Talk:MDS America/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

"Legal History" section

I'm removing the Legal History section. It appears to discuss a patent disagreement with some small company, and having half the article about it appears to be undue weight. Please cite major stories in mainstream news sources confirming the importance of any legal case. Thanks! Weregerbil 12:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Weregerbil, I again do not understand. I have just checked the articles on Echostar, USAirways, etc. All contain info that is only covered in the trade press. Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. I can only go by what is written. I thought this was an encyclopedia. Here what wikipedia writes about wikipedia:

Wikipedia (IPA: /ˌwikiˈpiːdi.ə/ or /ˌwɪkiˈpiːdi.ə/ (Audio (U.S.) (help·info))) is a multilingual, web-based, free content encyclopedia project.

now Encyclopedia:

An encylopedia, encyclopaedia or (traditionally) encyclopædia,[1] is a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge or a particular branch of knowledge.

I did not read anything about 'mainstream' articles covered by mainstream press. Perhaps what is frustrating me is that anyone in the field of Microwave distribution knows of the significance of this court case. If the trade info is not explained to the "layman" in the US Airways article, or the Echostar article, why is it so important in the MDS America article? Why would mainstream. I have inserted one of these references in the MDSA article and it states the significance of the court case. As well I have inserted a New York Times article that explains MDSA and Northpoint and their significance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.109.95 (talk • contribs)

So can this information and its significance be verified using reliable sources, as required by Wikipedia policy? Weregerbil 12:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Is the New York Times a reliable sources? Is Broadcasting and Cable? I have included links to both. I have experpted the Wikipedia page you reference.

Secondary sources are documents or people that summarize, analyze and/or interpret other material, usually primary source material. These are academics, journalists, and other researchers, and the papers and books they produce. A journalist's description of a traffic accident he did not witness, or the analysis and commentary of a president's speech, are secondary sources.

The New York Times link references the Congressional hearings (Mr. Kirkpatrick's Senate Testimony was linked from day one) on this matter which are already linked from this article. I simply do not see how this matter which spawned 3 bills in Congress, two Statements of Administration Policy from the White House, and the "most contentious proceeding " in FCC history could be described as "a patent disagreement with some small company." Why would the US Senate hold hearings on "a patent disagreement with some small company?"64.134.109.95 16:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Serious referencing problem

This article seems to have similar problems as those appearing in the MDS International article. There are multiple instances of opinions about cases only having the actual court documents cited. The New York Times article briefly references the MVDDS technology itself and discusses Northpoint in detail but doesn't back up anything in the Technology section its being cited for. Also the statement This court case and subsequent invalidation of Northpoint's patents opened the way for the free licensure of MVDDS spectrum. is supposedly backed by the Internetnews article, but while the article talks about free licensing for providers who use satellite, it never mentions invalidating patents - which is a rather extreme claim. The entire Appeal subsection is referenced to a document which no longer exists - since the reference contains nothing more than a url, its incredibly difficult to verify whether or not this information is correct.

In short, the article needs to correctly cite secondary sources and preferably give complete citations for them instead of the abbreviated references being used or a great deal of text needs to be removed. Shell ^babelfish 22:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I am someone with first-hand knowledge of this case, these companies, and their on-going dispute so I have followed this discussion with some interest. After so doing, I have concluded that Wikipedia, while a great concept in theory, is junk in practice and this running battle seems to prove it. I have witnessed admins admonish a party for "attacks" then turn around themselves and attack the admonished party:

Please see WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. Please understand that personal attacks are absolutely not allowed on Wikipedia. Your positive contributions are appreciated; comments such as "pathological liars" may get you blocked without further warning or discussion. There is no excuse for personal attacks. Please understand the phrase no excuse. Not even the excuse you are now preparing to present to us (emphesis supplied). Thank you. Weregerbil 22:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I am tempted to ask if the admin who wrote this is clairvoyant, but I don't for two reasons: I will be accused of making an attack; and this unprofessional display can only be construed as an attack, so there is no point to even broach the question. The following was written by another admin:

Also the statement This court case and subsequent invalidation of Northpoint's patents opened the way for the free licensure of MVDDS spectrum. is supposedly backed by the Internetnews article, but while the article talks about free licensing for providers who use satellite, it never mentions invalidating patents - which is a rather extreme claim (emphesis supplied).

A quick search on Google will show multiple instances of reporting on this issue and substantiate this "rather extreme claim". The following link is to a law firm website (this law firm was not involved in the litigation) where they discuss the outcome of the case and its impact on patent law:

http://www.mwe.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/publications.nldetail/object_id/fd041d1f-0c09-4789-9788-39eca2212aac.cfm

By itself this is very sloppy work on the part of the admin, but a complete read of this on-going saga suggests that a few admins have decided to get into a "pissing contest" with an editing party for some unknown reason. The title "Serious referencing problem" is a "window into the soul" of the admin who wrote it. Is this a "serious problem"? I think not! You are dealing with a primary source of this information; the same source a researcher from a "mainstream" (what does "mainstream" mean anyway, and who is the judge of that?) publication would contact to write on this subject, yet, despite court records, congressional records, and news articles pointing to this person as a principle in this matter, the admins subjectively claim the information needs a secondary source when any amount of diligence on the part of the admin would confirm the veracity of information. The way I read the reliable sources page, a primary source can be used if not disputed. In the face of court rulings, congressional records, and news articles, what is being disputed? The better question is, why do these admins spend their energy rebuffing the editor and throwing up roadblocks to prevent the dissemination of worthwhile information instead of simply using their admin status and power to steer the editor in the right direction?

I purposely vandalized one of the pages connected to this subject (no one who read the page could reach any other conclusion except vandalism) to see how the admins reacted; I didn't hear a word from them. I can't imagine that it wasn't reviewed, yet only the original editor of the page caught it and reverted it; no warning from an admin before or since the page was reverted. Where are the admins spending their time and energy?

As I said earlier, in it's present form, Wikipedia is a worthless compilation of second-hand material that is subjectively edited by admins who seem less interested in making Wikipedia a valuable resource and more interested in throwing around laughable power, I guess because it's probably the only life they have and the only area of their life that lets them feel important. Remember, all glory is fleeting. If Wikipedia doesn't get control of its admins and dump its subjective rules, it will be destined for the scrap heap of history; replaced by a site that better fills the need that Wikipedia is currently neglecting

209.214.214.3 21:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for providing the reference, as requested. Please note that it is the responsibility of the party adding information to properly source their additions and that any editor has the ability to ask for sources for information, particularly when those claims are out of the ordinary or potentially harmful to the subject if untrue. Please see WP:ATT for our policies on sourcing. Shell ^babelfish 20:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

More Information

The outcome of the patent case described in this article started an entire industry and was covered extensively in the telecom press. Could the author of this article please place more references in the article as well as fill in some detail as to the case? Thanks64.195.223.68 18:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

MDS International has been nominated for deletion

Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MDS International (2nd nomination). I also put notices of the WP:AFD at WP:AN/I and WP:COIN. You are welcome to join the deletion discussion and give your opinion. If you can log in before participating, your vote will carry more weight, under the policy of WP:AFD (search for 'unregistered' in that page). Your reasons and arguments will be carefully considered regardless of whether you have a logged-in account. If you are an employee of MDS America or MDS International, or have an affiliation with either one, mentioning that in your comment would help to reduce any concerns about conflict of interest.

At this time there is no proposal to delete the article on MDS America, as the activities here have not led to any legal threats. EdJohnston 01:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Great Thanks for deletion

MDSinternational article are full build by Harold Kirpatrick CEO of MDSAmerica itself without the permission of Hypercable MDSinternational and only to make lies against this company. Thanks to not Delete MDSAmerica this are a good page and a good tribune to said the right about this guys. ALSO TCPip Assymetrical system use from satellite to ground with Telco return way are a standard in use long time before the Fabrice genious inventor of the HotWater leave the French army!! MDSAmerica invent the best way to use the Al Fawares funds to make smoke and noise, no more83.206.63.250 22:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear editors, we await your proposed changes

This is a general hello to some of the anonymous posters on this Talk page. The page should not be used as a forum for general discussion of the company. It is specifically for recommending article changes. Any changes you wish to propose should be backed up by reliable sources. If you feel that information about Sheikh Al-Khalifa should be in Wikipedia, then you should draft it up in the form that you think correct and propose it, here on the Talk page. I assume that Sheikh Al-Khalifa must have been written up in business publications, so you should be able to find references for him. The link to the Arab Times provided above does not open for me, and the second link is to a regular web site, not a recognized publication. It is not clear that either reference mentions his connection to MDS. It seems you must be writing here to refute some kind of a rumor about him, but I'm sorry I don't know what that rumor is. It is probable that we will have to leave all mention of the rumor out of this article, because we know so little about it. EdJohnston 00:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ed I fixed the link. The rumor is not a rumor, it is a poltical accusation from enemies of a great man. There are many references to it. However the Kuwaiti courts threw it out three times, the last being with prejudice and notes that all accusations were without merit. The editor who wrote the above wants others distracted from the behavior of MDSI and keeps peppering talk pages and article with innuendo. Look at it.

