nanog mailing list archives

Re: LEC copper removal from commercial properties


From: Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc>
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 11:06:42 -0500

I think this goes back to 2016. This explains it better than I could.

https://publicknowledge.org/the-fccs-plan-to-gut-tech-transitions-rules-is-bad-for-consumers-small-businesses-and-competition/

Essentially Mr.Pai didn't change the rules, he pushed through the order
( FCC-16-90 ) that redefined what things meant so that the rules became
toothless.

On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:44 AM Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell () isipp com>
wrote:



I had the same thought and dug into it. I traced the email chain
backwards as well as the office phone. The email (and named employee) are
legit as well as the switch serving the office line. Everything adds up. I
don't have a reason to believe it's a scam. They also noted they will
abandon existing infra in place. Good observation. Thanks!

The way they are going about it, and the fact that they are
misrepresenting the FCC's rules, and that the tenants are left holding the
mess, is the scam.

Anne

--
Anne P. Mitchell, Attorney at Law
CEO Get to the Inbox by SuretyMail
Author: Section 6 of the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 (the Federal email marketing
law)
Author: The Email Deliverability Handbook
Board of Directors, Denver Internet Exchange
Dean Emeritus, Cyberlaw & Cybersecurity, Lincoln Law School
Prof. Emeritus, Lincoln Law School
Chair Emeritus, Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop
Legal Counsel: The CyberGreen Institute
In-house Counsel: Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS) (Closed in 2004)



Current thread: