Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2014
Posts: 3,524
Default A bit of the old corporate...

....integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company. Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."


--
“My heart goes out to the people of Ebola.”
Sarah Palin
  #2   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company. Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to plug in
a light.


  #3   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2014
Posts: 3,524
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/14 7:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into
hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company. Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying
policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to plug in
a light.



Why would it remind you of that? The electrician's rate card at trade
shows and auditoriums is not a secret nor is it handled illegally.
Marriott's excuse for its illegal behavior is laughable.

--
“My heart goes out to the people of Ebola.”
Sarah Palin
  #4   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/2014 7:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into
hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company. Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying
policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to plug in
a light.



Why would it remind you of that? The electrician's rate card at trade
shows and auditoriums is not a secret nor is it handled illegally.
Marriott's excuse for its illegal behavior is laughable.



When was the last time you went to a nice restaurant carrying your own
home cooked dinner?

Marriott's jamming was indeed illegal as I understand FCC rules but I
don't condemn them for trying to sell their WiFi service. People have
choices of where to stay or where to hold conventions.


  #5   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2014
Posts: 3,524
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/14 7:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord
Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a
month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into
hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per
access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use
the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company.
Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying
policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high
fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts
consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to plug in
a light.



Why would it remind you of that? The electrician's rate card at trade
shows and auditoriums is not a secret nor is it handled illegally.
Marriott's excuse for its illegal behavior is laughable.



When was the last time you went to a nice restaurant carrying your own
home cooked dinner?

Marriott's jamming was indeed illegal as I understand FCC rules but I
don't condemn them for trying to sell their WiFi service. People have
choices of where to stay or where to hold conventions.



Ah, so it is ok when corporations break the law. I get it.

--
“My heart goes out to the people of Ebola.”
Sarah Palin


  #6   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/2014 8:01 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord
Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a
month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty
fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into
hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per
access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use
the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to
the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company
said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company.
Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen
for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying
policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high
fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts
consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a
technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to
plug in
a light.



Why would it remind you of that? The electrician's rate card at trade
shows and auditoriums is not a secret nor is it handled illegally.
Marriott's excuse for its illegal behavior is laughable.



When was the last time you went to a nice restaurant carrying your own
home cooked dinner?

Marriott's jamming was indeed illegal as I understand FCC rules but I
don't condemn them for trying to sell their WiFi service. People have
choices of where to stay or where to hold conventions.



Ah, so it is ok when corporations break the law. I get it.


Putting words in people's mouths seems to be an obsession of yours.


  #7   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/2014 8:01 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord
Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a
month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty
fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into
hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per
access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use
the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to
the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company
said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company.
Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen
for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying
policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high
fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts
consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a
technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to
plug in
a light.



Why would it remind you of that? The electrician's rate card at trade
shows and auditoriums is not a secret nor is it handled illegally.
Marriott's excuse for its illegal behavior is laughable.



When was the last time you went to a nice restaurant carrying your own
home cooked dinner?

Marriott's jamming was indeed illegal as I understand FCC rules but I
don't condemn them for trying to sell their WiFi service. People have
choices of where to stay or where to hold conventions.



Ah, so it is ok when corporations break the law. I get it.



One problem is that the rules (not necessarily laws) established by the
FCC for wireless transmission of data are based on those written back in
the 1920's and 1930's well before the Internet, iPhones and other
personal wireless devices were ever envisioned. For commercial purposes
they basically said that you could not be charged to receive radio and
TV transmissions broadcast from antennas.

It's similar to the controversy regarding FAA rules governing privately
owned drones and the recording of video data. You can do it but not for
commercial purposes nor are you supposed to receive any payment for
recording a video. The FAA is starting to revise those rules because
they are obviously outdated.
  #8   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Feb 2014
Posts: 3,524
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/3/14 7:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/3/14 7:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/3/2014 7:21 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
...integrity:

Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi
inShare13

Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET

SCOTT MAYEROWITZ
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for
jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord
Opryland
Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use
the hotel's own connection.

Frequent travelers often carry personal Wi-Fi hotspots -- tiny devices
that can connect to the Internet via cell phone towers. For $50 a
month,
they can connect to the Internet on the move, often avoiding hefty fees
charged by hotels, airports and conference facilities. Some people
upgrade their wireless data plans to make their smartphones into
hotspots.

Last year, a conference attendee at the Opryland hotel in Nashville,
Tennessee -- which is managed by Marriott -- found that the hotel was
jamming devices in its ballrooms and complained to the Federal
Communications Commission. In the complaint, the guest noted that the
same thing happened previously at another Gaylord property. The block
didn't affect Wi-Fi access in guest rooms.

While jamming personal Wi-Fi connections, Marriott was charging
conference organizers and exhibitors between $250 and $1,000, per
access
point, to use the Gaylord's Wi-Fi connection. The FCC declined to
release the initial guest complaint except if requested under the
Freedom of Information Act, a process that can often take weeks.

