DS> it is also an offence to sell a non-approved modem without DS>
stating that the modem is non-approved.

DS> Many people in this echo think they can get away with it.

 RS> And many seem to think that they should get involved in an Austel
 RS> wank too. Do you stand beside the road and record with a stop watch
 RS> who exceeds the speed limit and get all excited about that too ?

 Can't say I have, but then speeding and posting messages knowing that
 it requires a non-approved statement are two complete things.

 Most people posting ads for non-approved modems know they require the
 statement, they just fail to include because to the unwary, they seem
 like a good deal, when they are actually illegal to use on the public
 exchange.

DS> Now all we have to do is to dig up a message where that Joshua
DS> wanker is trying to flog off 10 or more non-approved modems and
DS> show that to AUSTEL. Nice hefty fine would be involved there.

 RS> Its more than a tad more complicated than that Dave.

 It's always the way.

 RS> First you have to be able to actually prove that you didnt just
 RS> enter the data in that message yourself to shaft him or something.

 Or that the person actually exists.

 RS> AND they dont actually fine people like that $12K if say an ad of
 RS> theirs appears in say APC either.

 Never thought about that one.


 Then again, this is probabbly off-topic.
 One would hope that the moderator would do something about the topic we're
 all getting a little annoyed at.

 I would say that 99% of the people flogging off non-approved modems
 and not including the warning know they are in breech of Austel's regulations.


--- Maximus 2.01wb