call. Then I would have to hold my head just right to hear who I was talking to. You would think that being across the river from one of the biggest cities in the world, the phone would work well." Melissa Thompson, a spokeswoman for Interstate Hotels & Resorts, the hotel-management company that runs the Courtyard, said the hotel was not blocking wireless calls. "We would never infringe on anyone's rights to use a cellphone for the sake of making a few extra dollars," she said. But she acknowledged that cellphones did not always work on the property, particularly in hard-to-reach areas like the elevator. "I can understand that some guests would be frustrated," she said. "I can understand that they would be suspicious." The doubts are not limited to guests. When a recent Pricewaterhouse- Coopers survey showed the number of calls made from hotel room phones had fallen by 40 percent in the last four years, the firm's lodging consultants wondered whether hotels were fighting back by investing in wireless jamming technology. An investigation, however, turned up nothing. "It's possible that there are hotels using cellphone jammers," said Bjorn Hanson, a PricewaterhouseCoopers hotel analyst. "But we couldn't find them." Then again, it is nearly impossible to prove that jamming technology is being used. "If you turn your phone on and it says 'no service,' then that's the only hint that you're being jammed," said Barry Zellen, editor of Technologyinnovator.com, a Web site that covers wireless security issues. "If you're in an area that has good coverage and you pull into a hotel driveway, and suddenly there's a dead zone, then you can probably speculate that there's something unnatural going on." Adding to the intrigue is the fact that the Federal Communications Commission, which could easily sniff out a blocker with its direction-finding equipment, has never issued a fine for the use of a cellphone jammer, according to an agency spokesman. Not everyone sees that as proof that the devices are not in use. "The F.C.C. rule prohibiting cellphone jammers is unenforced," said Howard Melamed, the chief executive of the CellAntenna Corporation, a cellular-communications technology company in Coral Springs, Fla. At the same time, consumer complaints to the F.C.C. about telecommunications service quality, a catch-all category that includes possible cellular-blocking devices, busy signals and roaming service, surged to 704 in the fourth quarter of last year, the latest period for which numbers were available, from 450 in the first quarter. "If you do the math, if you connect the dots, it's obvious that these cellphone jammers are catching on," said Mr. Zellen of Technologyinnovator. "Especially in the hotel industry." The companies that sell the devices are understandably tight-lipped about their clients. Mike Menage, the chief executive of Global Gadget, a Worthing, England, seller of jamming equipment, insists he has no idea whether any hotels have bought his devices. But he admits the motive is there. "Hotels want them to either cut down on disturbance to the other guests or, more likely, to increase hotel revenue by forcing the guests to use the in-house hotel telephones for external calls," he said. Practically speaking, jamming an entire hotel would not be easy. Mr. Melamed of CellAntenna, which sells legal jamming devices to the government, says that the cheap hand-held jammers sold by mail order have too short a range to do the trick. He estimates that a small hotel would have to spend at least $25,000 to block all cellphone transmissions, while a larger operation, like a conference center or a big chain hotel, might be looking at a bill of $35,000 to $50,000. Instead of intentionally interfering with transmissions, Mr. Melamed said, he believes hotels remain conveniently neutral. "The hotel doesn't have to go to extremes to stop people's calls from going through, because there's already interference caused by the building or there's just a weak signal," he said. Properties could easily install so-called repeater systems to help a cellular signal penetrate every room in a hotel. But why spend money on something that is going to reduce your revenues? In the end, most hotel guests shrug off their suspicions and find someone else to blame. Mr. Trepel, the Utah senior manager who could not connect from the Hampton Inn, said he ultimately faulted his wireless carriers. "I walked up and down the street, and I had the same problems," he said. Whether they think a hotel is tinkering with their wireless transmissions or not, experienced business travelers usually have a contingency plan. "Anybody smarter than a pineapple knows that cellphones do not and never have worked everywhere, and that hotel long-distance charges have always been outrageous," said Ed Barrett, a software upgrade specialist in Flanders, N.J. "So you just go out and buy a phone card, and you carry it everywhere you go. And then you use it when your cellphone doesn't work.'' Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, New York Times Company. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #423 ******************************