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!