LeGal2

http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?p=1936048#post1936048

http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=811560

consumer
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?p=2970343&posted=1#post2970343

asdf
wild bewaar

http://www.sahgca.co.za/en/dringende_hofaansoek.aspx

adsf asdf
[QUOTE=Glock26;2913041]Since most of your argument centers around this fact that Mr Welch has not relicenced or disposed of his guns....I strongly suggest you check those facts :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]

It is very simple, if he had indeed relicensed or turned in his guns he would have said so by now! The ANC created the illusion that come tuesday the NPA is going jump out from behind a rock like growling wolfman hunting down all those TLU farmers who told the anc to go to hell.

The NPA isn't like the ANC in the business of settling scores, being vindictive ,using the law for double purposes such as confiscating farms, driving the whites out of the country no. IF they had any intention to prosecute Tuesday they would have said so by now in order to avoid prosecuting the people!

Don't you get it, like all normal people that prosecutor wants to have a braai on Saturday, not work flat out for next 5years prosecuting people, it would be mayhem. The NPA doesn't have the resources to prosecute 900 000 people, the courts don't have the resources to judge all these cases, the jails don't have the space to put all these people. If we all stand together refusing to piss over ourselves like the cowering dogs who relicensed even the const. court will rule in our favour realizing the admin mayhem it will create.

There are practicle constraints to everything.

asdf
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?p=2912995&posted=1#post2912995

[QUOTE=Glock26;2912519] I'm hoping to have more clarification on this whole situation on Monday.... [/QUOTE]

[quote=Glock26;2912519] I'm hoping to have more clarification on this whole situation on Monday.... [/quote]

The courts clarify things not the ANC police and the court has ruled that all licenses are valid until the const. rules on the issue. That is the only clarity you need.

If the court rules against us, as they probably will due to our brilliant Hunters association prosecuting themselves then they will issue a directive that a final cut-off date must be given to relicense. [b] Worst case what to do[/b] 1) You ignore that and wait till the very last day. 2) The NPA says nothing, meaning they won't prosecute because the const. court can't order John Welch to prosecute himself if he isn't going to relicense or dispose of his guns. 3) Last day arrives ANC gazettes 24hours before deadline and extension of such a deadline for 3 months, because it takes about 24hours for a gazette notice to take effect. It is important that you understand this that the [b]government gazette[/b] is what matters and since John Welch won't prosecute himself no matter what the const. court rules the ANC will growl, bark and blow hot air but when push comes to shove and that PAC shopping mall bomber who has his knife in for the remaining TLU farmers in Tzaneen that he wants nail....... the ANC will relent at the very last momemnt: [b]24 hours before the cut-off date BECAUSE IT TAKES 24HOURS FOR THE GAZETTE TO TAKE EFFECT.[/b]

4) This admin weakness is our saving grace, if the ANC had not yet gazetted an amendment 24hours before say 30 June, then come 30June the law would enable our ANC police force to go and get the last remaining farmers they so desparatly want to nail. But the ANC SAPS can arrest all the farmers tomorrow for alien species on their farm such as Lantana which carries a 3-year prison term but will never do this because John Welch isn't going to prosecute them.

5) Then after 3months the whole cycle will repeats itself for the next 100 years. http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=178332&page=2

[quote=marine1;2910140]Judge rules firearms still valid until the new law is tested in Concourt [url]http://www.ewn.co.za/articleprog.aspx?id=16270[/url]

Well done to the judges !! About time the FCA is struck down and nullified[/quote]

And if the constitutional court rules we must hand in our guns tomorrow? Nothing has has been nullified, the Hunters association made a grave mistake I think, they in effect took on the role of the NPA "prosecuting" themselves so to speak. Instead this whole issue would have remained in legal limbo for the next 100 years as the ANC extends deadline after dealine, amnesty after amnesty as to when you must relicense. Why would you want to have legal clarity in anycase, what practical value would it have it the NPA won't prosecute you ?

How stupid can one be to take such an issue before judges who are on record that all guns must be confiscated! Why would you want to find out what their ruling would be, rather have no ruling on the issue.

I really hope I am wrong on this, any legal types around here with a different opinion ?

Let me put it this way, under Act.96 Verizon paid Naidoo bribes to forbid all wires crossing a road for data. Now lets presume we took the case to the const. court and the judges rule that baas Verizon from the USA was correct, nobody can cut roads. But this still wouldn't mean that the NPA could have been forced to prosecute a road-cutter inspite of such a would be court ruling, because it would in effect be a violation of section 20 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act, No 32 of 1998 as amended, because the constitution entrenches the NPA independence. There is only one individual who decides to prosecute that first test care of not: Director of the NPA.

Thus the const. court would have to decide wether they want to have an intolerable situation develop where; if they rule we must all hand in our guns tomorrow, the cutoff date comes closer and closer lets say 2011, only the last 100 000 coward whites hands in their guns but our staunch fearless blacks tells the ANC to go to hell and refuse to hand in their guns, the NPA then decides not to prosecute these last 700 000 people ? Do you see why I call the legal profession lowlife dogs and filth, the told everybody to relicense because the law says so, but the law doesn't say anything, only courts says things.

You must remember that const. court judges lives a fantasy world where they are protected by guards behind high walls and gates, many prosecutors and judges are intimidated with many prosecutors shot dead, executed or "hijacked" in their drive-ways. All a crook must do is find out where that prosecutor lives and go and kill him.

[b]Worst case senario [/b] 1) The const. rules we must all relicense. 2) The cutoff date nears, wait till the very last moment, the very last day: Do nothing till then. 3) Wait for the NPA to make press release, if they say nothing, then you do nothing. 4) ANC huffs and puffs , bothma growls and yelps: Do nothing. 5) one day before deadline the ANC realizes the NPA won't prosecute (well actually they know that because zuma would have phoned the npa by then) 6) ANC extends deadling by 3months in amnesty via government gazette notice.

Thus by sheer willpower if we all stand together and refuse to do the anc stooges bidding, nothing will happen. But whatever you would do just remember: Wait till the very last day and then only do what you wanted to do.

[b] It is very simple to understand[/b] The anc can't gazette an amenesty the very day of cuttoff say 30June, they will always do such about one to two days before. Because if they don't extend and the SAPS rounds up all the TLU farmers whom they want nail and the NPA refuses to prosecute, the anc will be sued for wrongful arrest.

editor of The Star
exposed Manto as drunk in hospital. Mbeki ordered the SAPS to investigate "theft" case. NPA gave it the horses laugh. Poor editor was panic stricken with fear as he replied yap, yap yap..... al he had to realize was the NPA also thinks Manto is mentally deranged.

Helen Zille
Marched and knocked on the door of known drug dealer. SAPS arrested here and charged her. NPA gave it the horses laugh. NPA protected zille from ANC/corrupted, crime infiltrated prosecution.

NPA dutch
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123257047606303395.html There are of course limits to free speech, such as calls for violence. But one doesn't need to agree with Mr. Wilders to acknowledge that he hasn't crossed that line. Some Muslims say they are outraged by his statements. But if freedom of speech means anything, it means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection.

This is exactly what Dutch prosecutors said in June when they rejected the complaints against Mr. Wilders. "That comments are hurtful and offensive for a large number of Muslims does not mean that they are punishable," the prosecutors said in a statement. "Freedom of expression fulfills an essential role in public debate in a democratic society. That means that offensive comments can be made in a political debate."

The court yesterday overruled this decision, arguing that the lawmaker should be prosecuted for "inciting hatred and discrimination" and also "for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism."

asdf sdf
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=129541

[url]http://www.ellipsis.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/licence_exemption_regulations_2008.pdf[/url]

Gazette notice: [b]"Small electronic communications network" means an ECN that lies within a limited spatial area, used by a specific user group, has a specific topology and is not an ECNS of national, provincial, district or local municipal scope, but may be connected to one which is licensed or licence exempt. For example Local Area Network (LAN) or wireless LAN (WLAN). [/b]

The gazette notice references the following passages in the ECA:

