+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26
  1. #1
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410

    Terminate i760 Short Term Confidentiality; Complain to FCC!

    UPDATE: Post #18 includes my letter to the FCC about both the i760, as well as the Apple iPhone. Also post #19 includes the DA 04-1705 document from the FCC that all of this is in regards to. KBAM has provided great help in the research and the original letter...



    Also digg this:

    Digg - Forum works to terminate FCC confidentiality of Samsung i760 and iPhone


    Instructions on what is going on (in progress, my terminology might be incorrect and some of my thoughts might be as well. I am typing this at 4 AM, and only going on memory...)

    1. Why are we doing this - I had an hour long conversation on the phone with KBAM to discuss this process and see what's going on. We are both in agreement as to why we are doing this. It shouldn't be right for a company (ANY COMPANY) to request FCC Short Term Confidentiality of certain document, for devices that have already been publicly revealed. We are NOT doing this to gain access to more information, although that will be a benefit of this, but it is to show the FCC, people at pdaphonehome.com, and the internet community that companies can't/shouldn't request to block this short term information on devices they have already made public, and abuse a privilege the FCC has provided for those companies.

    2. Why we think Samsung is in the wrong to request FCC Short Term Confidentiality - Since January 2007, the Samsung SCH-i760 has been made public on numerous occasions and been presented to the press at many different functions. This constitutes marketing activity, and this activity is what the FCC says will remove the privacy block on the short term confidentiality.

    3. Samsung already is in the wrong - KBAM brought up an interesting point in our phone conversation. Samsung specifically request 180 days of privacy for the short term documents, when the FCC documents specifically state that a 45 day request can be requested and that up to 180 days of 45 day requests be given. So already Samsung shouldn't be allowed a privacy block.

    4. How can I help - As of right now, I see this being a three part process.

    Part One, we would like to know as much information and background on the "release" of the Samsung SCH-i760. This includes "public" access to the i760, press releases from Samsung and it's companies, and any other "public" information on it as possible. What we don't want is information about "tips", "spied images", and the like, as this isn't public information. Information from underground sources to Engadget are not something that is public, but articles written by Engadget (and other blog sites) at public trade shows, press junkets, etc. is exactly what we want. So please keep that in mind.

    Part Two, after we have compiled this information, we will be composing a Letter to send to the FCC either by Snail-Mail, FAX, e-mail, or all of the above. We will need help in composing a "well-written" letter stating our case, as well as help in making sure we follow all of the FCC guidelines for doing so, and for "why" we are writing the letter, making sure that Samsung "HAS" violated their policies.

    Part Three, once this has been finished we will be providing you with the information you need to help us "present" this to the FCC and let them know of our disappointment in Samsung for doing this.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the time being, please only post the information we request, and relevant information, as anything else will be deleted. We need to compile the background information on the Samsung intended "publicity" (meaning information that Samsung was apart of marketing) of the SCH-i760, as well as the FCC guidelines as presented in this quote from KBAM:

    =====================================================



    This is a quote of KBAM'S POST from the i760 Rumor/Release Thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by KBAM
    Well, we seem to have "Community Mo" on Samsung's (and perhaps, HTC's) alleged breach of FCC policy regarding post-authorization, Short-Term Confidentiality.

    To review, a "Grantee" (normally, the device manufacturer), may apply for 45-day FCC confidentiality that protects, from the date of authorization, certain filing documents from early public disclosure. This period can be extended three times, for a total of up to 180 days. FCC privacy protection ends upon the earlier of 1) commencement of public "marketing activity," or 2) release.

    While the phrase "marketing activity" is somewhat vague, we believe Samsung has crossed the line--and should forfeit its claim on confidentiality. But to terminate protection, we must make a demand.

    What's most useful that's at stake is the i760/WM6 User Manual--probably about 200 pages in length (.pdf). Its value speaks for itself. Without termination of confidentiality, this tool won't likely be accessible for two months. In "wireless years," two months is, well, a lifetime...

    Calling Samsung's (VZW's) bluff is a worthy adventure--not so much because we have a shot at disgorging info unreasonably withheld from the community, but because forums need to exercise their inherent ability to 'persuade'. At the root of forum power is critical mass and, in general, it's terribly underutilized.

    Think about it. How many times have wireless forums taken effective, collective action over, say, the past five years? Very, very few.

    In particular, the FCC's liberal, recent-era confidentiality policy is widely abused by manufacturers. It costs too little ($155 for up to 180 days!) to obtain, is almost a given for each and every approved device, serves no useful purpose, is unjustified and unwarranted in most, if not all, cases, protects carriers, is anti-competitive, and insults, compromises and harms subscribers. Time to bust the bubble?

    OK, so let's get it together over the next day or so. Here's a plan:

    1) We'll start with the Samsung SCH-760, FCC ID A3LSCHi760, approved 03/30/07.

    2) I will dig up and post the FCC docs and links that allow us to cite the violation and request termination of the i760's Short-Term Confidentiality protection.

    3) I will draft a template letter and supply the proper FCC email address to which any member can send a complaint. Although it could be dispatched as an online petition, we'll defer the petition concept and roll out this one as individual complaints. All are urged to participate by sending an email to the FCC. Heed the guidelines, but modify the message as you wish.

    4) We'll need to assemble "EVIDENCE." Here, the mission is to produce a collection of links to convincing examples of public "marketing activities" that, taken together, establish the Samsung SCH-i760 as not qualifying for Short-Term Confidentiality.

    The list of "Exhibits" must be limited to Samsung-sanctioned items. Examples of what works are trade shows (e.g., CES, CTIA, CBiT, regional events, etc.), Samsung Experience, press releases, A/V material, exec interviews, spokesperson quotes, ads, VZW slides and disclosures, and the like. What WON'T FLY are spycam shots, most Engadget-like intelligence, unsubstantiated leaks, rumors, rants, noise, and anecdotal, unofficial or hearsay submissions.

    How many links do we need? Six solid examples of public marketing episodes should do it. All can cite the same examples, or add others.

    5) Recommend mrailing create a thread called, say, "Terminate i760 Confidentiality; Complain to FCC!"

    This post can inaugurate the thread, along with my follow-ups, your replies and, most importantly, EVIDENCE.

    THE COMMUNITY MUST SUPPLY, AS REPLIES, THE EVIDENCE LINKS.

    We'll sort through 'em and identify those that have traction.

    If we can prevail with this challenge, we may be on the way to closing the curtain on the unwelcome era of "permissive," abusive, confidentiality. As always, transparency rules.

    If this plan is agreeable, let's rock!
    ==================================================

    In the next few posts we will have:

    1. A checklist of all the items we need and their progress (currently being made)
    2. A compilation of all links for the information and pictures (I will compile based upon your posts)
    3. KBAM's Letter to the FCC (will be a work in progress)
    4. Information on how, what, where, and when to submit information to the FCC. (detailed instructions so you can easily help us)
    5. Now we just need your information on this topic....
    Last edited by mrailing; 05-19-2007 at 11:44 PM.

  2. #2
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    This will be a checklist of everything we need...
    Last edited by mrailing; 04-05-2007 at 01:24 AM.

  3. #3
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    This is a collection of all of the links gathered:

    FCC Information on how to cite and provide information:

    This information has yet to be compiled...

    Evidence of Marketing written with photos (this should be direct from the people at the places of marketing CES, CTIA, etc, and shouldn't be links to site that link to other sites):


    1. wmexperts.com CTIA Day - March 27, 2007 - By Dieter Bohn
    Summary - "Day One-Half, technically, where we go to a press-only event that preceded CTIA proper. What happened at this pre-show show? Lots of fun ogling some of the latest and greatest coming out soon. Read on for impressions of the HTC Vox, the Samsung i760, and the Motorola Q9." - This includes one photo of the Samsung SCH-i760 taken at CTIA.

    2. Engadget CES - January 6, 2007 - By Ryan Block
    Summary - Engadget has photos and spent some time with the i760, but the i760 wasn't able to be turned on since the WM6 OS hadn't been announced by Microsoft, and this is what the device was/is running. Includes 5 Photos.

    3. Infosyncworld - Preview of the i760 at CES By Philip Berne, 12 January 2007
    Summary - A write up of the device including details, pros/cons, and specifications. Three photos available of the i760.

    4. mobileburn.com - i760 preview - by Michael Oryl (editor) on Monday January 08, 2007
    Summary - A preview of the i760, no battery, and pictures that include the FCC logo. 8 photos, including side by side with the Samsung BlackJack.

    5. Preview information on the i760 - Stock Photos - by Brad Kellett on Sunday January 07, 2007
    Summary - This is an article written the day before the one above, and includes the specifications and 4 stock photos.

    6. CES Information from PhoneScoop
    Summary - Information from CES, including 11 photos on the device

    7. Press Release for CTIA Awards Winners - 3rd Place Samsung SCH-i760 - March 28, 2007
    Summary - The 2007 CTIA E-Tech Award winners for Hardware - Smartphone/PDA.

    8. Samsung's Press Release about the award winning phones, including the i760 at CTIA, posted at PRNewswire - March 27, 2007
    Summary - Press Release directly from Samsung about their "award winning SCH-i760".

    9. Brighthand - Discussion about the i760 at CES by Ed Hardy on Wednesday, January 17, 2007
    Summary - This talks about the i760 at CES, and hands on with the device, includes 1 photo.

    10. ubergizmo.com article about the i760 at CES - January 7, 2007
    Summary - Includes video and description of the i760.

    Evidence of marketing video blog:

    1. Video Preview of the Samsung SCH-i760 from CNet - By Tom Merritt, Executive Editor CNET @ CES January 2007
    Summary - This is a video preview of the Samsung SCH-i760 at CES. It shows all sides of the device, and details of the device, including amount of memory, MicroSD slot, Camera, and technology of the Radio, including a possible release date.

    2. Popular Mechanics Video from CES by Erik Sofge - Demo Model
    Summary - Video showing off the Samsung SCH-i760 at CES, including the first shots of the stylus.

    Also a link to the article - http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4210978.html

    3. Independent video of the i730 at CES
    Summary - Video showing the phone on display in the display cases at CES.

    4. Video of the i760 at CES
    Summary - Video showing the i760 from all sides, video by ubergizmo.com

    Link to the article - http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives...nd_sexy_1.html

    5. DL.TV Episode 128 - With Patrick Norton & Sascha Segan (Lead Analyst, PC Magazine) - At the 17:50 minute mark.
    Summary - Video showing off the i760 just before the "public" release at CES.

    Information from Samsung themselves:

    1. Press Release for potential awards for innovation CES Janaury 8, 2007
    Summary - Specifically mentioning the SCH-i760 with press kit photos - If we also want to get in to it, there are at LEAST 9 different language versions of this press release, which means this was a GLOBAL announcement.

    secondary link, wrapped in Samsung's site

    2. Another Press Release mentioning the SCH-i760 at CES - January 8, 2007

    3. January Insight E-Newsletter from Samsung Mobile - Sent January 18, 2007
    Summary - This is attached as a PDF in Post #10, and can be included in the final letter that should be sent, or a link back to it. It clearly shows the photo of the SCH-i760, and the award mention as CES, and this is directly from Samsung to it's subscribers...

    4. Copy of #8 in the written text, but this is a press release from Samsung about CTIA:
    Samsung's Press Release about the award winning phones, including the i760 at CTIA, posted at PRNewswire - March 27, 2007
    Summary - Press Release directly from Samsung about their "award winning SCH-i760".
    Last edited by mrailing; 04-05-2007 at 03:19 PM.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    02-18-2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    638

    FCC Complaint Letter Template

    Here's a sixth pass at the prototype letter; feel free to comment.

    You may modify this letter as you wish but keep in mind that requesting (demanding), for cause, termination of a device-maker's confidentiality protection is a serious complaint. You must cite applicable regulations, make a compelling argument and support it with facts.

    Be sure to remove the [Edit] notations before sending the letter.

    --BAM

    ----------------------------------snip----------------------------------------

    Email Layout--

    [Subject]
    Re: Request to Terminate Short-Term Confidentiality, FCC ID A3LSCHi760

    [Date]

    Honorable Commissioners of the FCC:

    I am writing to request that Short-Term Confidentiality protection granted to Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ("Grantee") for the above device and applicable to certain filing attachments, effective March 30, 2007, be terminated forthwith. (Equipment Short-Term Confidentiality is requested by device manufacturers or distributors under DA 04-1705, and subject to 47 CFR §0.457, 47 CFR §0.459, 47 CFR §2.803, and/or 47 CFR §2.1204, and to §552 (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act.)

    Substantial merchandising and publicity initiatives on behalf of the above model appear to have commenced even prior to Grantee's submission to the FCC of its confidentiality request letter, dated January 17, 2007, and are ongoing.

    https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=756706&native_or_pdf=pdf

    For example, Samsung featured this product in its January “Insight” E-Newsletter, a promotional vehicle dispatched to an extensive consumer mailing list. The newsletter was distributed on or about January 18, 2007, just one day after the manufacturer/importer’s request for FCC privacy protection.

    http://www.smartphoneforums.com/forums/attachments/samsung-sch-i760/10553-terminate-i760-short-term-confidentiality-complain-fcc-samsung-january-insight-newsletter.pdf?d=1175799864

    As further shown by the below-hyperlinked references--and in violation of both the spirit and letter of FCC regulations governing temporary confidentiality requests--Grantee has facilitated, and engaged in, pervasive public marketing activities throughout the pendency of its Application for Equipment Authorization.

    In addition, it is apparent that Samsung has requested Short-Term Confidentiality for a blanket period of 180 days. My understanding is that, perhaps to prevent "squatting," FCC policy confers an initial grant of confidentiality for just 45 days--renewable in like increments, subject to continued justification and upon timely written request, up to a maximum of 180 days.