There have been changes to the MDSI article reverted even though they were backed by reliable sources. (See contempt of court.) 65.2.150.213 00:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The Arab Times link looks like it could be a letter to the editor, it doesn't seem to be a full news story. Is the complete story available anywhere else? And where can we find the contempt of court thing; I saw it once as a link to a PDF file but the archives are full of strange stuff and I don't know where it is now. EdJohnston 00:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ed, Look at all of the Day by Day articles, every day they are all written by Metar. He is a political columnist for Kuwait in the Arab TImes. 72.19.4.235 14:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer. But while I'm here, I note that Wikipedia does not currently have an article on Sheikh Al-Khalifa, if I am not mistaken. If you are concerned about dispelling rumors about him, perhaps you could collect some reliable sources for us that could eventually go into a biographical article about him? Or you could begin writing the article yourself, perhaps asking for input here to be sure it is neutral. EdJohnston 15:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

POV tag

From a discussion on my talk page with 65.2.150.213 (and clarified a bit): After more review, I changed the tag to a POV one. There is no incorrect fact there that I can tell, but I do feel that the article portrays MDSA in a somewhat preferential light. The statement "MDSA's innovative technology is a high-speed...(MVDDS) system created by MDSAmerica" seems to associate the technology's origins too closely with them. The phrase "Northpoint Technology Ltd., a company set up primarily to lobby the FCC and Congress for free RF spectrum" is very dismissive. The quote from Mr. Kreig appears inappropriately right in the lead. The sentence "The unique design of the transmitters and antennas facilitates an exceptionally pure radio frequency signal that allows transmission of video and data at very high speeds over long distances. " sounds scripted. nadav 03:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive created

I've created an archive for the discussions here. I propose all discussions not relevant to the article, or otherwise not appropriate per WP:TALK be moved to the archive so we aren't distracted. I propose the following sections be moved:

• More Information about the owner company
• Clean funds or not Clean funds
• Looks like clean funds to me

--Ronz 01:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I've move them to the archive along with two others that I also suggested should be moved. --Ronz 21:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge

Now that the MDS International article has become a redirect to MVDDS dispute, I think it is only proper that this page be too. No secondary source I found about the company, and I have done an extensive review in the course of the MDSI debate and in writing MVDDS dispute, has mentioned the company outside the context of the Northpoint Technology story. Moreover, all the sources indicated MDS America was the North American licensee of MDS International. Representatives of MDSA say the status has changed, and the contempt of court order does indicate the companies are no longer on friendly terms. However, I still haven't seen anything indicating that the hypercable technology is not sold outside the US by MDS International. Indeed, see SCTV's news release (uploaded 01-Feb-2007). nadav 19:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I beleive the article will still need to go through a regular AFD reguardless, in which case discussion will take place there, I suggest going ahead and starting the AFD. Russeasby 19:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Why AfD? Just merge and redirect. --Ronz 20:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

merges don't need Afd. I'll wait a little before doing this, though. nadav 20:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Merges don't need an Afd unless they are controversial. I'm not sure what the official definition of controversial is, but I don't think it's appropriate to have no entry at all for a company which, for example, owns 500MHz of spectrum across 1/3 of the US. MDS has the largest number of MVDDS DMAs in the US - that's spectrum that was purchased at auction. That alone is a reason that, IMHO, it would be inappropriate to remove the MDSA article without some serious discussion. Bhimaji 20:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

The correct procedure for controversial merges is discussion on the talk page (which should be at MVDDS dispute since the templates post there) as well as listing on Wikipedia:Proposed mergers, which I have done. See WP:MERGE for more. nadav 22:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Please see Talk:MVDDS_dispute#Straw_pole_on_merging_MDS_America --Ronz 22:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring

Rather then edit war please contribute to the merge discussion. If edit warring continues the page will have to be protected in which case it will be more difficult to edit and improve the article to help your case with keeping it rather then merging it. Russeasby 16:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I find your threat to be absolutely astonishing.

You're telling me that people from MDS America must not revert edits that violate Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy, even if the anonymous users making the edits have a history of adding off-topic attacks?

You're telling a vandal that she or he will get their way if they keep at it?

I've been actively involved in the merge discussion. So have numerous other MDS America employees.

Nadav said, "I want to thank you for improving the neutrality of MDS America" about my prior edit. An anonymous user came in, undid my edit, and added libelous rumors. You're saying that you wish to punish me for this?

I would sincerely appreciate it if you could clarify which part of this that I am mis-understanding.

Bhimaji 19:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

If edit warring continues, the article will be protected. If you find this to be a personal threat, please read WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. --Ronz 19:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

My guess is that Russeasby was addressing the other person, rather. In future, though, it might be better to drop a message on this talk page so that one of us can revert the change so as to prevent the appearance of an edit war. nadav 19:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Russ was probably trying to address 83.206.63.250, who I believe has identified himself as J-C Ducasse in a previous conversation. I trust that Jean-Claude will realize it is more sensible for him to join the conversation here, than keep reverting the page. Can we hold off on semi-protection for just a little bit? There are plenty of regular editors here, ready to revert any changes to MDS America which are against policy. So let's give it at least another 24 hours before adding semi-protection just to block one IP, who we hope will join the conversation anyway. If anyone finds it necessary to revert, please leave a comment here each time you do so, just to keep some order. Thanks, EdJohnston 20:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Testimony

When I served as President and CEO for RapidWave Inc I receive near than one million US dollars from the team of Donors Kirk S.Ali Al Fawares and I testify in court. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.160.95.1 (talk) 06:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

I am unable to understand your comments. I think it will be easier if you just wrote in French, and I will find a way to translate. Thank you, nadav 07:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

The only Ex-CEO of Rapidwave is in California. This IP originates in Taluyers France (MDSI) and I believe is a sockpuppet of Jeanclauduc. . 65.2.198.147 09:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Revert changes

I have reverted obvious vandalism by Jean-Claude Ducasse. Please look at what was reverted before calling this "edit war" 09:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.17.236 (talk • contribs) 09:41, 5 May 2007

Ronz, thanks for keeping up with this. We should not allow potentially defamatory material to remain on the Talk page unless reliable sources are provided. Asking for blocks at WP:AN/I per legal threats is something to be considered. EdJohnston 15:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually the above was posted by me. I don't understand why someone put it as RONZ. However, I tried before to remove this garbage and was chided for this. I thins all of this extraneous garbage should be removed immediately. 76.109.17.236 15:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that wasn't me. I've fixed the signature. I think we should be cautious about removing comments from here. --Ronz 16:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, let's have a consensus to leave the Talk comments for now. Unsourced changes to the article itself should still be reverted. EdJohnston 18:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

South Coast Television

Does anyone know why the SC television installation was so quick (less than a year from approval to deployment, according to this article), while whatever is happening in the US is apparently going to take from 2004 to 2009? Is it a different technology? EdJohnston 02:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that information is accurate. It was already approved years ago when MDS International was in charge. I have no idea about the current status or what happened since, and MDSA guys say the stuff I found is out-of-date. The only info in print I saw is in the contempt of court order. nadav 02:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The most recent info on the project looks to be this: [1] nadav 03:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

There are a couple reasons for the difference:

I believe that the regulatory-side work actually started around 2001. SCTV was definitely doing their end of planning and logistics before 2006. My understanding is that SCTV decided quite awhile ago that the market demanded more TV channels than their old system could offer. I don't know when they started doing what, but I do know that 2006 is when they told us that they were going to definitely go ahead and asked us to actually start building their system.

SCTV was an already-established TV provider - they've been providing TV services in Ireland since the 1980s. They had a pretty good grasp of what they wanted to provide, what people would pay, among other things. They didn't need to set up new departments for marketing, customer service, etc.