6.2(c) Private electronic communications networks (PECN) used principally for or integrally related to the internal operations of the network owner. Except that where the private electronic communications networks' additional capacity is resold, the Authority may prescribe terms and conditions for such resale;

(d) small electronic communications networks such as local area networks; (e) uses of the radio frequency spectrum that were permitted without a licence

92.(2) Any person who, immediately before the commencement of this Act, lawfully provided any service or used the radio frequency spectrum in terms of the Telecommunications Act, the Broadcasting Act or the IBA Act without a licence, is considered to have a licence exemption in terms of section 6 to continue to provide such service or use the radio frequency spectrum, unless notified in writing by the Authority that such service or the use of the radio frequency spectrum requires a licence in terms of this Act.

[COLOR="Blue"][B]...Of Municipal scope ...[/B][/COLOR] The latest gazette notice read in context of the ECA 6.2(c) and 92.(2) with the term "...municipal scope.." basically says that fiber and copper can't cross the road, since this crosses a municipal boundary. Icasa has for the first time [i]interpreted[/i] the ECA as they see it.

The issue is [i] intent [/i], what was the intent of the ECA ? Certainly not to give the public the right to run their own fiber cable from PTA to JHB. And in any court ruling a judge will take the intent of the ECA into consideration. IF your intent is to setup a Wi-fi system and resell data to everybody in a radius of 10km, Icasa would have a case against you. But if you cross the road with a radio signal only a small distance to link your two houses then you intent is clear: Not to provide a commercial service.

Lets presume SAB has buildings on both sides of the road and wish to setup a PECN between these two networks by running a fiber under the road. Their [b]intent[/b] isn't to resell Neotel data and thus it would be legal for them to cross the road but not to run a fiber between their JHB and PTA offices for this would absorb to large extent the whole point of having a Neotel. Jawug would seem to be borderline situation because the networks crosses extended municipal boundaries and people are using it to provide commercial services "undercover". How would one any case prevent resale of data?

This is in stark contrast to Act.96 which outright forbid all data crossing a boundary.

[b]Fiber for CCTV seems legal[/b] A community setting up a non-profit company to stream CCTV via fiber over roads seems legal. The term " small network" is ambiguous - how small is small ? If your [b] intent [/b] with a "small" regional network covering 10 roads is not to become the next Neotel but to CCTV the street then I can't see Icasa having a problem with it. If the result of your network doesn't impact the revenues Neotel would have made, Icasa will probably not send you a notice.

[b]All of this of academic importance[/b] None of this nonsense would ever get past the NPA, it is largely of academic importance. The only issue would be if Icasa sends you a notice that say your WUG tower is reselling data and that they will confiscate your gear if you don't desist. Thus what damages in terms of physical confiscation can Icasa inflict, this is all we should concern ourselves with.

[b] Private Estates - Icasa has just asserted its jurisdiction over you as I predicted[/b] ON this site [url]http://tinyurl.com/6kcq2x[/url]  I predicted that Icasa will eventually make some sort of ruling about private estates running fiber under their roads. This gazette notice by Icasa was the notice, read it carefully and see that Icasa now has control over every electron inside a boundary using any network topology for any purpose using any device or apparatus licensed or not.

Read especially the part on th ITWEB article where ISPA jumped the gun and told us what Icasa was planning to do, they have now done so.

fiber copper
I missed the article but from your interpretation it is 100% what the ECA says on p.28 and p.110: Nobody no VANS, community road diggers, Wuggers, ampers or wapa's is allowed to send any data using any medium wireless, fiber or copper across any boundary until Icasa has made a formal ruling spelling out for example that Wi-Fi may cross a boundary but not fiber - which they probably will do as dominic has indicated. The ECA is very clear - Act.96 is still in full force from a purely technical legal perspective ! The ECA gives Icasa the ability to amend whatever Act.96 specified as Icasa sees fit. Icasa has not yet formally done so, made no rulings concerning Wi-fi, fiber and copper that I know about.

Only a PSTN license holder can legally send data across the road as per terms under Act.96, until such a time as Icasa rules that for example a VANS may send data across the road using fiber, Wi-Fi and copper.

