Tech Industry Opposes Possible FM Chip Mandate for Mobile Devices...

Tech Industry Opposes Possible FM Chip Mandate for Mobile Devices A coalition of six technology industry associations sent a letter today to the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the U.S. House and Senate Judiciary Committees urging them to resist efforts to include an FM technology mandate for mobile devices in any legislation addressing an unrelated conflict between the broadcast and recording industries over royalties. Calls for an FM chip mandate are not about public safety but are instead about propping up a business which consumers are abandoning as they avail themselves of new, more consumer-friendly options,” the associations wrote. “It is simply wrong for two entrenched industries to resolve their differences by agreeing to burden a third industry - which has no relationship to or other interest in the performance royalty dispute - with a costly, ill-considered and unnecessary new mandate.”   The proposed imposition of an FM chip mandate is not necessary for resolution of the dispute between performance artists and broadcasters and, if adopted, it would be bad policy for several reasons: •Mandating that every wireless device include an FM chip would require consumers to pay more for a function that they may not desire or ever use. •The groups that are parties to the discussions over the performance rights royalty issue lack any expertise in the development of wireless devices and are in no position to dictate what type of functionality is included in a wireless device. •Development by the technology industry and government of a mobile broadcast emergency alerting system makes the requirement unnecessary. The following Presidents and Chief Executive Officers of CTIA-The Wireless Association®, the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA)®, the Information Technology Industry Council, the Rural Cellular Association, TechAmerica and the Telecommunications Industry Association signed the letter. To see a copy of the letter, go to: http://files.ctia.org/pdf/Leahy_Conyers_Letter.pdf     Wireless Design & Development © 2010 Advantage Business Media Sincerely, Robert Stretton RBS Enterprises 1.707.444.9650 rbse@yahoo.com http://RBSe.us

Posted via email from rbse's posterous

Warning RETRACTED... They met my needs and refunded my money, thumbs up... B-)

Warning RETRACTED... They met my needs and refunded my money, thumbs up... B-) I am satisfied with Buy.com and their prompt response, therefore, i will continue to use their services.  These are the kind of folks I like to do business with, they make sure you're happy.  Nice to see that these days Congrats Buy.com Sincerely, Robert Stretton RBS Enterprises 1.707.444.9650 rbse@yahoo.com http://RBSe.us

Posted via email from rbse's posterous

Warning update...

I was compelled to post this warning here after I received this response: The first sentence says; "We apologize for UPS's rough handling of your order. " Do you blame me? The best they would do is offer me 15% off my next order. Right.  Like I'm going to order something else from them... Join my crusade... Sincerely, Robert Stretton RBS Enterprises 1.707.444.9650 rbse@yahoo.com http://RBSe.us

Posted via email from rbse's posterous

WARNING! Do not purchase from Buy.com and ANTonline.com...

WARNING! Do not purchase from Buy.com and ANTonline.com... To whom it may concern, I am very angry right now! I just opened my package to find, after close inspection, 7 broken CD cases in my order. The packing for this product was the poorest packing I've ever seen! There is a lot of mass in 50 CD's & cases and must be packed correctly to survive the shipment, which this was not. You cannot put that amount of mass in a thin bubble-bag, stick the CD's in the corner of the box, and put a wad of paper in the other corner, seal it up, and expect it to survive shipment. That is pure stupidity! Also, nowhere on the ad does it say "5-color pak" which is what i received, and the picture in your ad does not match what you sent me, they are clear on black in the photo. That's called a bait and switch and is illegal! I expected clear & black like most cases and I assumed that was what I was getting, again, as in the photo. I bought this because I needed it to do a job right away, and now I have to give my customers fruity colors!  WTF! I have to use what you sent me because of my deadline (which makes me look like an idiot) so I will be keeping what you sent me, but I want the 7 cases replaced at minimum. You can send my replacements to the same address you sent the package. If I have to do anything beyond writing this letter I WILL give you a bad review and you will have to explain to Buy.com why I no longer will be shopping through them. The details of my purchase follow: http://www.buy.com/prod/fujifilm-48x-cd-r-media-700mb-120mm-standard-50-pack-slim-jewel-case/q/listingid/1285617/loc/101/10378313.html 8/11/2010  3:10:12 PM Fujifilm 48x CD-R Media - 700MB - 120mm Standard - 50 Pack Slim Jewel Case * Marketplace Item -- Shipped by: ANTOnline     Qty: 1(50pc.) ... Buyer beware... Sincerely, Robert Stretton RBS Enterprises 1.707.444.9650 rbse@yahoo.com http://RBSe.us

Posted via email from rbse's posterous