| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 12.10.00 02:11l 194 Lines 6768 Bytes #-8619 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_277D
Read: DB0FHN GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/277D
Path: DB0ABH<DB0RGB<DB0LAN<DB0RBS<DB0SWR<DB0FP<DB0SRS<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<
DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<PI8HGL
Sent: 001011/1411Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:23954 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_277D
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 00 14:37:10 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_277D>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
had changed the mail system, but forgot the alias file. Should be
fixed soon.
Dick - W6CCD
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:01:40 GMT, Dick Hughes
<dhughes33@earthlink.net> wrote:
>The primary reflector coming from the official PSK31 website.
>psk31@bipt106.bi.ehu.es . Sorry, thought it would be assumed.
>
>Dick - W6CCD
>
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 12:02:03 GMT, "Gilbert Baron" <gbaron@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>>This post does not help much. EXACTLY what reflector. There are MANY PSK31
>>reflectors.
>>
>>
>>Egroups.com has the most and the best.
>>
>>"Dick Hughes" <dhughes33@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:cj12us402au34brkhcp3n0roh58bua1gtf@4ax.com...
>>> Anyone else having a problem with the PSK-31 reflector. Everything I
>>> send bounces, and nothing is coming this direction.
>>>
>>> Dick Hughes - W6CCD
>>> Change 33 to 55 in address
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 08:30:54 -0400
From: Dave Hall <nojunkmail_n3cvj@worldlynx.net>
Subject: wireless PDA hacking
O.C. wrote:
>
> > Dave Hall <nojunkmail_n3cvj@worldlynx.net> wrote:
> >If you are providing a service to others which is also available
> >through commercial providers, you are illegal.
> >if you encrypt your data, you are illegal.
>
> So if a ham radio packet-internet gateway provides e-mail
> service to the radio-side users, it's illegal because they
> could get that service from a commercial provider? I don't
> think so. In 1997-98 i was doing just this, and was in
> communication with dozens of other hams doing it as well.
> Where are you getting the fuel for this allegation?
It is legal to provide a service to other hams, provided that you do not
charge for the service, and that the messages contained comply with the
FCC's rules. You (as sysop) are responsible to ensure conformity to FCC
regulations. Private, personal E-mail is fine. But don't start sending
advertizing, or soliciting for business transactions.
> > As long as you aren't conducting business over the Amateur
> > frequencies, and are using the channel for personal communications
> > - it is legal.
>
> Exactly.
>
This is true, and as a system operator, it is up to YOU to make sure it
stays that way. Do you want to be responsible for filtering out all of
the internet flotsam that may flow through your station? E-mail is one
thing, but you open up a can of worms (and possible trouble with the
FCC)if you start granting full internet access.
Dave
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 08:21:31 -0400
From: Dave Hall <nojunkmail_n3cvj@worldlynx.net>
Subject: wireless PDA hacking
horseshoestew@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> In article <39DC7A03.2B98@worldlynx.net>,
> Dave Hall <nojunkmail_n3cvj@worldlynx.net> wrote:
> > horseshoestew@my-deja.com wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <I8PC5.14844$s76.1025200@bgtnsc06-
> news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> > > "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <horseshoestew@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:8rfr38$adu$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > >
> > > > <misc deletia here and there>
> > > >
> > > > > 900MHz device! Seems to run at 19200bps. I just found out that
> > > this
> > > > > kind of thing apparently is very popular in Japan. I had this
> kind
> > > of
> > > > > idea about two months ago, and have started a company(PubCel),
> and
> > > have
> > > > > been working on apps.
> > > >
> > > > So you have a pecuniary interest in this stuff.
> > > >
> > > > > I'm working on 9600bps applications on MURS VHF frequencies.
> The
> > > > > communications range should be MUCH higher on VHF. With 900Mhz
> UHF,
> > > > > you are very limited. Also, you can't do anything with the
> antenna
> > > to
> > > > > increase range. With MURS, we should be able to.
> > > >
> > > > We would never have guessed!
> > > >
> > > > > And a nice Bronx cheer to all you old PBBS nincompoops who
> didn't
> > > see
> > > > > this coming. Try loosening up the old sphincters a little bit,
> and
> > > > > quit threating to "report" anyone doing Internet-backbone
> > > applications
> > > > > on ham freqs.
> > > >
> > > > You operate illegally, and you WILL be turned in.
> > > > It's that simple.
> > >
> > > I'm doing it right now - call the FCC. If you keep bothering them
> with
> > > non-issues, they'll probably pull YOUR ticket for being such a pest.
> > > As long as you aren't conducting business over the Amateur
> frequencies,
> > > and are using the channel for personal communications - it is legal.
> > > Quit spreading false rumors - you aren't "God" anymore.
> >
> > If you are allowing messages and content that do not meet the criteria
> > (As set by the FCC) for legal traffic, you are illegal.
> > If you are providing a service to others which is also available
> through
> > commercial providers, you are illegal.
> > If you encrypt your data, you are illegal.
> >
> > You really need to READ part 97, and read it for content. The rules
> are
> > in place for a reason. That reason is to keep guys like you from using
> > the ham bands for commercial ventures.
>
> More doublespeak. The rules are in place to disallow an individual to
> conduct business on the ham bands. There are plenty of "commercial"
> ventures on the ham bands - what do you think APRS is? What do you
> think all those commercial radios are? You're talking out your ass.
I am really beginning to think that you cannot tell the difference
between commercial and Amateur. APRS is not a commercial venture. It is
a system that was put together by hams, for hams, and no one makes a
profit from it.
Commercial radios? What of it? How they are USED is what counts. Sure,
you can design a product and sell it to hams for use on the ham bands,
provided that using said product is not in violation of FCC rules. But
you cannot design a product that (for example) allows hams to
rebroadcast commercial radio and TV traffic over the ham frequencies, so
that they can hear it down at the lake, where reception is poor.
>
> > I have nothing against the technology that you are proposing, provided
> > it be used on a frequency band that is approved for that type of
> > traffic.
>
> It IS OK for ham bands - because there ARE no other commercial services
> that offer the same kind of functionality(there are no existing
> services that provide equivalent range for mobile platforms). Besides,
> if your reasoning held true - we would have to outlaw all ham phone
> patches! Quit talking out your ass.
>
Phone patches are legal PROVIDING that the traffic is not in contrary to
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_277E
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
