Nothing very new here. Several years ago, before I got fired, I was
speaking at a conference where one of the attendees was a lawyer (of
course) from New Zealand. I discovered that she had been working on
spectrum sales policy out there in NZ, where the government had this
bright new idea for raising a heap of money.
I took issue with her at great length, to zero effect. The lawyer
mindset is that there is a specific, quantifiable resource out there
that any government can lay claim to and sell to the highest bidder,
regardless of the countries next door. The fact that the frequency
spectrum and/or ionosphere is a global resource which does not fall
nicely into geographically located chunks goes way over the heads of
these greedy goons. No pun intended.
If there is any potential for an expensive dispute, lawyers and
politicians are at the head of the line for a cut of the action.
The good old days of large scale pirate radio operation may well
return to haunt them - if they ever went away.
John G3JAG
On 09-Mar-99 Karl F. Larsen wrote:
>
> Hello Richard,
> Guilty, guilty and guilty. American business can be
overbearing
> when there are Billions of Dollars to be made. And the American
> government
> is still taking bribes in the current legal way so that their old
> age is
> assured.
>
> The technique was quite remarkable. First in the name of
saving
> money they cut the Federal Communications Commision (FCC) budget to
> the
> bone. All the trained technical people had to trnafer, retire or
> find
> other work. In a year FCC went from about 1000 people to 50. Then a
> new
> commisioner hand picked by business was installed and came up with
> the
> great idea of selling frequency and applying the money towards the
> debt.
> Sounds great.
>
> Of course no-one even asked if Canada and Mexico care. Turns
out
> they did. We got a lot of flak from both and the sales are on hold
> while
> business figures out how to solve this problem...:-(
>
> So in a real sense we are getting what we should. American
Hams
> have a love affair with the military. And the military protected
> our
> frequencies and even let us use theirs. But now the military is
> fighting
> for their own frequencies and loosing...
>
>
> On Tue, 9 Mar 1999, Bown, Richard wrote:
>
> } Why should you be any different that side of the pond ?
> } In the UK we have already lost huge chunks of 13 cms, 3 cms, due
> to lose
> } part of 70 cms, and some of what's left has been rendered
> unusable by shared
> } services which use spread spectrum.
> } Who's bright idea was it to start selling user bandwidth ??
> } You should appreciate how much band space you have in the US,
> Region 1 has
> } already been hit hard and there's more to come.
> } It is however ironic that the perpetrator is now becoming the
> victim
> }
> } -----Original Message-----
> } From: Mark Schoonover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> } Sent: 08 March 1999 19:55
> } To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; 'Karl F. Larsen'
> } Subject: RE: A dose of reality
> }
> }
> } Karl and the Group:
> }
> } I do see some possibilities in what Karl is saying. Loosing
> 70cm??
> } Possible given enough time, loosing 2m? Kinda doubt it. What
> industry
> } would want 2m?? Consider the millions of radios out there on 2
> and it
> } would be like Gates and company going after 11m. I see hams
> loosing the
> } vast majority of the unused microwave stuff first, before any
> attempt is
> } made to go after highly populated bands. I think this is where
> hams need
> } to build independant, high speed networks using 10 GHz, standard
> } ethernet cards, etc for local stuff. Probably 95% of traffic that
> is
> } generated is for local use only. Just think about forgetting
> ISPs, phone
> } companys, ARINC et el. The higher speed could support voice,
> video, etc
> } just fine. Use HF for the things that don't need lots of
> bandwidth,
> } email is about the only example I can think of right now. Why
> settle for
> } using a proprietary protocol?? What's wrong with developing open
> source
> } protocols?? Aside from fighting the FCC on this, example, trying
> out
> } PSK31 - is that legal in the US?? All development done on DSP
> with
> } frequency agile radios, etc to adapt to changing HF propagation??
> I'm
> } not talking HF spread, just the ability to change bands when
> condx at a
> } remote site degrade. Almost all newer rigs can be controlled via
> a
> } serial port. Amateurs world wide are going to have to adapt to
> the
> } changing landscape, just like in the past. How about open source
> } hardware?? Nothing is really different here, other than the
> passing of
> } time.
> }
> } Just my $.02! es 73!
> }
> } ..mark
> }
> } =================================================
> } Mark Schoonover KA6WKE IS Manager
> } Trail Runner,HAM [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> } ka6wke@wb6dgr.#sca.ca.usa.noam
> } http://www.qsl.net/ka6wke ka6wke-1 145.05
> } Mobile: 146.52 & 28.470
> } Long: 32.85380 Lat: -117.00980 Grid: DM12LU
> } =================================================
> }
> }
> }
> }
> } >----------
> } >From: Karl F. Larsen[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> } >Sent: Monday, March 08, 1999 5:47 AM
> } >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> } >Subject: A dose of reality
> } >
> } >
> } > The End of VHF/UHF
> } >
> } > Karl Larsen K5DI
> } >
> } > March 7, 1999
> } >
> } >
> } > Last summer the President of ARRL spoke at the Alamogordo NM
> } >Ham-fest and said the ARRL legal team is busy daily around the
> year
> } >fighting companies that want to co-use or take away our VHF and
> UHF
> } >Ham bands.
> } >
> } > I talked to my Senator Pete Domenici and he said Motorola
> } >and Microsoft are spending big money in congress this year and
> } >pushing "reform of the FCC rules". It is a matter of the
> greatest
> } >good for the largest number of people that drives Congress.
> } >
> } > To get a feel for the kind of money I am talking about,
> } >Microsoft is spending 12 Billion Dollars on their near earth
> system
> } >and Motorola has spent 9 Billion and is spending at the rate of
> 2
> } >Billion per year.
> } >
> } > It is common to spend 5-10% of a projects money on obtaining
> } >the proper Government lean towards the companies work. So
> assuming
> } >they use only 5% you still have at least one Billion dollars for
> } >getting Government on your side. That is 1000 Million Dollar
> bribes
> } >or like that.
> } >
> } > Now we Hams have history and a few good lawyers on our side.
> } >We will not be a push-over to beat but the fact is we will lose.
> I
> } >expect the method will be to "share" frequencies. And after just
> a
> } >few years we will lose it all.
> } >
> } > My guess is the first to go will be the 420-450 MHz band. We
> } >share it with the Defense Dept. and while Defense was strong we
> were
> } >safe. But now Defense is weaker and I believe industry will get
> } >420-430 MHz in the year 2000.
> } >
> } > Then 144-148 MHz will be hit with industry getting 146-148
> } >MHz and this will happen around 2003. As time passes industry
> will
> } >get more and more until there is no more.
> } >
> } > For good technical reasons industry doesn't want the HF
> } >bands. They are noisy and un-reliable and not useful for wide
> band
> } >data. So my Ham activities are going towards HF, and by accident
> the
> } >bands are getting better.
> } >
> } > The cute idea of using HF packet called PACTOR to send and
> } >receive Internet e-mail to mobile hams looks good and I plan to
> try
> } >it. Alas at this time the only PACTOR driver I can find is high
> } >priced from Kantronics and WinLink which is free and both run in
> } >Windows 98. I d/l Winlink and it's very nice software. Done in
> Visual
> } >C and the loader looks like any of the new Microsoft software
> and it
> } >does run.
> } >
> } > Looking at PACTOR II which seems to be the very best HF
> } >system but can't yet get a price from PacComm for the modem. And
> when
> } >I get the price that may make straight PACTOR more
> attractive...:-) I
> } >can get a MFJ 1276 "Packet/Pactor controller" for $139.95 from
> AES
> } >and that is quite cheap. This is what most people are using I
> think.
> } >
> } > I hope someone good at programing gets interested and writes
> } >a driver for Pactor in Linux. I get my Internet e-mail on Linux
> and
> } >use procmail to sort it. So no problem putting mail to me in a
> } >special place.
> } >
> } >Best wishes
> } >
> } > - Karl F. Larsen, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (505) 524-3303 -
> } >
> } >
> }
>
> Best wishes
>
> - Karl F. Larsen, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (505) 524-3303 -
----------------------------------
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 09-Mar-99
Time: 20:18:25
John Crux
Consultant in product forgery - Asia and
Africa
----------------------------------