The area they deployed to was relatively small compared to many of the massive regions in the US. The system includes base stations and repeaters. Depending on the distance from a base station to the furthest repeater, you need different kinds of repeaters.

Smaller systems can be somewhat more hand-built. We don't need to have an assembly line. We don't need to train teams of people to set up transmission sites. I've seen the CEO help pack a box when we got a really big order.

The Irish system is currently TV only, rather than triple play with broadband Internet. The American market demands as many time-wasting opportunities as possible in one bill. :)

Finally, the FCC set very conservative maximum power-level requirements. However, if we wish to increase our power level - giving us better coverage and fewer towers - we need to request a waiver from them. FCC waivers require literally hundreds of pages of technical documents. I refilled a printer tray a couple times a day last week when we were printing out a draft. We don't want to deploy until we know what power level they will approve. Once we submit our technical report, the FCC will analyze it. Then, I think, other get the chance to comment on it as well. Next, the FCC looks at their comments, and decides who's right.

On big military airplane projects, they used to say that the plane wasn't ready to fly until the paperwork weighed more than the plane; I think in this case, we don't get to actually deploy until the paperwork can cover the region we've licensed :)

Your question is a very good one; I asked it when I first joined MDSA.

Bhimaji 03:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I have done a review of all articles on Lexis-Nexis about the SCTV move towards digital (I will probably be writing an article on SCTV; it's a company with a fun and notorious past). Excerpts are available here: user:Nadav1/SCTV. MDS America was not mentioned in the articles (it hasn't been mentioned in print in two years), but they were somewhat vague about technical details. I am trying to look at ComReg publications too. nadav 09:02, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Trop c'est Trop

L'ignominie de MDS America atteint des sommets que je me passerait de commenter plus avant; cette société a comme activité de base les detournements, le vol, la diffamation, les mensonges. Comme ils sont le fait de l'un des brillants redacteurs, le Chef produit de MDSAmerica est un Francais, voleur prouvé et de plus mégalomane il sera heureux que je lui écrive en Francais, je sais de quoi je parle il s'agit de mon propre fils ainé issu d'une première couche!

Je relève entre autre ce qu'ils ont publié sur Satellite Guys sur MDSAmerica Wikipedia et sur un site Proxy en se faisant passer pour la société Real Network voila ci dessous la copie de ce qu'ils ont encore ajouté:

Line 37: Line 37:

   Fraud Case

- Defrauded by Hypercable/MDSi/Worldwave/Jean Claude Ducasse (reliable source from RealNetwork serverhttp://www.xingtech.info )

Defrauded by Hypercable/MDSi/Worldwave/Jean Claude Ducasse (reliable source from RealNetwork server http://www.xingtech.info ) As a client of MDS International, same us MDSAmerica, you may have been defrauded if you purchased the HyperBoost or WADSL software products for use with your broadcasting system.

MDS International has been selling pirated versions of Xingtech Streaming Server as its own intellectual property since 2002.

As a client of MDS International, same us MDSAmerica, you may have been defrauded if you purchased the HyperBoost or WADSL software products for use with your broadcasting system.

MDS International has been selling pirated versions of Xingtech Streaming Server as its own intellectual property since 2002. 83.206.63.250 11:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment: We see above a repetition of the claim that MDS International does not have proper rights to distribute the XingTech Streamserver software. Since we believe the poster of this comment, 83.206.63.250, is Jean-Claude Ducasse of MDS International, i.e. the company that is the victim of this accusation, I think Wikipedia need not worry about defamation issues, and there is no urgency to removing this claim from the Talk page. We can archive it on the normal schedule, or even better, try to engage Jean-Claude in a discussion. The accusation is made on a web site, xingtech.info, that can't be traced to an owner because of the lack of normal whois information, so we don't know the original source of the charge. Jean-Claude appears to be making two arguments here that aren't right: (a) xingtech.info is a reliable source, [it's an anonymous web site with no credibility, reputation or even announced owner], (b) xingtech.info belongs to Real Networks. EdJohnston 14:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually Ed, the French explains the English a little bit but is only slightly more coherent. jeanclauduc is saying that "too much is too much" and then rails about the fact that his son (and partial owner of MDSI) has turned against him. The following part after the French is a cut-and-paste from a blog. I assume it was posted there by the author of the Xingtech.info site which turns out to be, I think, an ex-MDSI employee.

MDSA has been trying and will continue to try to work within Wikipedia's process to make these article more conforming so long as they are not inaccurate. There will be no such posts from our side as this one. 76.109.17.236 14:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional comment from an anonymous poster who identifies himself as connected to MDS America. We welcome participation by any editors affiliated with either MDSA or MDSI, preferring that (as happened in this case) the person mentions their affiliation.

Jean-Claude may be quoting (above) from a post that appeared anonymously on the web site satelliteguys.us in April, which made the same piracy charge. I don't believe there is any reliable source for the claim that this accusation originates with people from MDS America. The most recent poster (76.109) says he thinks the whistleblower is a former MDSI employee, though we have no data for this claim either. This charge has appeared previously on different Wikipedia pages, though if the claim were to appear in an article, we should remove it promptly as defamatory and unsourced. EdJohnston 15:09, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

+ Strange, the information concerning xingtech.info web site (and the cut-and-paste) were posted in this talk by "83.206.63.250" which we suppose to be Jean Claude Ducasse. Then Jean Claude ducasse is complaining to find these information on MDS America talk page. Nothing else to do during week end ? --IPTVdev 15:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

IPTVdev, do you mind stating your affiliation? I am assuming MDSA employee? Russeasby 15:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

INCREDIBLE LIARD

User IPTVdev of course are again a member of MDSAmerica probably my past son ! Previously named Fabrice and now Abdallah with a new father the Shaick Ali Khalifa Al Sabah Owner of Al Fawares and Irak Rebuilder with the US Pentagon funds. It is more comfortable to have a new father with Billions of Dollars than to have an old and poor worker father! Also do you think seriously that inside WHOIS you can see the name of the company using this IP adress "62.160.95.1"  ? We have and we work still on the same adress and I sign what I said I am not same my past son a liard and a dishonest stealing the poor to give to the rich.83.206.63.250 15:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC) (Take note dear reader that the same words and comments from myself are inside my testimony in France on the French case against Abdallah)83.206.63.250 15:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

+ Who is a Liar ? whois 62.160.95.1 OrgName: RIPE Network Coordination Centre OrgID: RIPE % Information related to '62.160.95.1 - 62.160.95.1' inetnum: 62.160.95.1 - 62.160.95.1 netname: FR-MDS-INTERNATIONAL descr: MDS INTERNATIONAL descr: Za La Ronze descr: Taluyers descr: 69440 country: FR --IPTVdev 16:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

No affiliation at all. Just someone who used to work a lot with Xingtech products. --IPTVdev 15:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

+It seems that MDSA article "Fraud Case" for which Jeanclaude ducasse (MDSI) is complaining, was edited by "62.160.95.1". this IP belong to MDS international (according Whois). (Jean Claude Ducasse should look inside his company before complaining against MDSA ? --IPTVdev 16:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)~

YES IPTVDEV I look inside the company and I see you and you confirm that you are the past employee of MDSinternational share Holder of 5 % and fired in 2004 for theft and Breach of trust and now product manager of MDSAMerica.the Iraki company, and you have nothing to do with Real Network you are the maker of the false XINGtech.info proxy site and much more but also the IP adress 62.160.95.1' are a free public WiFi long range acces point use by the operator WiMix Telecom

+ So, according what you say jeanclaude ducasse, the article "fraud case" which you are complaining against was posted by the IP address "62.160.95.1" which belongs to WiMix Telecom. As Wimixtelecom belongs to MDS international (wimixtelecom.com), we can conclude that this post comes from MDS international. So your complain should be directed to MDS international, and has nothing to do on this site. Fortunately, I am lucky of not being one of your employee (present or past) or one of your family member. --IPTVdev 21:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

==+++== IPTVdev the maker from dady go of the false Xingtech proxy site are the Product manager of MDSAmerica. http://www.mdsamerica.com/company1.html

It's true that Jean-Claude re-stated the piracy charge in his own comment above. I don't think he believes that the charge is true. I believe he is upset that the Xingtech charge keeps being repeated, and he believes that MDSA is circulating the charge. From Wikipedia's point of view, since no reliable source asserts that MDSA is the source of the rumor, our work is done, and we don't need to keep investigating who might have submitted it to our Talk pages. (Anonymous postings on our Talk pages are *certainly* not a reliable source). EdJohnston 16:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree entirely, the software piracy allegations are a non issue, there is no reliable source reguarding them. Simply put, any additions of them to the article pages will be removed and talk page additions will be ignored. The way I see it the only real issue right now with this article is determining notability and if it should be merged. Outside that, I dont see any other pressing issues. Russeasby 16:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I wrote that this is en ex-employee and my source for this is the litigator for Real. She told me this as we were identified as a customer (we bought two) of this product. I realize that this is not a reliable source but this is my source. 76.109.17.236 20:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Made by harold Kirkpatrick and fabrice Ducasse a gang of Liards this are easy to call or mail to REAL and to see on WHOIS the owner of this Proxy adress! 83.206.63.250 15:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Patent

I have fixed the link to the patent. It is assigned to MDSA, but the inventor is Jean-Claude Ducasse. Is this the patent that has been the source of so much bad-will? nadav 22:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I've placed a citation needed template since I have not seen sources that support the fact that the technology was developed by MDSA. Instead, I have seen many sources that indicate it was developed by MDSI and was to be implemented in America by MDSA. nadav 22:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC) If it cannot be verified, I will remove or substantially reword those sentences.

Patent or no Patent

This patent assigned to MDSA "invented by myself" are not made by myself, this are false documents made by MDSAmerica using some old advertising (2001) from our company and I never receive one penny for this, and all of this are a stupid patent diagram and speach are full false.We have nothing to do with this stupid document and nobody worldwide can use this.

MORE This process described are stupid and cannot work also the diagrams inside are take from old advertised pictures from VISIOSAT french Companies and the soft inside the Set top Box are propiétary of Thomson Multimedia and from Pace. I can produce the original documents and contracts long long time ago before this " Cretin .fr patent".

I have made another inventions with patents assigned to various companies such as Comera or Hypercable or Thales or Bluwan but never for MDSAmerica and we do not have any dispute with any for this stupid patent with no potential applications worldwide ! 83.206.63.250 15:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I think Jean-Claude just admitted to purposely lying on a patent application, a Federal Document. There is a perjury admonition on this document. I believe this is a crime. I will investigate. 76.109.17.236 21:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I confirm with great pleasure that the MDSAmerica patent is only a mix of existing documents from another companies, my name onthis patent are not a reference for this patent all of this patent are smoke and fog but you can use I think you cannot find a "GOGO" to pay one penny for this You produce this system and the set top box with a special software inside ??? Fortunately a Standard Set Top Box can be use Readers and Editors can see the SCTV page to see that the STB in use are standard with no Special MDS America software inside the STB this are again a new Harold Lie in this article one more inside a sea ol Lies to screen the real facts. 83.206.63.250 22:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposing AFD

I would like to propose that this article be propose for deletion. An AFD exposes this article to a wider audience to gain consensus on notability then the current merger suggestion. If it AFD fails then the merger issue is out, MDSA would have stood up to debate on its own right. Certainly durring AFD the merge option would be proposed as well and consensus may be there, even if the AFD succeds, a redirect would still be warrented to MVDDS dispute. The fact is we can discuss until blue in the face about notability and parties will still hold their respective opinions. AFD is a very clear and easy way to settle this. MDSA employees should not worry about this, as if the company is notable enough to warrent an article then it will remain. Myself, and other editors who question notability, would as well stand by the results of the AFD even if it goes against our current opinions. I would like to hear others view on this proposal (noting anyone can put up an AFD reguardless, no consensus is needed to actually start an AFD). Russeasby 04:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

At this point I think it's a good idea. We'll get outside feedback that could solve the problems here. --Ronz 21:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

If you feel it should be deleted then go ahead and do it. I'd have to see the nomination; I might support a merge..nadav 21:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Printed for the Court

Before new change inside by MDSamerica an Co the contents are printed by the baillif for the French Court 83.206.63.250 15:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

To editors reading this. Bailiff means witness in French. This is not an officer of the court. In fact, they are not associated by the court at all but are hired by individuals and companies to act as witnesses. These court threats are simply bluster and hot air. Judges in court cases see the same things you see here. This is not serious. 76.109.17.236 21:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Harold Kirpatrick thinks that in France a Bailiff is only a sort of witness with no mission from the court or not a government justice officer with no links with the court you think that the editors are so stupid to still eat your lies?

Sorry you are a fine user of wikipedia ? yes ? go go quiclky modify the Wiki page about what is a Bailliff to make the baillif at the new Harold Kirpatrick sauce http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailiff 83.206.63.250 22:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the court, Bailiff and attorneys are not very Happy that you said this" are simply bluster and hot air" are your great great arrogance!

Go ahead I like this tribune I Like you addd lies on lies this give to me a good reason to add for the next step in Wikipedia new informations using the US Forensic computer contents of your Product manager keep by the court to display what you stole and also the XX files and super porn Gigabytes movies and pictures you have stored. 83.206.63.250

"Hussier de justice" are not Bailiffs in the sense of the American Jurisprudence. They are paid witnesses. They do not take a side in court. They do not get mad. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huissier_de_justice. Note this line from Wikipedia article above (emphasis added):

The most common British English translation for huissier de justice is "bailiff" (and sometimes "sheriff officer"); note however that French huissiers de justice are not government employees and do not have police powers.

The above comment is again, a violation of the "No Legal Threats" by implying a legal action to those who do not understand that what 83.206.63.250 is simply flailing about. It should be obvious that the "French Judge" sees the same "reasoning" from 83.206.63.250 displayed so prominently on these pages.

None of this contributes to improving these articles.The legal threats should stop! 76.109.17.236 12:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Talk removed

Very important talks about MDS America are removed to make a smoke screen about the real story and real business and real funds in use by MDSAmerica with the attached reliable sources, fortunately the reader can still see a copy saved inside the unremovable old article versions Revision as of 06:27, 6 May 2007 and older83.206.63.250 05:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Pitiful

MDS America send hundred emails to major companies worldwide under the name and the logos of Real network using a Proxy site www.xingtech.info with the use of the REALNetwork link WWW.XINGTECH.COM. This fraudulous use of REALNetwork company to display lies and false informations

This email back are send april 17th to a SpinOff of Thalès the company BluWan.

---

Message d'origine-----

De : xingtech [2] Envoyé : mardi 17 avril 2007 18:16 À : legal@xingtech.info Objet : Defrauded by MDS international/Worldwave/JeanClaude Ducasse

As a client of MDS International/Bluwan you may have been defrauded if you purchased the HyperBoost or WADSL software products for use with your broadcasting system. MDS International has been selling pirated versions of Xingtech Streaming Server as its own intellectual property since 2002.

For more information check http://www.xingtech.info

legal@xingtech.info

Old and legal informations about Hyperboost softwares for Wireless Assymmetrical Distributed Subsciber Line can be download from MDSi : http://www.mds.fr/products_all/products_mds_soft.htm PDF White Paper are available for Download from year 1998

83.206.63.250 16:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

MDSA did not send any emails. MDSA was sold two pirated copies of Xingtech and are cooperating fully with REAL. MDSA does not know nor has ever contracted anyone called Bluwan. Not a single piece of evidence has been shown by MDSI in everything they post.

However MDSA WILL make sure that REAL is now aware of Bluwan and the possibility that they too have pirated software.

Thanks Jean-Claude, any other customers you want to inform us of or is this customer just like the "hussier" and the "French Criminal Court"? Just imagination? 76.109.17.236 21:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Pitbull

you are Mr Harold, to change the talk by pitiful thats fine and usefull what you do and what you said! thank you again to add REAL Network in the circuit now you have the good size partner with you and I am very happy to know now that you are "cooperating fully with Real" Do you think that you can MDSA still no send emails but send emails with false names and false adressses in full impunity? I remember you said to me I can send emails to the world under the name of GOD and nobody can vever know the real sender because I ama the best hacker of the world in this matter... poor Pitbull!