We need separate what technical legalities of the ECA is from what everybody is doing: Illegally sending data across the road using Wi-Fi and copper. What will Icasa will do is formally legalize Wi-Fi over boundaries but not fiber.

It is this specific point that the VANS license holders wishes to obscure. The entire Wisp form around here for example have only made representations to Icasa to legalize Wi-Fi. Rodent, Mikrotik resellers and the regular Wi-Fi is wonderful, Wi-fi is everything, we only want to Wi-fi posters were the only people who made appeals to Icasa for just Wi-fi. They have said nothing about legalizing copper and fiber crossing the road.

Why is there not a single person on this forum that is at least willing to make a formal presentation at Icasa's hearings on these issues to legalize copper/fiber crossing boundaries ? Edit/Delete Message

Telecoms lawyer discussion on ECA
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?t=126004&page=8

the whole question of boundaries is largely now irrelevant under the ECA
 * to the best of my knowledge nobody has an ECS or ECNS licence yet and VANS are no longer issued

P.28/110 of the ECA makes clear that this is not the case. You should quote the actual legislation to motive your position.

- there is a DRAFT regulation covering the WUG scenario operating on a mesh network basis in the unlicensed bands where two or more "hotspots" overlap...this does not cover laying fibre....both the ECN and the ECS running over it will be licence exempt where the service is non-profit [NB. This remains to be finalised]

True, p.28/110 gives Icasa wide ranging powers and flexibility to legalize a situation they are powerless to stop. Under act.96 all boundaries crossing were illegal for Wi-fi/fiber/copper and shall remain illegal under the ECA until Icasa makes a ruling. Since the http://www.npa.gov.za won't prosecute anybody for running a private fiber link from Cape Town to Tzaneen it is largely irrelevant what Icasa rules, the NPA don't take instructions from Icasa. The only real teeth Icasa has is to confiscate non-licensed equipment in terms of the Icasa amendment act. See Act.96 still in force with the ECA

The Icasa Amendment Act gives Icasa the right to inspect or confiscate a fiber cable. But such confiscation can only be done if the judge allows Icasa to do it, which I seriously doubt the judge would allow.

If a court would only ever allow Icasa to inspect a fiber cable but not confiscate it then Icasa will never be able shut our fixed-wired networks down. Such an inspection/confiscation will only be allowed for the purposes of presenting a case to the NPA for a prosecution. Lets presume Icasa does get a confiscation order then they can only pull the fiber out from under one house, they can't raid and entire street - our constitution forbids this as ICASA Bloemfontein manager Herman explained to me. It would be ridiculous to confiscate 40meters of cable running the length of 1km and then the next day another house. No court would consent to such a farce. No, Icasa will only be given the right to inspect a fiber/copper cable and thus Icasa won't even apply for such a court order knowing full well that the NPA will ignore any report presented to them by Icasa.

Any court order allowing Icasa confiscation or inspection must be done in the spirit of the constitution. The sole purpose of inspection or confiscation is to present evidence of wrong doing to the NPA. The reasonable man would argue that "inspection" alone by Icasa would be sufficient evidence for a prosecution. The "reasonable man" principle is the bedrock of our legal system. It would be unreasonable for Icasa to get 25 court orders and on 25 separate days confiscate 40m of fiber for the sole purpose of actually destroying the network. It would be more reasonable to take a small section of the network as a sample.

There is lots of loose talk from lawyers, Icasa, Vodacom, MTN about how "illegal" it is for communities to run their own fiber network. From a strictly legal point of view this can only be established by the courts but the courts will never be given the oppertunity by the NPA to decide on the matter.


 * - WAPA have not signed anything admitting to illegality?

And even if they did, you can't force the NPA to prosecute you, do you understand this factuality concerning our legal system dominic? If all you had to do was sign a form admitting you are illegally running fiber over the road then MTN/vodacom/telkom would have paid somebody a long, long time ago R1 000 000 to go do exactly that, get prosecuted and establish a precedent. Once that precedent like with theft is established the NPA would have no choice but to prosecute all such cases.