    It is discouraging to observe that abuses of the Short-Term Confidentiality provisions of DA 04-1705 (June 15, 2004) have become routine and shameless, as they defeat transparency and mock and compromise the public interest. Thus, as a general request, I ask that the FCC audit, and revisit the implementation and effectiveness of, its permissive current policy.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Very truly yours,

    [Name]

    [Telephone Number]

    Enclosures (Hyperlinks)


    Representative Public Marketing Activities for FCC ID A3LSCHi760:
    [Insert AT LEAST 5 (Five) Links to "Violations" Here, Make sure they are the actual address and not the text.]

    CNET TV (CNET Networks, Inc.), "Product Spotlight, CES 2007," January 8-11, 2007
    CES 2007 videos - Consumer Electronics Show Las Vegas - CNET.com

    Samsung Electronics, Press Release and Product Overview, January 8, 2007
    SAMSUNG's Digital World - Press Release
    imagine the possibilities

    PhoneScoop.com (Phone Factor LLC), "CES 2007," January 8-11, 2007
    CES 2007 + iPhone (Phone Scoop)

    Samsung Telecommunications America, Press Release, March 27, 2007
    Four Samsung Telecommunications America Products Named CTIA Emerging Technology Award Finalists

    MobileBurn.com (Michael F. Oryl, Jr.), "CES Gallery," January 8, 2007
    Samsung SCH-i760 Live Photo Gallery (MobileBurn)

    ----------------------------------snip----------------------------------------
    Note: Before sending your letter, be sure the links you cite are among those we have "vetted" and are on the community's "Approved" list. This process is ongoing.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Filing the Complaint:
    An FCC complaint may be filed by email to the following address (note that there appears to be no specific procedure or address for complaints related to Equipment Authorization filings):

    fccinfo@fcc.gov

    Alternatively, complaints may be filed by snail mail and fax (toll-free); consult this page for more information:

    Filing a Complaint - General



    When filing an FCC complaint by any method, please observe its guidelines:


    "The following information is required when filing a General complaint with the FCC:

    Your name, address and the telephone number or numbers involved with your complaint; (if telephone related)

    A telephone number where you can be reached during the business day;

    Specific information about your complaint, including the names of all companies involved with your complaint;

    Names and telephone numbers of the company representatives that you contacted, the dates that you spoke with these representatives, and any other information that would help process your complaint;

    If telephone related, include a copy of the bill(s) listing the disputed charges;

    What type of resolution are you seeking?"
    Last edited by mrailing; 05-19-2007 at 08:44 AM.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    02-18-2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    638

    Miscellany and Comments

    This post, from the i760 - Release/Rumor Thread, discusses the FCC confidentiality process:

    Samsung i760 - Release/Rumor Thread


    This hyperlink, to which reference is made in the above post, is the FCC announcement page that includes links to the press release detailing its current policy on confidentiality; it's dated June 15, 2004 and is known as: OET EQUIPMENT AUTHORIZATION SYSTEM UPGRADE PERMITS ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OF SHORT-TERM CONFIDENTIALITY REQUESTS (DA No. 04-1705):

    http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Da.../dd040615.html

    .txt version of the policy itself (PDA friendly):
    http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...-04-1705A1.txt


    FCC Filing page for the i760 (FCC ID A3LSCHi760):
    http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf...estTimeout=500

    Note: If the above page errors out, go to the following page and type "A3L" as the Grantee Code and "SCHi760" as the Product Code (no quotes). Then, hit Start Search:
    http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf...ericSearch.cfm



    Actual Samsung request for SCH-i760 Short-Term Confidentiality, dated 01/17/07 (see page two):

    (Please note that Short-Term Confidentiality commences upon FCC device certification (approval).)

    Short-Term Confidentiality requested for

    "External Photos"
    "Internal Photos"
    "Test-Setup Photos"
    "User's Manual"


    http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/fo...ive_or_pdf=pdf


    Incidentally, "Permanent Confidentiality" afforded for proprietary engineering information supplied to the FCC by device vendors is not a part of the subject dispute. We are only concerned with what's covered by "Short-Term Confidentiality."

    --BAM
    Last edited by KBAM; 04-08-2007 at 09:17 AM.

  6. #6
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    This is a placeholder for WHO, WHAT, WHERE, and HOW to submit the letter. Detailed instructions on what needs to happen...

  7. #7
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    This is a Change Log for this thread:

    4-5-2007 - 2:57 PM

    Added an e-mail newsletter from Samsung about the i760 and the award at CES. This is #3 of the information from Samsung, as well as in Post #10 below.