My Apologies to Wikipedia for this garbage! we know now what we need to know about my distinguish son and the honorable harold and also about the means to make world lies by the way of wikipedia.83.206.63.250 06:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Calm is suggested: no need to respond to irrelevant issues

Some editors here feel impelled to defend the honor of one company or another with regard to a matter involving Xingtech software. If you have been following the saga, you are probably aware that this issue, whatever its merits, has nothing whatever to do with the present article. I suggest that any further discussion of Xingtech matters should be moved into the Archives as soon as it is posted. As the WP:REFACTOR policy so wonderfully puts it, these matters are "clearly and unmistakable irrelevant". EdJohnston 03:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree they are irrelevent, but I sort of lean towards the view that if we leave them here that perhaps it will put an end to it. The poster is obviously intent on having this posted, if it keeps getting removed he will keep posting it. If we leave it here, is he just going to keep posting it over and over even though its already on the talk page (of course any article edits should be reverted). But then again, this poster has not shown much rational behavior anyways, so my point my be moot.

Myself I am at the end of my rope with this editor, if it was not for their constantly changing IP I would push for a community ban. At this point I just want to stop watching this article and forget about it(not in my nature) or I am in favor of sifting through history and collecting all the IPs that have posted this sort of information and start a community ban process, which may be a long term commitment due to the editors persistance and frequently varied IPs. Russeasby 03:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm for removing them. The editors here involved are being disruptive and are not responding to repeated requests to curb their actions. The irrelevant discussions only make it harder for anyone who is actually interested in improving the article. --Ronz 03:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually I thought Jean-Claude always uses the same IP (83.206.63.250). He manages to annoy some other IPs, and then they respond. The statements made are so confusing it's hard to follow things. I feel sorry for his bailiff who has to keep all this straight! With regard to a community ban, that would not be considered for someone who has never been blocked. EdJohnston 03:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

+++ No sorry my answers or contents from my IP adress are still change by MDSamerica making all confuse I like more to never make any answers about this lies and attacks this are my last message to Wikipedia to make happy the winner of the lies and false REAL web site maker Mr Kirpatrick and Fabrice Ducasse are really the first and powerfull hackers of the world, my congratulations to this gentlemen for the usefull use in USA of the Irakis Kuwaitis Pentagon funds83.206.63.250 06:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for Talk page clean up

I propose that NPOV editor like RONZ or ED go through and archive sections of this 'talk page" that are not regarding the improvement of the article 76.109.17.236 01:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

No objection if Ronz wants to do that. I am getting used to the irrelevant interruptions, so I don't object if we simply do time-based archiving. EdJohnston 01:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

How does this stuff actually work?

This is a follow-up on some French article references found by Nadav1, discussed at User_talk:EdJohnston#French_MDS_translation. I'm trying to add some material to the MVDDS article about how the MDSA/MDSI system actually works. From what I can tell, it's mostly useful for one-way transmission, as with HD cable TV, where the huge bandwidth provided is a key selling point.

Whether it is competitive with other methods of providing internet connection is another matter. I looked at "Le câble « hertzien », une alternative à la TNT" [3], an article published in a French technology magazine in 2003. There is an installation of an MDS Hypercable system in France's Ardèche region, where sparse population means that techniques like optical fiber are too expensive. This 2003 article explains that MDS provides an internet downlink, but the uplink is slow. It appears to be 9 kb/sec, and I couldn't figure out from the French how it is handled. I gather that satellite internet service can be purchased in the US, but the uplink is maybe 1/6 or 1/10 of the downlink speed. The link appears to go both ways via the satellite.

Here is the slightly-obscure French passage discussing the return path for the internet connection:

MDS met en oeuvre une technologie, baptisée HyperBoost, qui évite que le trafic IP sur la voie descendante soit bridé par l'attente d'accusés de réception via la voie montante à bande étroite (RTC, RNIS, GSM, etc.). Avec une voie de retour par liaison téléphonique à 9 kbit/s.

Someone from MDSA might know if this is how their system currently handles internet connections. (Return path via telephone).

Also, the MDS system appears to have so many advantages, at least for TV, I'm puzzled that it's not installed in more places yet. Especially in France, where it would seem that the regulatory regime may be less onerous than in the US. Does it lose out in competition with satellites?

Also in this article J-C Ducasse says that these are "technologies cousines du WiMax d'Intel". Can anyone who knows this stuff comment on the resemblance to WiMax? EdJohnston 03:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

There's some peripheral background info on TV technologies in France at Digital television in Europe (which also explains TNT btw) nadav 03:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The system spoken about in those articles (MDSI) is a QPSK based one way system using another data connection of any type for the upstream. One of the major advantages at the time was the highly asymmetric capabilities of the system. This was the system that Fabrice Ducasse invented that made the MDSI system interesting for data. There is no connection to WiMax which uses different modulation and power. They are 'cousins' because they are RF data transmission.

In the two years since the separation, MDSA has developed a 2 way system using 2.1 -2.5 GHZ, 3 GHz, or 5.6-5.8 GHz for its upstream. This system is a close cousin of the WiMax standard. WizardOfWor 18:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. One reason for my puzzlement was, IP requires lots of confirmation messages, so waiting for a return could delay the sender. Since any ground-based technology has much less latency, why would it be advantageous to have a separate return path? It seems paradoxical, that two-way internet can be supported via satellite, but the ground-based system doesn't want to provide a return path via the same antenna. It seems that a Wikipedia article ought to have answers to this kind of a basic question. EdJohnston 18:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

In the US we aren't allowed to use MVDDS for uplink; I believe the same is true in France. Also, most 12 GHz band equipment is quite expensive on the transmit side, being intended for high end sites - it's usually priced too high for CPE (Customer Premise Equipment) use. There's a lot of inexpensive reception equipment since it's commonly used in the satellite market. In addition, many network designs use repeater sites, and these sites would be more complicated if they had to receive and aggregate the uplink.

DVB digital TV broadcasts, as used by the system Fabrice designed, obviously have standard protocols that they use. Normally you wrap a number of MPEG-2 video streams in the bit stream. However, you can also wrap other stuff - in this case, Ethernet frames. At the receive end, you put in a customized set top box. At a certain point in the data stream, you split the signal up. One feed goes to the MPEG-2 TV decoder, the other feed goes to an Ethernet interface.

Now, you can get Ethernet frames from the digital head end to the customer. You need a return path. You could use WiFi, cellular, dial-up or 12 GHz radio.

12 GHz is probably not legally permitted, and is priced with the expectation that transmitters serve thousands of people and so are very expensive.

Cellular and dial-up have similar issues, being very slow; wifi is better but still poor. TCP's acknowledgment behaviour is based on the assumption that data links are symmetric, and that any apparent congestion is probably equivalent on both links, so it should slow down.

This is where the magical software that everybody's been arguing about comes in to play. Apparently, it actually replaced components of Microsoft's TCP/IP library with its own algorithms which had different TCP ack algorithms - algorithms that worked much, much better over asymmetric links.

I recall reading that some satellite providers used to use dial-up uplinks as well.

So, Fabrice's original system utilized two links which, at the network layer, were entirely independent.

MDSA is now developing a newer system based on WiMax. It is asymmetric, working on 12 GHz and a lower band, but it's actually a full duplex 802.16 system with coordination between both links - the network understands that it has a bi-directional link and link management is coordinated across both bands.

Bhimaji 18:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the thorough explanation. I hope that some of this information will wind up in the MVDDS article or a related one. Anyone who has been following along, and feels creative, is welcome to add some text there! EdJohnston 20:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Fabrice the inventor of the Hot Water

Fabrice Ducasse is a Liard and stole in MDSi various products and concepts and the French Criminal court in Lyon sue this guy for Theft and Breach of Trust.!! Again about HyperWimax www.hyperwimax.com this product and special antenna mixing KU 12 GHz and 40/43 GHz are supplied by MDSi Hypercable to Thales BluWan and another companies worldwide using Hypergate Hyperboost softwares to build instant VPN ways in assymetrical systems with dynamical adresses. The Triple Play Dual antenna exist and are produced by MDSi the softxare and systems are running with Wimpax from Alvarion or Motorola Canopy and Arraycom Wimax Mino system. What claim MDSAMERICA made by this famous Inventor ( This Fabrice Ducasse never obtain any diploma in any school at any level with no invention more than to download from X Hard Core porn sites Gigabytes of contents !) are again a project to make an obscure copy about what MDSi do.83.206.63.250 22:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide links to the court documents, please?

Who do you believe did invent this system? Bhimaji 23:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

YOU are MDSA and Fabrice Ducasse is yourself or at least your Product Manager,you have lawyers and you know perfectly the case against your Product manager and if your product manager do not said you the right you can ask the lawyer this are the best and legal way.

BUT YOUR PRODUCT MANAGER ARE not only a liard but full Crazy, see back what your Product manager said on Wikipedia !!! and our answer ! 83.206.63.250 00:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I am an employee. I am not a manager. You're telling me that my employer and my co-workers have lied to me, so I am asking you if you can show me documents about what really happened. When I asked my boss about this dispute, he showed me the contempt of court ruling against MDSi; I'd like to hear your side of the story. Bhimaji 01:42, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Boxed up some Talk comments that have appeared previously, re-submitted here by 83.206.63.250, probably J-C Ducasse
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Direct connection with the Liard Hello Ed, Thank you for your answer. Let me know how I can help you. I created the "MVDDS" business since 1994 and Sh Ali Al Khalifa Al Sabah financed it since 1998. So we know a lot concerning the history. --Fabrice10 07:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC) LIES company are created By Jean-Claude Ducasse alone in 1985 Just curious, but are you still on good speaking terms with your father? You don't have to answer. nadav 18:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC) Nadav, I will say that my father is not in good speaking terms with anyone. He is suing anyone he can. My brothers, my sister, my mother (and me) were sued by my father for absurdities. LIES only Fabrice and sons make case againts MDSi and all lost the case and paid fine to MDSi and I can supply the court decision The founder of MDSI Lotfi.F... was accused by my father of being a terrorist linked to the Libyans and responsible of the UTA B747flight bombing in 1989, DANGEROUS LIES Lofti Farran are not founder of MDSi only a share holder during 2 years making money when the bank Credit Agricole purchase the shares I nevre said any about Lybian responsible of Bombs!! all of MDSi employees were accused of having stolen the company assets and spying the secrets (some of them were accused to have been paid by France Telecom for spying MDSi), LIES it is right that France Telecom make a reverse ingenierie but France Telecom apologise and make a deal with our lawyer and no MDSi employees are involved in the case. I was accused by my father of having cracked and sold MDSI secret software to Al qaeda with Sh Ali, Etc... LIES evidences of Theft and Breach of Trust are ceased by the court in the fabrice computer for various subjects and MDSi CEO no myself and the Criminal court are still on this case after 3 years ov investigations. VERY DANGEROUS LIES Al Qaeda? My god! what Al Qaeda can do with Softwares clients and patent secrets for Multimedia ?? Generally speaking, my father has attacked everyone who has helped him to build a business and to re-start from several bankruptcies (investors, family, partners...) LIES I never attack anybody, And I never make Myself any Bankruptcies All attacks are by Fabrice and sons and Kirpatrick a family for raketing ... The poor Northpoint are pushed by MDSAmerica to launch an attack and after wining with my help MDSAmerica attack MDSI because Northpoint attack MDSA Thats is the Right I said this on the Protestant Bible 83.206.63.250 23:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC) Hello Nadav. How would you feel about leaving the articles and talk pages unprotected until the AfD concludes? That would give time for people who are afraid of revealing themselves publically to put in their two cents. One of the recent posters may in fact be the son of the inventor, so he might have helpful information to add. EdJohnston 00:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC) I strongly disagree. I don't think this is the place to air grievances (which are bordering on libel! in particular this stuff about the Kuwaiti owner). We have sources for writing an article, and we should just ignore stuff we don't have sources for. We don't need to involve ourselves in arguments between the two parties. Keep in mind this is a multimillion dollar case, and Wikipedia is not a battleground. BTW, I am now writing up the history of the Northlight v. MDSI & MDSA case. I'm basing it mostly off the Federal circuit court opinion [4], with a smattering of the the other sources I found. I want to include more stuff about MDSI, but as you saw, it was mostly French. nadav 00:40, 30 April 2007 (UTC) I'm glad to hear you are trying to write that up. But I do stick to my view that there should be a Talk page consensus for any protection (or an utter breakdown of consensus, which I don't think is the case). You are becoming aware now of the slightly irrational postings that have actually been going on since early March, and they didn't get drastically worse in the last couple of days. Actually this is milder than usual. And, I thought you're the one who wanted to take the high road and defend the article at all costs, in spite of the legal issues. If anonymous posters make libellous charges on the Talk pages, we can always remove them. The concern is that we might allow something false to go into an article, and with all the scrutiny, I don't think we will permit that. After the AfD is over, I think I will vote for permanent semi-protection of both articles (if we keep both), but not of the Talk pages. And I think we may want to request some blocks at that time. EdJohnston 00:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC) Ed. I left a message on Nadav's page if you want to read it. Thanks for you efforts in this. 65.2.150.213 01:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC) The talk page semiprotect request was declined anyway. Perhaps I was overly anxious about this stuff. Anyway, Ed, I agree with your proposal. nadav 01:37, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Jean-Claude responded about how the MDS system works

From the rather excited talk just above, I gleaned an answer by Jean-Claude, with regard to a dual-frequency system. Patient readers will now be able to check out www.hyperwimax.com, Motorola Canopy, Arraycom, etc. as well as Hypergate Hyperboost. EdJohnston 01:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

The HyperWiMAX system intrigues me. The block diagram shows HyperWiMax as a big one-way arrow and shows a very small arrow pointing back not to the HyperWiMax tower, but to the Internet. The text says, "HotSpot WiFi 2.4 GHz Or any return channel WiMax, GPRS, UMTS, EDGE, PSTN, ISDN, xDSL..." which sounds very much like the traditional asymmetric system. 42 GHz is way beyond what WiMAX normally runs at. From my discussions with WiMAX vendors at CTIA, even 12 GHz is beyond what they're looking at.

WiMAX is a bi-directional system; there's all sorts of management information that goes on. Also, 70 Mbits is the top WiMAX speed according to the Wikipedia article on it; MDSi's system claims up to 42 Gbps. Finally, WiMAX is a trademarked term used to describe 802.16-compliant systems that have been tested and approved by the WiMAX forum, an organization that doesn't list MDSi as a member.

I'm hoping that Jean-Claude can clarify the relationship between HyperWiMax and WiMAX; I'm having trouble finding any relationship at all. Bhimaji 01:34, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

We do not know the MDS System

I am the Technical manager of MDSinternational S.A. Jean-Claude is retired from one year ago and I do not understand or know any about the "MDS System". I provide the company Thales BluWan with Q band and KU Band Hypercable to build Triple Play networks combined with various WIMAX existing equipments using a special Triple Play CPE BluBox for this purpose. The systems name are various and depend of users some said Hyper Wimax another said Wimax ++ anothers said Fiber to air etc... the best to know all about this technology are to read on the page www.bluwan.com to understand the best of this Thales patented system. I hope this can clarify the technical subject. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.206.63.250 (talk) 07:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC). www.bluwan.com

Thanks for your response. If 'MDS System' is not correct, should we now call it the 'Thales Bluwan' system? I was trying to find a general term that would fit both the products of MDSA and MDSI without having to say 'MVDDS', which is US-specific. That acronym means to the American FCC "terrestrial reuse of satellite spectrum from 12.2 to 12.7 GHz." You mention Q band (36-46 Ghz) and Ku band (12-18 GHz). So I'm assuming that both MDSA and MDSI build equipment that re-uses some Ku-band spectrum already assigned to direct broadcast satellites for terrestrial use, while avoiding interference? Is that the bottom line? Thanks. EdJohnston 16:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

So to understand this, the poster, who continually re-edited the MDS International page to reflect Jean-Claude Ducasse as "CTO" of MDSI, now claims that Jean-Claude Ducasse is retired for more than a year. The MDSI web site 1 lists Jean-Claude Ducasse as CEO of MDSI. MDS International was founded in 1986 to continue private system development by CEO Jean-Claude Ducasse.WizardOfWor 18:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Ed, asking for real?

The above was written by Jean-Claude Ducasse. The only connection that HyperWiMax has with WiMax is that they are both radio based. There is no WiMax in HyperWiMax. WizardOfWor 17:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Sir

HyperWimax of course is full Wimax and full Compliant with the Wimax Forum this HyperWimax provide in the BluWan Wimax++ system a potential Speed to the users of 48 Gigabits in the Spectrum 40.5/43.5 GHz build by ourselves toprovide the Thalès BluWan patent. If anybody have a doubt please visit www.bluwan.com and mail to the CTO of this Company. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.206.63.250 (talk) 10:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

There is no indication at all that HyperWimax is anything compliant. The WiMax forum lists their partners and BluWan is not among them. There is no indication on the BluWan site that this is in any way WiMax. 72.19.4.235 18:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

++ Well, According Bluwan, MDS international is making public announcements without Bluwan permission. Moreover, Bluwan confirms purchase of cracked Xingtech StreamWorks server from MDS International. (source Bluwan Email to http://www.xingtech.info/mail.htm) --IPTVdev 14:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Are MDSi or BluWan members of the WiMAX Forum? Is the HyperWimax system officially certified? I can't find a listing on the WiMAX Forum's web site.

I can find any WiMAX products listed on the BluWan web site. BluWan does explain how their system is better than WiMAX.

BluWan's [2006 Fact Sheet] says:

"The current available access solutions such as xDSL, satellite, cable or WiMAX are not able to answer to the increasing capacity needs required by the market."

The diagram on HyperWimax.com shows a one way arrow. Is the system actually using WiMAX one way only? -- Bhimaji 16:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

To User:IPTVdev -- If you have some knowledge about xingtech.info, can you tell us who operates that site? If their information is correct, why do they insist on concealing their identity? I'm not asking because Wikipedia needs the information for our article, I'd just like to know why a wholly anonymous site should have any credibility at all. Making nasty charges in public is one thing; making nasty charges while concealing your identity is another. (This is irrespective of the truth of the charges). It's puzzling that they use the Xingtech name, which we assume is trademarked by somebody else. A proper whistleblower would go directly to Real Networks; it would be up to them to decide whether to pursue the matter, if there's truly anything there. EdJohnston 16:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

++++++++

Ed, While I understand somethings demand identity, why is it important that a "Wistleblower" site, who has identified real world IP Legal staff at REAL NETWORKS, reveals their identitiy? I think Jean-Claude and MDSI have established their "I will sue" bona-fides here on Wikipedia and REAL tells us that this type of (Whistleblower) thing is quite common among ex-employees. Why should they offer proof? MDSI has offered absolutely NO VERIFICATION about anything posted. Quite the contrary, virtually everything Jean-Claude posted has been demonstrated false. THey can't even get his position in their own company right.72.19.4.235 19:13, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

An anonymous complainer is trying to blacken somebody else's reputation while not putting their own reputation at any risk. If this kind of discussion is ever reviewed in a court, they would take note of whether Wikipedia talk columns are prepared to host reckless charges against third parties. If the people making the charges are afraid of being sued, then just keep quiet; nothing forces you to speak. Reporting the problem to the copyright owner should be the correct and blameless thing to do. If you keep raising the Xingtech matter here, the WP:LEGAL policy may apply.

If the Xingtech charges are emanating from MDSA staff, you should be aware there is a Michigan court order still in place. You could be in violation of that. (Under the Settlement Agreement, the parties are to refrain from disparaging each other). EdJohnston 20:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this simply a forum where people say anything regardless of how much sense it makes? I will personally draw Judge Cleland's attention to these pages tomorrow. Why is there the ASSUMPTION that this (xingtech.info) is an MDSA employee? Why is there the assumption that "someone is trying to blacken someone else's reputation?" Why is here the assumption that " If this kind of discussion is ever reviewed in a court, Wikipedia talk columns are prepared to host reckless charges against third parties." Who determined it was "reckless," You Ed? Based on what you read here? In the press? Who determined that a Judge would give a s__t about what is written in Wikipedia? You want to speak to the Judge Ed? But that is original research and would not be allowed here.

For the "whistle blower" to expose him or herself to right a wrong that, possibly, they helped to commit? I am sorry but none of that makes sense. Can someone be so morally bankrupt as to write "nothing forces you to speak?" How about doing what is right? But the tone of this talk page is not about what is right, is it Ed? Let us see. Someone, (an impertinent Arab) invested millions in a business and was not permitted to see the books, by MDSIs admission, yet these charges in Xingtech site are 'reckless?' Nothing written here is nearly as reckless as the above post!

Concerned MDSA employees are 100% aware of the contents of that settlement. Nothing in that settlement has been violated by MDSA but MDSI is NOW in Contempt for violations of the agreement. WizardOfWor 20:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

TO CLARIFY and for best understanding: IP address & IP location (72.19.4.235): are Harold Kirpatick CEO of MDS America WizardOfWor are Harold Kirpatick CEO of MDS America IPTVdev are Fabrice Ducasse MDS America Product Manager —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.206.63.250 (talk • contribs).

Also the IPTVdev guy said :(source Bluwan Email to http://www.xingtech.info/mail.htm) --IPTVdev 14:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC) everybody can understand that IPTVdev are also the maker of the false XINGTECH.info Proxy web site this is the evidence of what kind of game MDSamerica can play.

+ Ed, I don't know who creates xingtech.info web site, but the site is mentioning REAL litigator address to contact for the ones who purchased the cracked software. I have been working thousand hours with Xingtechproducts, and I can confirm that StreamWorks server available on Xingtech.info is the original one. I can also confirm that WADSL software (available for download on xingtech.info) from MDSi is the cracked version of Xingtech. But the site xingtech.info is not proving that the pirated WADSL file was created or sold by MDSi. Only MDSI clients or people involved in the cracking can know. --IPTVdev 21:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

IPTVdev still lie and made itself the proxy www.xingtech.info/mail.htm easy to kow this the site are made from Mac Computer of MDSAmerica see WHOIS.

Please remove this whole section below ++++++++ as it is in violation of WP:TALK. I would remove it myself but I do not want to violate NPOV. None of what is being written here has anything to do with improving this article. 72.19.4.235 17:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

MDSAMERICA FORGER EVIDENCES

After a short investigation the false XINGTECH.info web site are made By Mr Harris Jhosta you can see Whois for the account of MDSAmerica Harold Kirpatrick using materials supplied by Fabrice DUCASSE. Easy to see and to understand the forgery make against Real Network against MDSi and MDSi users and dealers.

From WHOIS: Resultat whois pour xingtech.info Registrant Email:XINGTECH.INFO@domainsbyproxy.com Admin ID:GODA-230295010 Admin Name:Registration Private Admin Organization:Domains by Proxy, Inc. Admin Street1:DomainsByProxy.com Admin Street2:15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353 Admin Street3: Admin City:Scottsdale Admin State/Province:Arizona Admin Postal Code:85260 Admin Country:US Admin Phone:US +1 4806242599 Appeler Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX:+1.4806242599

Company Name: Online Master Degrees Company Address: 15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353, Scottsdale, Arizona, 85260 Company Location: United States Contact Phone: +14806242599 Contact Person: Harris Jhosta Contact Email: **hidden** Website URL: http://www.speedydegrees.com/ Website Title: Online Master Degrees Company background: Offers life experience accredited college degree and university degrees online. High school diplomas also available.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.206.63.250 (talk) 16:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

• This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MDS America article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. I am beginning to regret that this talk page was not semiprotected. nadav 21:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Please remove this whole section as it is in violation of WP:TALK. I would remove it myself but I do not want to violate NPOV. None of what is being written here has anything to do with improving this article. None of what is written above is true and MDSA has nothing to do with the XINGTECH.INFO site. Being that the site seems to now list the same REAL litigator that I spoke to as well as her contact number, it would seem that they know about it. 72.19.4.235 17:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked 83.206.63.250 for 31 hours for adding the above diatribe to the actual article again. Looking at his talk page, he's had many, many warnings over this. I don't want to stifle any serious discussions about the article, but I'm not seeing any of that here. If Ronz, Ed, or nadav have a problem with this, please let me know. I have to re-iterate nadav's comment above - This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MDS America article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Please take your squabble to an appropriate place; Wikipedia is NOT the place for it. Kuru ^talk 19:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Another Evidence

Only MDSA Kirpatrick CEO and Fabrice Ducasse are aware of all said inside the false XINGTECH.info with a lot of details (more than I know) about another cases or about various French companies or about evoked contents such as a Fiducie Worldwave namely said by Fabrice Ducasse during the last meeting of MDSi administrators meeting and subject of a new cass against MDSi made by the same guys; this sign with any doubts that the authors of www.XINGTECH.info contents and also the namely Proxy site are from MDSAmerica staff I think thats is clear for all Wiki readers and admin. Time to remove are too late now the Bailliff are daily make legal forensics copies 62.160.95.1 19:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

• This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MDS America article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. I believe that 62.160.95.1 is a sockpuppet of jeanclauduc who has been blocked because he is still making legal threats and still wants people to believe about the "make legal forensics copies" garbage. 76.109.17.236 19:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Kuru make a mistake required blocking against jeanclauduc the target are for 76.109.17.236 alias Wizardofwor the subject of the talk are launched on the MDSInternational article by WiZardOfword the maker of the false XINGTECH article, Each lie require an answer.You can expect a lot of answers and we have thousands of IP adress to are still present and not Blocked by 76.109.17.236 admin friends On another Ed talk page I see that MDSAMERICA product manager are the MVDDS HYpercable inventor and that your team are in fact the MDSi Hypercable system Maker Ha Ha !

So sorry the patent Hypercable in France are made in 1985 by myself and at this date your Product manager are in the French army and 22 years Old I can produce the document if Ed need.... another evidence against the gang of liards62.160.95.1 22:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't make heads or tails of this, partner. Your English is a little spotty. So I'll try to ask specific questions.

1. Is there something specific on the the current article that you disagree with? Yes or no.

2. If so, what is it?

3. What reliable, published and independent source do you have that we can use to remove or add to the article?

I do not want to hear any more personal or legal threats, random bluster, or uncivil remarks. I'm serious. This is not the place to continue some random pissing match with the subject of the article. Please answer the questions as simply as possible. Kuru ^talk 23:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this "You can expect a lot of answers and we have thousands of IP adress to are still present and not Blocked" a Sockpuppet threat>? 76.109.17.236 00:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Answer to Kuru

Please apologise my Frenglish About this article ED make a strong cleaning and a lot of researchs to find the right!

1. Is there something specific on the the current article that you disagree with? Yes or no Yes concerning the lies about the last contents

2. If so, what is it? “Andrew Kreig, President of Wireless Communications Association International (WCAI), a Washington, D.C. trade group, said, "MDS has rather quietly become established as a leader in this field, They have strong experience internationally."

Andrew speak about MDSinternational not about MDSAmerica we have supplied worldwide around the world from 20 years ago MDS America supply only SCTV a client stoled to MDSi by Fabrice Ducasse Share Holder of MDSi.

“The coverage of the signal extends from the transmitter to the curve of the earth. The unique design of the transmitters
and antennas results in a high resistance to interference from other RF sources.
This allows for a high speed digital video and data link over greater distances than many conventional systems
- up to 200 kilometers using a compact passive antenna.MDSA Technology may also cover a much wider area such a city
or an entire country, using a cellular type network.[4][citation needed] “

This are lies the MDSAmerica system run using 100% of the Northpoint concept and MITRE recommendations after tests with Northpoint equipments; power EIRP are max 14 dBm ( FCC needs) and of course range are Line of Sight Only and maximum 10 km using standard satellite 50 or 80 cm Offset Dish and LNB ( Ask to SCTV ) Also to link terrestrial with the curve of the Earth at 200 Km require High power a mast Height no less than 6000 metres !

But I disagree much more for the “tons of lies” in the Talk pages also a false Xingtech site are build by MDSAmerica staff and emails send to our clients worldwide, of course this are not the subject of the article but I can answer to MDSAMERICA step by step and I can advertise a lot of obscure things if MDSAmerica still attack us in various Wikipedia pages.

3. What reliable, published and independent source do you have that we can use to remove or add to the article? Fortunately today are the 20th anniversary of the patented invention of MMDS Hypercable in 1987 details and documents are available on our WEB site http://www.mds.fr/ and details of the MVDDS Patent on http://www.mds.fr/patent/patent.html some world clients are displayed also in the Press articles http://www.mds.fr/news/news.htm collected by MDSi in the world and also the full story in America from year 2000.

In the Talk pages MDSAmerica said that Fabrice are the Inventor of Hypercable and MDSAmerica the maker and world deployments made by the MDSa Staff; also this are lies and false same all do MDSAmerica 89.224.137.86 21:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

So we see more of the same rants, no real information. If you check the Krieg reference it is clear he is talking about MDSA. In addition the document fragment posted could be anything.

It is clear that this another sockpuppet of jeanclauduc and he will never try to improve this article.

Here is a question, The chief Engineer of MDSA has a ABD from the Bauman technical university in Moscow. We have another engineer (BS CMU). Another PhD RF Engineer from GWU in DC. jeanclauduc, you keep mentioning Fabrice's education, which University did you attend? 76.109.17.236 22:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

"Also to link terrestrial with the curve of the Earth at 200 Km require High power a mast Height no less than 6000 metres !"

This seems to be contradicted by the results achieved by amateur radio operators, using home-built equipment, in the UK:

Map and list of UK distance records

In the 10 GHz band, the UK record is 1 275 km. In fact, even at 47 GHz the record is 203 km. The highest mountain in the UK is Ben Nevis (in Scotland, specifically) at 1 344 m.

I don't know how you calculated 6000 meters, but empirical results indicate that impressive distances are possible without such unreasonable tower sizes. Bhimaji 23:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Bhimaji you do not know the radio

Earth are round and Microwaves run line of sight only. Because earth are round if you need to see at 400 Km this require you are at 12000 km High same in a plane ( You do not know the formula?) Microwave distance record made by Ham radio amateurs are not for reliable service but only amateur links made during few seconds or few minutes by Microwave reflexions on layers of the air made by thermal inversion or inside similar "ducts" or by reflexion on various meteorologic events Droplets on water scattering,meteoscatter, strorms Huricanes ( Same than a radar impulsion returned signal etc.This amazing phenomeous cannot use for a Professional HDTV reliable service. Impressive long range system (1000 km)are made in the past by the NATO to make narow band tactical radio links using megawatt EIRP power in low band with enormous antennas using the TROPO Scatter mode. Conclusion are clear the article are wrong about this subject 200 km can be made with at least 4 meters dishes with both side TX and RX LOS on a top of a mountain with space diversity antennas but with a relability no more than 80% of the time.

• This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MDS America article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Direct your attention Kuru's questions, not irrelevant technical discussions. nadav 07:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank for the replies. First, please stop with all of the personal attacks (directed to the IPs). I know in real life you all detest each other, but as editors here we're expected to show a certain amount of civility to other contributors. Keep you comments on the article; and stop with the personal accusations back and forth. If you need to sort out something unrelated to this specific article, please start a blog offsite - but do not respond to it here!

Let me see if I can enumerate the relevant issues with the article:

• ISSUE A: Andrew Kreig Quote. 89.244.137.86 feels that the quote is about MSDi and not MDSA. He also feels the quote is inaccurate. 76.109.17.236 feels this is specific to MDSA.
• ISSUE B: Product Specifications. 89.244.137.86 feels the specifications are not an accurate description of the product.
• ISSUE C: Talk page comments. 89.244.137.86 feels the comments on this talk page are inaccurate and inflammatory.

Is that a fair summary of the current issues, or is there something else specific? Kuru ^talk 23:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Kuru Info

Kuru, thanks for your efforts here. Please look at this just as an example.:

62.160.95.1 resolved to the MDS International network. It is being used by jeanclauduc.

When I served as President and CEO for RapidWave Inc I receive near than one million US dollars from the team of Donors Kirk S.Ali Al Fawares and I testify in court. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.160.95.1 (talk) 06:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

Rapidwave Inc [5] was a company in San Jose who went bankrupt earlier this year. In this post, jeanclauduc is claiming to be the CEO who was a man named Bernard Picot [6].

I understand we are supposed to assume good faith. But I do not believe that will get anywhere here. These "objections" to the article are not real or at least as real as the above quote. I can get, for example, Andy Krieg to post something here regarding his comments. MDSA is a member of the WCAI. MDSI is not. While I hope your efforts come to some good. I am not hopeful. WizardOfWor 23:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with improving the article. If the article is not improved, it could be subject to deletion. nadav 07:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

ISSUE C: Talk page comments

Ok, let's start with the obvious. ISSUE C indicates a problem with some of the stunningly off-topic debates here on the talk page. Let's resolve that first, since I can already see the wheels falling off the cart. Random back and forth accusations and in depth discussions about satellite technology are not relevant to resolving this article. What we're looking for are references that support the content of the article, no a debate on the feasibility of the claims. I could care less about who has what degrees and who has pictures of someone's wife. So first step, I'd like to refactor this talk page and remove all the nonsense. Delete the crap, and archive the relevant discussions. Start with a clean slate and keep the discussion appropriate to improving the article. Unless there are any serious objections, I'll do this when I get back in this evening. Kuru ^talk 13:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

This has been done once already and no one objected to the proposal for more cleanup: Last cleanup proposal. --Ronz 15:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)