<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.theindustrystandard.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>The Industry Standard - House OKs Hang Up Act in 2008 - Comments</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;House OKs Hang Up Act in 2008&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>I&#039;ve changed the date to</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-5566</link>
 <description>&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;&lt;p&gt;I&#039;ve changed the date to give this more time.  I&#039;m much more interested in the community&#039;s opinion if this will pass the House or not, not if the vote will take place in time .  Agreed?  So, in doing so, the wording will need to be tightened a bit.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:54:28 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Eric Hill812251</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 5566 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>To be clear, this only has</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-5565</link>
 <description>&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;&lt;p&gt;To be clear, this only has to pass the House - not the Senate or be signed into law.  Is that correct?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:01:51 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Eric Hill812251</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 5565 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>And there are various</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-4696</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;And there are various Mid-East and European airlines playing around with offering cell service.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I suppose this is one way of erecting a second roadbloack beyond just the FAA to maintain the ban.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:32:14 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Bradley Baker</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4696 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>http://www.fiercevoip.com/sto</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-4692</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fiercevoip.com/story/air-voip-or-not/2008-08-20&quot; title=&quot;http://www.fiercevoip.com/story/air-voip-or-not/2008-08-20&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.fiercevoip.com/story/air-voip-or-not/2008-08-20&lt;/a&gt;. VoIP calls over broadband attempted with some success. VideoOIP does not. Regardless, this Act will disallow both, if approved.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:24:45 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>David Kuan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4692 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Permanent until they change</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-4050</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;Permanent until they change it.  That just takes a bit of lobbying, naturally.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 19:06:15 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Bradley Baker</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4050 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>@Bradley, the Hang Up Act</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-3984</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;@Bradley, the Hang Up Act makes the ban permanent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The Federal Aviation Administration already bans cell phone calls during flights, and the Hang Up Act would make that ban permanent. The ban would have certain exemptions for members of the flight crew as well as law enforcement officers. &quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As to the &quot;waste their time and our money&quot;, I fully concur.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:05:15 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>David Kuan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 3984 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>What flights currently allow</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comment-3934</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;What flights currently allow people to make calls?  Every flight I&#039;ve been on there have been announcements that all cell phones must remain off for the duration.  How is this law necessary (which I understand is irrelevant to whether or not Congress feels the need to waste their time and our money passing it)?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:29:12 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Bradley Baker</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 3934 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>House OKs Hang Up Act in 2008</title>
 <link>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act</link>
 <description>&lt;!--paging_filter--&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;/sites/thestandard.com/files/u98/hangup2.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;Hang Up&quot; align=&quot;left&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; height=&quot;304&quot; hspace=&quot;10&quot; width=&quot;250&quot; /&gt;Rep. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.defazio.house.gov/index.php?option=content&amp;amp;task=view&amp;amp;id=423&quot;&gt;Peter DeFazio&lt;/a&gt;, D-Ore., a senior member of the House Transportation Committee, successfully advanced &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-5788&quot;&gt;a bill&lt;/a&gt; to prohibit passengers from making mobile phone calls during flights. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On July 31, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-5788&quot; title=&quot;Hang Up Act&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;H&lt;/b&gt;alting &lt;b&gt;A&lt;/b&gt;irplane &lt;b&gt;N&lt;/b&gt;oise to &lt;b&gt;G&lt;/b&gt;ive &lt;b&gt;U&lt;/b&gt;s &lt;b&gt;P&lt;/b&gt;eace (Hang Up) Act&lt;/a&gt;, which would make the FAA ban on mobile voice communications during flights permanent. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=209901685&quot;&gt;InformationWeek&lt;/a&gt;:
&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;The ban would have certain exemptions for members of the flight crew as well as law enforcement officers. Additionally, passengers would still be able to access in-flight Wi-Fi, as well as send text messages and e-mails as those services become available.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Hang Up Act now awaits a vote from the full House of Representatives.  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt; Will the U.S. House of Representatives pass the Hang Up Act this year?  &lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Let the community decide.  &lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://www.theindustrystandard.com/predictions/suggestions/congress-passes-hang-act#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.theindustrystandard.com/taxonomy/term/3588">Congressional Law</category>
 <category domain="http://www.theindustrystandard.com/taxonomy/term/9142">Hang Up Act</category>
 <category domain="http://www.theindustrystandard.com/taxonomy/term/786">mobile</category>
 <category domain="http://www.theindustrystandard.com/taxonomy/term/5668">Standards &amp;amp; Legal</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:12:27 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>David Kuan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">111181 at http://www.theindustrystandard.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
