Paraphrased
6. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Authority may prescribe the—
type of electronic communications services that may be provided such
as the network topology of small local communications networks such as local area networks.
Notably absent is the word 'boundary' in the ECA - it's doesn't exist. Nowhere does
the ECA say that non-profit data networks aren't allowed to cross boundaries.
Icasa though has the right to actually ban games on local LANS - they may do so
, they don't have to do so. And until such a time as Icasa bans Warcraft gaming
crossing boundaries via a copper wire (gaming type electronic service in other words) you can carry on sending gaming data across the boundary or inside the boundary.
What dominic is implying is that we must wait 3 years for Icasa to make some sort
of ruling on what non-profit electronic services may be provided either inside a boundary or outside a boundary .
Icasa thus actually have far greater powers than accorded it under Act.96 which they may use at their discretion
It specifically also means that non-profit telephone poles are now legal either inside a boundary or outside a boundary until Icasa declares otherwise.
Dominic's view is simply wrong.
Paraphrased again
Licence exemption
6. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Authority may prescribe the—type of electronic communications networks that may be operated and the type of radio frequency spectrum that may be used, without a licence either inside a boundary or outside a boundary, but until such a time as they do you are allowed to operate your non-profit printer network printing data
originating either inside your boundary or outside your boundary
Or until such a time as Icasa bans CCTV running on telephone poles either inside boundaries our crossing boundaries you can stream the data. dominic is implying that all data services crossing boundaries are illegal until such a time as Icasa declares
it legal. No, all non-profit data services either crossing boundaries or staying inside boundaries are legal until Icasa
declares a specific data service illegal either inside a boundary or outside or bot.h
Clearly there are thousands of types of electronic communications data services that can be provided. How could dominic possibly imply that the intention of p.15 was that your LAN using a router either inside or outside a boundary is illegal until Icasa makes
a ruling? As dominic stated on another thread:"Everything is illegal until Icasa declares it legal".
ECA as applied to Golfing estates and private residential houses in a municipal area
What is the difference under the ECA?
Answ: Absolutely none!
Under Act.96 Golfing estates was considered by Icasa and Telkom to be one seemless property and thus Telkom had no problem
in selling them a Diginet line which was shared by everybody. Under the ECA this distinciont falls away!
Legally both private single properties (PSP) and Golfing estates can now resell a Telkom diginet line if they don't make a
profit. And carefully note the wording of p.15 - "non-profit". This means you can charge money so as to cover your costs.
Now this will be the position until Icasa decides otherwise. Icasa has basically complete control over all network topologies and
because it will take them at least 3years to make even a statement concerning non-profit networks we the public have a golden
opertunity to form a fixed wired power block.
With the ECA you must reprogram your mind and get this 'data crossing boundaries' idea banished.
The demarcation under the ECA is between non-profit (which needs no license) and commercial (which needs a license)
, wether such data crosses a boundary or not. In other words Icasa reserves the right to insist you have a license if
you resell commercial data inside a boundary with a profit motive
Under Act.96 the demarcation was between data inside boundaries and those crossing boundaries. No distinction was made
between non-profit data and commercial data, leading to the absurd situation that CCTV wasn't allowed to cross boundaries.
The logic of the ECA:
From a regulators perspective the ECA accords it the powers to regulate the convergence of Voice, Video and Data either inside boundaries or data crossing
boundaries. Nobody knows what is the next technological marvel. I believe X-max is far superiour to anything we might have known of. Icasa needs to be able to rapidly adapt the regulatory environment to
innovative communications networks that could be invented.
Final note
What is the constitutionality of p.15? Doesn't it perhaps infringe on my rights? The only person who would be able to test p.15 in
a criminal proceding is the Director of Public Prosecutions - not Icasa or Telkom or anybody else.
