[cr-india] why distinguish CR from regular FM?

[Subramaniam Vincent]

> Why should we not ask for an interim policy that allows the largest 
> number to start, then look for refinements down the road once we have 
> a working base of operational stations? 

I don't disagree with this at all. It's a good thing to be inclusionary,

rather than restrictive, and let experiences tell, like you point out. 
But these are high level principles and nuances that you and I can agree

should guide the devil and its details. What I'm unable to visualize how

this might work in practice though. 

> Do you think if a village had 
> a really good station going anyone should care who owned it? 

I realize that in practice a handful of individuals can telecast over 
a few kms with a 1W-50W transmitter out of a room with a terrace. But
look 
at the problem from the point of view of the license assigner. Who
should 
a license be given to in terms of fixing ownership of process and even
the
few silly formalities that will necessary from to time? 
 
An individual? It looks like we're both visualizing different
situations. 
Explain a little more about how an 'unincorporated' entity will maintain

accounts, file tax statements, WITHOUT mixing up the individuals' own 
finances with it. What if the individual had a disagreement with someone

else (very very common in India) and decided to move with his/her
license 
to some other village/town?

Also, forgetting these things for the moment -- what really concerns
many 
is that I&B is unable (YET) to come to terms quickly with allowing
commercial-FM 
stations air news! That's our starting point! I don't say that means we 
should water ourselves down and not assert for the rainbow with TRAI.
But 
perhaps what we ask must be understood and packaged by TRAI in such a
way 
that the quickest middle path can be found to get an open-policy rolled
out 
and scalp away and other things as we go along. (again like you point
out, 
assuming that I&B will even take TRAI seriously).

-Subbu