    4-5-2007 - 11:30 AM

    Updated the main description at the top to fix a couple of typos
    Added - Short Term Confidentiality to most of the terms
    Changed the title of the thread to reflect "Short Term"

    4-5-2007 - 6 AM

    Thread started and initial information presented.
    Included 16 unique places of "release information"
    Last edited by mrailing; 04-05-2007 at 01:59 PM.

  8. #8
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    I have taken the 4 links from the Release and Rumor thread by drnezzy and posted them above. I also searched quite a bit and found the rest of the above in searching and compiling the information I have bookmarked. If you have any additional information, please submit it here so we can compile it.
    Last edited by mrailing; 04-05-2007 at 02:57 PM.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    03-19-2005
    Location
    Allentown PA
    Posts
    1,376
    What we need is an Attorney familiar with this type of thing who is willing to donate some of their time.
    Thanks
    - Andrew - PDAPhoneHome.com

  10. #10
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    Attached is a copy of the January Samsung insight newsletter, which was sent from Samsung to their mailing list. This newsletter clearly shows the i760, and mentions it's award for CES Innovations 2007 Design and Engineering Awards Honoree.

    Again, this is public advertising about thier product, and was sent on January 18, 2007.

    Thanks to the "Horsepower" who still had this in their mail and forwarded it to me.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by mrailing; 04-05-2007 at 02:04 PM.

  11. #11
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    Awesome KBAM.

    Great first draft for sure...

    So, since I compiled the list above, can we have ANYONE/EVERYONE visit those sites and check to make sure they are:

    1. Original, first hand experience sites that saw, held, and viewed the SCH-i760.

    2. That this information isn't speculative or rumor based (although they can make references to what they think about it, or what they think it might have in it), but they make reference to the actual product.

    3. That the information in those links be PUBLIC information, and not something leaked, passed along, or given under the table.

    If you find some of that information, please let us know so we can "strikeout" the text and come up with a complete list.

  12. #12
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    KBAM

    I do have a suggestion on the letter. Why don't we hard post the information that was directly released by Samsung in everyone's letters and then put another statement that "due to Samsung displaying and announcing their products in this previous way, it sparked marketing activity with these companies, in these hyperlinks", or something to that nature...

    What do you think?

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    02-18-2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    638
    MR,

    Will mull this over and see what can be done to address your point.

    Essentially, the posted links fall into two categories:

    1) Samsung-issued material (e.g., the "Insight" piece, Award Honoree press release, etc.).

    2) News reports and coverage that result from Samsung's presentations/exhibitions to third party organizations at trade shows (e.g., Engadget, PopMech, etc.). While these stories and video segments aren't produced by Sammy, they're definitely not the result of stealthy enterprise reporting.

    Samsung wants such (free) coverage and subsequent buzz and goes so far as to lend unreleased products to crews so they can report to the public. In the face of such brazen, assisted hype, no vendor can claim a right to FCC privacy--and this is our point.

    Years ago, CES and other tech shows used to be "for the trade only." In that era, precious little "retail" news emerged; when products were ready for distribution, they were announced and marketing efforts commenced. Today, "pre-announcements" rule, and there are really no surprises. (iPhone was the rare exception, although its debut was very much "retail," not "trade." We'll soon see whether iPhone seeks FCC confidentiality. In the face of the record, this would be criminal.)

    While the two categories aren't directly related, both evidence Samsung's formula approach to building demand. This is, of course, fine with us. What isn't permissible is a disingenuous, hypocritical cloak of secrecy at the FCC that distorts and compromises the public's right to transparency.

    In fairness, we should note that the FCC filing process has nothing to do with a company's marketing machine. What we have here is engineering operations acting in good faith while hypesters Rock 'n' Roll to a different beat. To which we reply: "Tough!"

    So let's see how best to capture this twisted mess.

    --BAM
    Last edited by KBAM; 04-06-2007 at 01:25 PM.

  14. #14
    ...That Funky Monkey brassMONKEY's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-03-2005
    Location
    The 801
    Posts
    280

    Per MRailing's request, here is the repost...

    I am a partner at an ad agency, and one of our clients dropped $24,500 for reserving 700 square feet of booth space at the CES. I don't know what size booth Samsung had, but at $35 per square foot, it would be hard to argue that any products featured at this trade show, as the i760 clearly was (see the plethora of pictures from various industry websites), were not being "actively marketed".

    The $24,500 is no where near all that most company's spend to "market" their upcoming products. Plan on tens of thousands to furnish and operate the booth, plus hotel rooms for all employees, rental vans, thousands spent to advertise at the show itself and food and beverage for employees. The "average" company participating in CES will easily drop between $500,000 to $1 million each year on CES alone.

