In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Magnus Danielson wr
ites:
>> The 1EUR per receiver fee is not decided and if it was, it would be
>> pointless, because there is no way to enforce and it would never
>> amount to enough money to matter anyway.
>
>I agree it would be rather pointless, but at least for some manufactures it
>would/could be a limiting factor and unnecessary hazzle.
Sure, but what would it pay for Galileo ? 10MEUR ? Not anything that
really matters.
>The best thing would be for them to forget about the whole license thing and
>remove that from their specs.
Yes, indeed. And if they want the sats up there, they'll have to.
>> Actually, I think the "value add" of the subscription service is
>> another signal one second later saying "the data for last second
>> was received correct at our monitoring station, so you can rely
>> on it".
>
>Now, there is a value added service indeed. But that is beyond that of the
>open service.
Sure, sounds nice on paper, but who will pay for it ?
I think 40% of the operational expense are supposed to be paid by
this fee, and with an budgeted operational cost of $202.5 MEUR (from
ERNP draft) and given that I havn't been able to nail down one
single potential and willing subscriber yet, that sounds like the
old joke about mathematical proofs:
1. (terribly complicated formula).
2. Then a miracle happens
3. QED.
Poul-Henning
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
