---------- From: Rick S. Newton Subject: Scanner Situation Update A fellow named Robert Khoury posted this information on CompuServe, from a message by Rich Barnett:
To go along with the earlier discussion of scanners I pulled this off of the net today. Bob ------------------------------------------------ This is one of the most important, and gratifying, e-mails I have ever written: In Washington today, I attended the House Telecommunications Subcommittee Mark-up on H.R. 2369. Mr. Tauzin of Louisiana introduced an amended bill which replaces the original language almost in total. The amended bill was reported to the House Commerce Committee without further amendments and without objection. The amended bill only requires that scanner manufacturers eliminate cellular and PCS frequencies! Of course cellular was really not an issue. Broadband PCS frequencies lie near 2 GHz and have never been a concern. Narrowband PCS at 900 MHz will have to be eliminated from scanners, but the manufacturers believe that is do-able. PCS communications use CDMA, TDMA and GSM digital encoding and are essentially unmonitorable. It will also be unlawful to manufacture equipment which is capable of decoding "protected" digital SMR systems. (More on that in a later post.) Most importantly though, there is no longer a restriction on CMRS (commercial mobile radio service frequencies) as Congress has recognized that there are shared commercial and public safety frequencies. The dreaded "Intercept OR Divulge" language has been narrowed so that, while it remains in the new bill, it does not apply to any exceptions which are included in the 1986 ECPA (these exceptions include public safety and other transmissions which are readily accessible to the general public). It will be unlawful to modify a scanner in a manner which makes the monitoring of the aforementioned channels (cellular, PCS, digital SMR) possible. One new provision: it will be unlawful to manufacture a scanning receiver which can read alphanumeric text from a pager system. (What is unclear is whether what is proscribed is a scanner which is capable or which is internally equipped, as we all know that the issue is the software, not the scanner.....but the intent in the bill is apparent.) I will have much more on this tomorrow. For now, while we must remain vigilant (as there is always the very remote chance an amendment will be offered in the Commerce Committee or on the House or Senate Floor), I believe we can all breathe a sigh of relief. And, I think we all deserve a pat on the back. So many of you wrote your Congressman, contacted Rep. Tauzin.....the message was heard. Also, public safety, particularly the fire service, really stepped up to the plate. But, most importantly, the industry fought for itself and for all of us. What is so gratifying about this is that the manufacturers, distributors, ARRL and others, recognize the importance of this business, this hobby, and the customers. That should make us all feel very good. When you see the full draft of the amended bill in the next couple of days (it will be on the various web sites) you may find some minor provisions slightly troubling. But, when you read these, please remember how the original bill looked. And, remember, that there is a legitimate case that has been made for certain privacy rights. At first brush, I feel this amended bill is eminently reasonable. It will keep the manufacturers in business and will keep scanners available to public safety, hobbyists, and others. One very good thing has come out of all this. Congress now has a very good understanding that there are important, legitimate uses for scanners. The FCC, which will be responsible, according to the bill, for determining the need for much of the policy in HR2369 (that's right, much has been shunted to the FCC from what was going to be law), must have a clear understanding that Congress wants scanners to be available to the public and that certain digital formats can be a part of the scanner future. Finally, as I said before, we still must remain vigilant. The bill will most likely not come up for a vote (and perhaps not even come to Commerce) before next year. However, in the meantime, I think we should all back off from the letter/e-mail phone and fax campaigns. If you want to write Rep. Tauzin, please let him know how much you appreciate his willigness to listen to the concerns of the industry and make the necessary change to his bill (as Congresswoman Eshoo remarked herself during the mark-up). Mr. Tauzin could have disregarded our issues. He had bi-partisan support and everyone is for the basic premise of privacy. Yet, he and his staff heard us out and worked with us (quite extensively) to amend his bill. I am very impressed with his office and with Congress. It's terrific to know that you can make a difference and that Congress is willing to listen and amend legislation when it is appropriate. Thanks to everyone for all your help and support! We've really done ourselves proud and we've demonstrated that we're part of something very worthwhile. I will have more on these developments shortly. Rich Barnett POLICE CALL/Scanner Master (P.S. It's been a long day going back and forth from Washington to Boston. Please forgive any typos, etc. I wanted to get this out as quickly as possible. ---------- --> SPORRS: Serious Photographers of Railroad Related Subjects