    This is a "marketing" trade show. Marketing is the very point. It is absolutely ridiculous for them to argue they are not "marketing" the products being featured at the show! This alone, constitutes blatant marketing and is cause for any confidentiality to be dropped!

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    02-18-2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    638
    Yet another promo reference to the SCH-i760 from Samsung itself:

    Email from Samsung Telecommunications America, "Samsung's Four Award-Winning Phones," received 04/10/07
    http://a676.g.akamaitech.net/f/676/7...hostedpage.htm

    --BAM

    Edit: Credit to maxnix, who snagged this item in the Rumor thread.
    Last edited by KBAM; 04-11-2007 at 03:38 PM.

  16. #16
    Registered User zucchero's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-16-2003
    Location
    New Joisey
    Posts
    653
    From the June/July 2007 issue of "Smartphone & PocketPC" Magazine:

    I have posted the front cover (with a picture of the phone) as well as the little article on page 15 describing the i760 and how it being released by Verizon.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Terminate i760 Short Term Confidentiality; Complain to FCC!-smartphone-cover.jpg   Terminate i760 Short Term Confidentiality; Complain to FCC!-i760-review.jpg  
    2 things to live by:
    John 8:12a - "I am the light of the world." and
    John 14:1a - "Let not your heart be troubled."

  17. #17
    Oppressed Wireless User Geckotek's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-10-2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    688
    I'm assuming this went nowhere....

  18. #18
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    OK, all of this made me mad over the past week, especially with the announcement of the iPhone on the FCC, and Apple admitting to marketing, and still the FCC allowed it.

    Here is my letter (thanks to KBAM for his letter from above, since this is HEAVILY borrowed from his work and research):

    Honorable Commissioners of the FCC:

    In the recent months we the public have seen an increase in the abuse of the Short-Term Confidentiality provisions of DA 04-1705 (June 15, 2004), and that the request for short-term confidentiality have become routine and shameless, as they defeat transparency and mock/compromise the public interest.

    I am writing to request that Short-Term Confidentiality protection granted to Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. ("Grantee") & Apple, Inc. (“Grantee”) for the above devices (FCC ID#A3LSCHi760 & FCC ID#BCGA1203, respectively) and applicable to certain filing attachments, effective March 30, 2007 & May 17, 2007, be terminated forthwith. (Equipment Short-Term Confidentiality is requested by device manufacturers or distributors under DA 04-1705, and subject to 47 CFR §0.457, 47 CFR §0.459, 47 CFR §2.803, and/or 47 CFR §2.1204, and to §552 (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act.)

    Discussion of the FCC ID A3LSCHi760:

    Substantial merchandising and publicity initiatives on behalf of the above model appear to have commenced even prior to Grantee's submission to the FCC of its confidentiality request letter, dated January 17, 2007, and are ongoing.

    https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/f...ive_or_pdf=pdf

    For example, Samsung featured this product in its January “Insight” E-Newsletter, a promotional vehicle dispatched to an extensive consumer mailing list. The newsletter was distributed on or about January 18, 2007, just one day after the manufacturer/importer’s request for FCC privacy protection.

    http://www.smartphoneforums.com/foru...f?d=1175799864

    As further shown by the below-hyperlinked references--and in violation of both the spirit and letter of FCC regulations governing temporary confidentiality requests--Grantee has facilitated, and engaged in, pervasive public marketing activities throughout the pendency of its Application for Equipment Authorization.

    In addition, it is apparent that Samsung has requested Short-Term Confidentiality for a blanket period of 180 days. My understanding is that, perhaps to prevent "squatting," FCC policy confers an initial grant of confidentiality for just 45 days--renewable in like increments, subject to continued justification and upon timely written request, up to a maximum of 180 days.

    Thus, as a general request, I ask that the FCC audit, and revisit the implementation and effectiveness of, its permissive current policy.


    Representative Public Marketing Activities for FCC ID A3LSCHi760:

    CNET TV (CNET Networks, Inc.), "Product Spotlight, CES 2007," January 8-11, 2007
    CES 2007 videos - Consumer Electronics Show Las Vegas - CNET.com

    Samsung Electronics, Press Release and Product Overview, January 8, 2007
    SAMSUNG's Digital World - Press Release
    imagine the possibilities

    PhoneScoop.com (Phone Factor LLC), "CES 2007," January 8-11, 2007
    CES 2007 + iPhone (Phone Scoop)

    Samsung Telecommunications America, Press Release, March 27, 2007
    Four Samsung Telecommunications America Products Named CTIA Emerging Technology Award Finalists

    MobileBurn.com (Michael F. Oryl, Jr.), "CES Gallery," January 8, 2007
    Samsung SCH-i760 Live Photo Gallery (MobileBurn)