Marriott agreed to the fine and has instructed its hotels not to use
the
jamming technology in the way it was used at Opryland, according to the
FCC. But the company on Friday defended the blocking of guests' own
Wi-Fi networks in the interest of network security. The company said it
is legal to use FCC-approved technology to protect its Wi-Fi service
against "rogue wireless hotspots that can cause degraded service,
insidious cyber-attacks and identity theft," adding that hospitals and
universities employee similar jamming practices.

At the four Gaylord hotels in the U.S., Marriott today monitors for
hotspots causing interference but does not automatically block such
connections, said Harvey Kellman, a lawyer for the hotel company.
Only a
handful of Marriott's 4,000 other hotels worldwide currently screen for
hotspot interference.

Marriott said it encourages the FCC to change its rules "to eliminate
the ongoing confusion" and "to assess the merits of its underlying
policy."

The government said people who purchase cellular data plans should be
able to use them without fear that their personal connection will be
blocked.

"It is unacceptable for any hotel to intentionally disable personal
hotspots while also charging consumers and small businesses high
fees to
use the hotel's own Wi-Fi network," Travis LeBlanc, chief of the FCC's
enforcement bureau said in a statement. "This practice puts
consumers in
the untenable position of either paying twice for the same service or
forgoing Internet access altogether."




Sorta reminds me of the many times my company had a booth at a technical
conference/trade show and had to pay a union electrician $250 to plug in
a light.



Why would it remind you of that? The electrician's rate card at trade
shows and auditoriums is not a secret nor is it handled illegally.
Marriott's excuse for its illegal behavior is laughable.



When was the last time you went to a nice restaurant carrying your own
home cooked dinner?

Marriott's jamming was indeed illegal as I understand FCC rules but I
don't condemn them for trying to sell their WiFi service. People have
choices of where to stay or where to hold conventions.




I wonder if Marriott announced ahead of time to its customers that their
wifi would not work, and they'd have to buy hotspots from Marriott for
an exorbitant fee.

--
“My heart goes out to the people of Ebola.”
Sarah Palin
  #9   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,006
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On Friday, October 3, 2014 11:07:03 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 19:21:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



...integrity:




Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi


inShare13




Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET




SCOTT MAYEROWITZ


AP Business Writer




NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for


jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord Opryland


Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use


the hotel's own connection.




It is interesting that every Marriott we have stayed in had free WiFi

for the guests. Must be a Gaylord thing.



This is where the consumers can vote with their wallet.

If a few companies pulled their conventions, Marriott would fold.

I do agree that it is illegal to jam radio traffic tho,.

(the same reason your techy neighbor would get in trouble for jamming

drone signals). The whole area of cell phone jammers is working it;s

way through the courts as we speak.

It will eventually get down to property rights vs the right to use the

government's radio waves.


A friend in California, back in the old days, was among a group who built antennas that could receive a movie service that was broadcast, for pay, to customers. They were, in effect, stealing the movie service using that old rule that if it was broadcast over the air, you could receive it. The company providing the service sued, one of the guys that had built his own antenna that had deep pockets went to court, and he lost. All the folks with the renegade antennas had to take them down.
  #10   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,972
Default A bit of the old corporate...

On 10/4/2014 12:01 AM, wrote:
On Friday, October 3, 2014 11:07:03 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 19:21:44 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



...integrity:




Marriott fined $600,000 for jamming guests' Wi-Fi


inShare13




Friday - 10/3/2014, 7:20pm ET




SCOTT MAYEROWITZ


AP Business Writer




NEW YORK (AP) -- Marriott International will pay a $600,000 fine for


jamming conference attendees' own Wi-Fi networks at its Gaylord Opryland


Resort and Convention Center, forcing them to pay hefty prices to use


the hotel's own connection.




It is interesting that every Marriott we have stayed in had free WiFi

for the guests. Must be a Gaylord thing.



This is where the consumers can vote with their wallet.

If a few companies pulled their conventions, Marriott would fold.

I do agree that it is illegal to jam radio traffic tho,.

(the same reason your techy neighbor would get in trouble for jamming

drone signals). The whole area of cell phone jammers is working it;s

way through the courts as we speak.

It will eventually get down to property rights vs the right to use the

government's radio waves.


A friend in California, back in the old days, was among a group who built antennas that could receive a movie service that was broadcast, for pay, to customers. They were, in effect, stealing the movie service using that old rule that if it was broadcast over the air, you could receive it. The company providing the service sued, one of the guys that had built his own antenna that had deep pockets went to court, and he lost. All the folks with the renegade antennas had to take them down.



What did the court find as being illegal? Was it simply receiving a
non-encrypted or "scrambled" signal? According to FCC regs, that is
*not* illegal.

If the broadcast was scrambled and people built their own de-scamblers
to receive the movie, then that is illegal.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Corporate Honesty...at last. F*O*A*D General 2 April 18th 14 10:03 PM
New Rule for Corporate Execs... Harryk General 36 July 23rd 11 12:06 AM
Corporate culture... H the K[_4_] General 2 October 30th 09 07:37 PM
Corporate thugs...of course. H the K[_2_] General 20 September 11th 09 12:34 AM
End Corporate Welfare Now! Charles Momsen ASA 0 November 9th 08 03:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017