The http://www.npa.gov.za also don't know about any such cases nor pending cases.
 * the court case referred to about crossing a public boundaries is to the best of my knowledge fiction


 * there is no such thing as an ECN licence

Whatever, its not really the point what you call this license. What matters is that technically in terms of the ECA nobody, neither a Vans has been given any right to send data across any boundary using any license free medium wi-fi,fiber,copper other than Neotel, Telkom,cell companies until such a time as Icasa makes a ruling. Wapa(many members has a vans), jawug, private road cutters are violating the law from a legal point of view if they send data across a boundary. But the NPA doesn't care what the law says they won't enforce it if you are using legal mediums. You will only get into trouble if you use 900mhz for example.


 * - problem here is ICASA cannot enforce in the unlicensed bands. firstly they have admitted that they will only act on complaints from licensed users and secondly they do not have the capacity to do any of their own investigations or follow through on them.

Yes, Icasa can in terms of the Icasa amendment act get a court order to confiscate and/or inspect so as to present evidence to the NPA but Icasa can't fine or prosecute anybody.


 * - as a legal person in this space i can confirm that it is incredibly difficult to prosecute.

As a legal person you have a remarkable ability to obfuscate the issues. All legislation that has any sort of criminal penalty must always be interpreted in the light of what the http://www.npa.gov.za has written here: In terms of section 20 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act, No 32 of 1998, the power to institute and conduct criminal proceedings on behalf of the State (and to discontinue criminal proceedings) vests in the national prosecuting authority. In practice, decisions in most courts on a day-to-day basis are taken by prosecutors with delegated authority from the National Director. In more important or difficult matters, the decision is taken by the various provincial directors or the investigating directors in consultation with the relevant provincial director and subject to the control and directions of the National Director. In some cases, the National Director himself will be involved in the decision-making process and he may even make the decision himself.


 * if a guy has no licensing at all it has to go to the criminal courts & even though this is straightforward there is little to no enforcement here.

If the NPA refuses to take roadcutters, ampers and wugs to court then who else has the power ? Certainly not the SAPS, they can criminally charge somebody who refuses to relicense his gun, but they can't prosecute him. Your old firearm license remains valid for life or until a court decides it doesn't, but since nobody will be taken to court we will never find out. What is straightforward is what the ECA says: No data can cross boundaries without a license. It is also straightforward what the Firearms control act says: You must relicense or you can be prosecuted. The laws gives the NPA the right to prosecute, something they will not do in either cases as explained here: http://www.tinyurl.com/6kcq2x


 * if you are trying to prove that a guy has mod'd equipment beyond its type-approved status so that the EIRP limits are set this is impossible at present.

No, its not impossible it just that John Welch from the NPA has got better things to do with his time. The ANC who wants all the white farmers land for example is making a huge fuss about the FCA, just think how taking the guns of farmers will help "land reform". The SAPS especially have on numerous times threated people I know that they must relicense their guns or the police will prosecute them, which is factually, legally, technically wrong: They can charge you not prosecute you. They can take a statement from you and even if you write on the statement: The NPA is "bang vir die boere", you still can't force the NPA to prosecute you.


 * how do we go about cleaning up the spectrum? all ideas welcome (rational please and accepting that there needs to be room for commercial and non-commercial use). WAPA and others have represented to ICASA that 2.4 be reserved strictly for non-commercial usage by WUGS and private individuals. In 5.4 and 5.8 WAPA is trying to clean up the space and get rid of the ampers and cowboys etc.

We clean up the spectrum by running a fiber/DSLAM combination in the North/South direction down the middle of say Waterkloof in a straight line for 10km. Every CommunityBlockNetworkhttp://tinyurl.com/5wfw7n on this backbone becomes a MeshNetworking hotspot. These hotspots in turn links the houses in a 5km radius to this backbone. This allows the network to scale to any size, which is how MTN/vodacom builds their exchanges using 900mhz instead of 2.4 and 5.8ghz. The community backbones will be linked using WiMax. Multiple backbones are laid in the North/South direction separated by 10km the entire length of Gauteng. Thousands of hot-spots are created in this manner enabling mobile video,voice and data.