    Discussion of the FCC ID BCGA1203:

    In regards to the FCC ID BCGA1203, Apple, Inc. (“Grantee”) even admits to marketing activity in their Cover Letter (Confidentiality Letter):

    http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/fo...ive_or_pdf=pdf

    Specifically:

    “Although Apple has begun to market the device publicly, these documents reveal technical and design information that has not been publicly disclosed in such marketing and that is protected by Apple as confidential and proprietary trade secrets. This information has been disclosed to those required to maintain its confidentiality, and is not customarily disclosed publicly prior to the commercial release of a device. As a result, disclosure of this information by the Commission prior to the commercial release would hard Apple by giving competitors an unfair market advantage. Apple believes the period of confidentiality requested is necessary to protect the information until the commercial release of this device.”

    In this statement Apple, Inc. admits to having marketed the device publicly, which is in violation of the guidelines set forth by the Equipment Short-Term Confidentiality which is requested by device manufacturers or distributors under DA 04-1705, and subject to 47 CFR §0.457, 47 CFR §0.459, 47 CFR §2.803, and/or 47 CFR §2.1204, and to §552 (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act. The short-term confidentiality is to protect the company BEFORE such marketing happens, and Apple, Inc. has engaged in the marketing of the FCC ID# BCGA1203 since January 9, 2007 when the CEO of the company announced the product to the public at MacWorld 2007 in San Francisco. Next this device was shown during a commercial on February 25, 2007 during the broadcast of the Oscars. This same commercial has been publicly available on Apple.com since the original airing, as well as a full product information page on their publicly available website:

    Apple - iPhone

    There are also countless other websites that have made the device publicly available, as well as countless tradeshows having the device presented and available for the press and general public.


    It’s this type of blatant abuse of the Government system, not following the guidelines set forth by the FCC, that is hurting the public interest. I, and the general public, would have no issues with these companies if they followed the guidelines set forth by your agency, but both companies are in violation of these guidelines and I ask that the FCC audit, and revisit the implementation and effectiveness of, its permissive current policy, and terminate the Short-Term Confidentiality of both FCC ID: A3LSCHi760 and FCC ID: BCGA1203. If companies are continually allowed to violate these policies, then why are they in place? We must hold the companies responsible for their requests, and need to follow the guidelines set forth.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    Very Truly Yours,

    .....
    I borrowed from KBAM's letter above, and added some more....
    Last edited by mrailing; 05-19-2007 at 11:23 PM.

  19. #19
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    Here is a copy of the text of the FCC document DA 04-1705

    PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12 th St., S. W. Washington, D. C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418- 0500 Internet: http:// www. fcc. gov TTY: 1- 888- 835- 5322
    DA 04- 1705
    June 15, 2004


    OET Equipment Authorization System Upgrade Permits Electronic Submittal of
    Short- Term Confidentiality Requests
    An upgrade to the Office of Engineering and Technology’s (OET) Equipment Authorization System will be implemented effective 06/ 15/ 2004. This upgrade will provide
    additional flexibility for electronic submittal of requests for confidentiality of certain commercially sensitive information that is submitted in conjunction with applications for
    equipment authorization.
    Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 0.457 and 0.459 of the Commission’s rules (47 CFR §§ 0.457, 0.459), the Office of Engineering and Technology currently accepts requests to
    hold in confidence certain attachments to the electronic Application for Equipment Authorization (Form 731). These requests are granted indefinitely, and are strictly reserved for limited types of
    technical information.
    The new electronic process will include a provision for temporary confidentiality for certain additional portions of an application for equipment authorization. This will give
    manufacturers and distributors the ability to import and/ or distribute devices following equipment authorization, while maintaining the confidentiality of detailed technical information
    about the product prior to product launch. Electronic submittal of a request for such confidentiality will ensure expedited approval and will make it less burdensome for
    manufacturers and distributors to comply with the marketing regulations in 47 CFR §2.803 and the importation rules in 47 CFR §2.1204, while ensuring that business sensitive information
    remains confidential until the actual marketing of newly authorized devices. Such confidentiality will extend for 45 days from the date of the Grant of Equipment Authorization,
    and, absent any other action, the subject exhibits will be automatically placed on the public database at the end of this period. However, if prior to the expiration of the 45 day period, an
    applicant engages in public marketing activities or otherwise publicizes a device for which temporary confidential treatment has been granted, the applicant must coincidentally notify the
    FCC or the TCB issuing the equipment authorization so that the subject exhibits may be placed in the public database immediately.

    1
    2
    This limited confidentiality will be granted for the following exhibit types when an applicant requests and justifies such confidentiality in conjunction with the Form 731, or a TCB
    submits such information and justification in conjunction with the TC Form 731: External Photos, Test Setup Photos, Block Diagram, Schematics, User’s Manual, Internal Photos, Parts
    List / Tune- up Procedures, and Operational Description. Exhibits containing certain types of technical information (e. g. Block diagram, Schematics, Parts List / Tune up Procedures, and
    Operational Description) that have heretofore been granted indefinite confidential treatment will continue to be so treated upon request. The confidentiality fee described in 47 CFR §1.1103 must
    be submitted with the Form 731; however, only one confidentiality fee per FCCID is charged regardless of the length of the confidentiality request.


    If an applicant requires more than the original grant of confidentiality of 45 days, the applicant can request an extension of the limited confidentiality for an additional 45 days. To do
    so, the applicant must notify the FCC, or the TCB that issued the grant, a minimum of 7 calendar days prior to the expiration of the original 45 day grant of confidentiality.


    The existing procedures for electronic requests for confidentiality for an indefinite time period, based on the regulations in 47 CFR §0.459, are unaffected by this upgrade, and
    applicants may continue to avail themselves of this procedure.
    Please direct any questions regarding the procedures for electronic submittal for Short-Term Confidentiality to eapninquiry@ fcc. gov.


    FCC NOTICE REQUIRED BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
    Pursuant to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (5 CFR Section 1320), the information collection FCC Form 731 have been approved under OMB Control Number 3060- 0057, and for FCC Form 731- TC under OMB Control Number
    3060- 0934. The estimated time per response for 3060- 0057 (FCC Form 731) is 18 to 30 hours, and the estimated time per response for 3060- 0934 (FCC Form 731- TC) is 2 to 6 hours. The estimated response burden( s) include the time for reviewing
    instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the required data, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. If you have any comments on the burden estimate( s), or how we can improve the collection( s) and
    reduce the burden( s), please write to Les Smith, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1- A804, 445 12 th Street, SW, Washington, DC, 20554. Please include the OMB Control Number( s): 3060- 0057 (FCC Form 731) and/ or 3060- 0934 (FCC
    Form 731- TC), in your correspondence. We will also accept your comments regarding the Paperwork Reduction Act aspects of the collection( s) via the Internet if you send them to Leslie. Smith@ fcc. gov or call (202) 418- 0217. Do not send completed forms
    to this address.
    Under 5 CFR Section 1320, an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the
    Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that does not display a valid control number. The OMB Control Number for FCC Form 731 is 3060- 0057, and the OMB Control Number for FCC Form 731- TC is 3060- 0934.


    THE FORGOING NOTICE IS REQUIRED BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995, PUBLIC LAW 104- 13, OCTOBER 1, 1995, 44 U. S. C. SECTION 3507.
    I bolded the key terminology of this document, as outlined previously by KBAM. These companies are just violating this, and especially Apple, who even admitted it to the FCC, who still granted them the confidentiality.

    I thought I would copy the entire text for anyone to read...

  20. #20
    Registered User mrailing's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-19-2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    8,410
    I thought I would do a follow up post to comments seen in the Rumor thread as to why we are going forward with this. I totally agree that companies SHOULD have a short-term confidentiality on their products. They should have the ability to work on a device in private and be as secretive as they want to be. The problem is the way that some of these companies are abusing the system. Companies want the best of both worlds, they don't want any information out on any product, yet they want to create hype and make the product visible.

    As Mark_A_K mentioned, this could be to the fact that the marketing division and development division don't know what each are doing, but I think it comes down to, they want to tease us, but only let us know what they want until the full release.

    So all of this is fine, but the problem is, the companies are violating government guidelines in the process and abusing the system. This is what we are trying to prevent from happening. In the previous post (#19) it shows a copy of the text of the guidelines for Short-Term Confidentiality and how they go about requesting it, and what they have to do to maintain it. It's simple for the companies, they request it, and as long as they continue to request confidentiality within 7 days of the end of the 45, they can continue to request the confidentiality of select documents for up to 180 days, or until the Market the device, or release it.

    It doesn't matter that this is the iPhone or the i760. It's the fact that the companies are abusing the system and the FCC is letting them. We have been working on the i760 because they violated this guideline and they didn't follow it correctly in the first place (requesting a blanket 180 days, instead of re-requesting each 45 day block). Apple admitted to violating it in their request. And both companies are still actively "marketing" the device.

    If we don't hold the FCC to their own guidelines, and hold the companies responsible for following the guidelines, then who will? Why even have guidelines in the first place?

    In this day and age, if people are going to set these rules, then people need to follow them, and they need to be upheld. We have enough of agencies within the government not doing what they should, we should hold them to what they say they are going to do.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts