home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 04:30:23 PST
- From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <ham-policy@ucsd.edu>
- Errors-To: Ham-Policy-Errors@UCSD.Edu
- Reply-To: Ham-Policy@UCSD.Edu
- Precedence: Bulk
- Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #85
- To: Ham-Policy
-
-
- Ham-Policy Digest Fri, 25 Feb 94 Volume 94 : Issue 85
-
- Today's Topics:
- Dan Pickersgill - USENET POSTS
- Industry gets more Amateur Spectrum
- Modern technology (was Re: The *language* requirement!)
- Morse Code testing (was Re: ARRL's Lifetime Amateur licenses)
- Online repeater directory, ARRL opposition
- Super Morse 4.10 is out!
- The *language* requirement!
- Two meter frequency allocations (2 msgs)
-
- Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Policy@UCSD.Edu>
- Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Policy-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
- Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
-
- Archives of past issues of the Ham-Policy Digest are available
- (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy".
-
- We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
- herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
- policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 18:24:12 GMT
- From: spsgate!mogate!newsgate!nuntius@uunet.uu.net
- Subject: Dan Pickersgill - USENET POSTS
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- In article <2kdgai$9oe@sugar.NeoSoft.COM> A great x ray technician!,
- xraytech@sugar.NeoSoft.COM writes:
- >This brings up another point. The Codeless Technician was SUPPOSED to
- >bring in all sorts of technically-advanced people, who were to use
- >radio to supplement their research in packet, satellite communication,
- >spread spectrum, and so on. Ninety-five percent of all Codeless Techs
- >are "ratchet-jawing" (their phrase, not mine) on Two Meter FM.
- >Therefore, I submit that the Codeless Technician is NOT being used for
- >the stated purpose, and instead being used for Citizen's Band.
-
-
- Robert,
- I can see why you have the trouble seeing all the wonderful ways we are
- exploring amateur radio. If the truth be known, most people find you
- terribly offensive, and don't invite you to play......So those of us who
- take time to post thought out arguments (you're entitle to not agree, but
- we had hoped you might be challenged to write a real rebuttal that could
- be construed to be thought out) are spat upon as being lazy? Oh quite
- contrare, we have spend much time trying to enlighten you on our point of
- view. I have seen many well thought out pro and con statements on the
- net, but not with your tag line attached. In fact some of the pro coders
- have made an impact on my point of view in their favor........but that
- hasn't reduced my contempt for you.
- Since taking my test I have built a couple power amps, taken over a
- newsletter in a local club, am involved in building a EME system and
- working towards emergency services.......and gee I'm just another lazy
- code free tech.
- Please define "ratchet-jawing", as that is the majority of the comms I
- hear on HF. Before the flames eat me I know there are many nets that
- discuss emergency or technical information, but come on do you really
- think that 2 mtrs has a lock on "ratchet-jawing"? Get real
-
-
- Rick Aldom
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 19:26:30 GMT
- From: catfish!cscsun!dtiller@uunet.uu.net
- Subject: Industry gets more Amateur Spectrum
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- A great x ray technician! (xraytech@sugar.NeoSoft.COM) wrote:
- : In article <millar.77.000832F7@nhqvax.sanders.lockheed.com>,
- : Jeffrey R. Millar <millar@nhqvax.sanders.lockheed.com> wrote:
- : >The Commerce Dept, in conjunction with DoD plans to give 200 MHz of spectrum
- : >space in the 1200 - 4800 MHz area to industry. This includes 2300-2310 and
- : >2402-2417 MHz. One annoying aspect, the 2402-2417 MHz segment goes to
- : >industry in August 1994 without a comment and review period.
- : >
- : >We need to gear up to fight this. Without a 2400 MHz allocation, repeaters
- : >in this band won't work.
-
- I'd like to see a slightly wide alloc at the top of the band, i.e. 2475 or so.
- (Yes I know that's ISM-land). That's so I can use a microwave magnetron
- for ATV...
- --
- David Tiller | Network Administrator | Voice: (804) 752-3710 |
- dtiller@rmc.edu | Randolph-Macon College| Fax: (804) 752-7231 |
- "Drunk, [Beowulf] slew | P.O. Box 5005 | ICBM: 37d 42' 43.75" N |
- no hearth companions." | Ashland, Va 23005 | 77d 31' 32.19" W |
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: 24 Feb 1994 00:32:45 GMT
- From: koriel!newsworthy.West.Sun.COM!sunspot!myers@ames.arpa
- Subject: Modern technology (was Re: The *language* requirement!)
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- In article <2kgpoi$rp5@chnews.intel.com> jbromley@sedona.intel.com (Jim Bromley, W5GYJ) writes:
- >In article <CLMt8E.3xE@world.std.com>,
- >David R Tucker <drt@world.std.com> wrote:
- >
- >>I've been thinking about the morse code requirement in the light of
- >>the discussion we've been having on language in this group, and I have
- >>an idea...
- >
- >>I suggest we get rid of the code requirement - and substitute a
- >>*language* requirement!...
- >
- >>There's no reason morse code couldn't be one of the "languages" (if
- >>you'll pardon the term) which people could master...
- >
- >
- >You'll get my vote in a nanosecond if you also include computer
- >languages on the approved list.
-
-
- Though it has nothing to do with the "code is a language" argument,
- I'd very much like to see the amateur question pools incorporate
- questions on the topics of embedded programming and network progamming.
-
- And, yeah, I think the demonstration of knowledge of current languages
- such as Pascal and C should count towards elements 1B and 1C. Maybe
- 50 questions each, each drawn from a pool of 500 questions. Include
- debugging, real=time, etc.
-
- Nah... wouldn't want anything relevant to modern radio on the tests. I
- had to pass the CW tests we have today, so everyone else should have to.
-
- NOT!
-
- --
- * Dana H. Myers KK6JQ, DoD 466 | Views expressed here are *
- * (310) 348-6043 | mine and do not necessarily *
- * Dana.Myers@West.Sun.Com | reflect those of my employer *
- * This Extra supports the abolition of the 13 and 20 WPM tests *
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 14:58:43 GMT
- From: catfish!cscsun!dtiller@uunet.uu.net
- Subject: Morse Code testing (was Re: ARRL's Lifetime Amateur licenses)
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- Dan Pickersgill (dan@mystis.wariat.org) wrote:
- : ehare@arrl.org (Ed Hare (KA1CV)) writes:
-
- : (Well stated position on code-nocode and hams in general deleted)
-
- : Ed, the only thing I would take exception to (and you mentioned it) is
- : that morse is an encryption method not a language. And it IS memorized
- : the fact that you have limited time to respond is a conditioned response
- : again, not learned. Conditioned. Any one remember Dr. Pavlov?
-
- I don't know beans about Pavlov, but I must agree with Dan in that CW
- is not a language. If it were then I could converse with any other CW
- fluent ham without those cute Q signals, could I not? The fact is we
- are merely converting letters and numbers into a shorthand of sounds
- suitable to the method of transmission. Just as a russian document in
- ASCII is still unreadable to a non-russian speaking person, so would a
- CW transmission be.
-
- PS - I don't like 'encrypt' - that implies attempting to hide the contents
- of the transmission when the actual intent is to facilitate communication.
- --
- David Tiller | Network Administrator | Voice: (804) 752-3710 |
- dtiller@rmc.edu | Randolph-Macon College| Fax: (804) 752-7231 |
- "Drunk, [Beowulf] slew | P.O. Box 5005 | ICBM: 37d 42' 43.75" N |
- no hearth companions." | Ashland, Va 23005 | 77d 31' 32.19" W |
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 1994 15:16:40 GMT
- From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!att-out!walter!dancer.cc.bellcore.com!not-for-mail@ames.arpa
- Subject: Online repeater directory, ARRL opposition
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- This discussion originated in rec.radio.amateur.misc, but I think
- it more appropriately belongs in ....policy so here's my post:
-
- >William=E.=Newkirk%Pubs%GenAv.Mlb@ns14.cca.CR.rockwell.COM wrote:
- >: I have a real big problem with the idea that there are deliberate errors
- >:purposely induced into a reference book. Maybe we should start
- >: a "repeater directory accuracy project" to confirm all the listings in the
- >: ARRL directory to see if content errors exist.
-
- My following post includes a layman's set of interpretations/opinions
- relative to some legal issues...Bottom line, I'm not a lawyer, but
- here's my opinion, treat it accordingly.
-
- First, I'm an ARRL member and a Local Gov't Liason (LGL) in the ARRL field
- organization, but that doesn't mean I agree with all positions of ARRL.
- I missed the initial thread of this discussion,but from the two recent
- posts it appears ARRL has threatened legal action against someone
- providing (or intending to provide) an "online" version of a repeater
- directory. It also appears that ARRL has determined that some of
- the data included in this "online" directory must have been taken
- from the ARRL Repeater Directory because there are certain
- identical pieces of data that were created (e.g. a deliberate
- misspelling of a town name, callsign, etc.) as such in the ARRL
- publlished directory to use as a means of identifying data from
- the ARRL directory which has been used to create other databases.
- The ARRL then claims that using that information is a violation of
- their copyright on their Repeater Directory.
-
- Hopefully I've expressed the above correctly...now I delve into my
- opinion. Several years ago an almost identical situation arose
- having to do with an "independent" telephone white pages provider
- who used the white pages of one of the regional telephone companies
- as the source for the independent's white pages. The independent
- first approached the telephone company and asked to purchase an electronic
- copy for the purpose, but the telephone company refused. The
- independent then just had all the data manually keypunched into its own
- database from an actual "hard copy" of the white pages.
- The telephone company was able to "prove" that the independent white
- page provider used the telco white pages because they had populated
- the telco white pages with certain "bogus" entries for that express
- purpose. Not knowing of which entries were bogus, the bogus entries
- were readily found in the white pages of the independent white
- pages. The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court.
-
- The final resolve of the case was that the white pages was NOT
- protected by copyright because it was nothing more than a factual
- listing of data that was arranged alphabetically. Factual
- information (e.g. my name, address & phone number) can not be
- copyrighted and the court decision said that a simple
- alphabetical sort/listing of that data did NOT represent a
- compilation that would be protectable by copyright. Thus there
- is precident for using data from any source (factual data that is)
- in another database if there is a valid argument that the data
- as presented in the newly created database is either (1) not
- of any particularly creative arrangement (e.g. alphabetical, arranged
- by state, town, etc.) or (2) is arranged in a different arrangement
- (creatively speaking) than the data as presented in the original
- database (e.g. the ARRL Repeater Guide).
-
- So, for this specific situation, it seems to me that all the
- individual data about any given repeater is not copyrightable
- by itself (e.g. input/output freq., location, callsign, attributes,
- etc.) and it is only the total compilation of that data for
- all the repeaters in a directory that
- MAY be copyrightable as a total work where the copyright protects
- a uniquely creative way of presenting the data (simple
- electronic sorts by band, state, and location don't...IMHO...seem
- to be a good example of a creative presentation).
-
- End of legal discussion-------
-
- Frankly, I think an online repeater directory would be a great
- benefit to us all. If it was available, especially where the
- user might be able to set certain "sort" parameters to derive
- a list of repeaters of specific interest to the user. Would
- I still buy the ARRL directory? Absolutely...because I keep that
- directory in the car, not in the shack anyway. My usual process
- is to buy a new directory every other year. Certainly at $6
- it isn't a financial reason that most folks would not opt to
- purchase their own hard copy directory for the glovebox.
-
- Just my opinion.
-
- Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
- Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!cc!whs70
- 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@cc.bellcore.com
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 16:48:49 -0500
- From: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!utcsri!newsflash.concordia.ca!altitude!dino.hip.cam.org!user@ames.arpa
- Subject: Super Morse 4.10 is out!
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- I read a note somewhere that 4.06 was available from some FTP site.
- Well super Morse 4.10 is out and available on Compuserve and possibly
- somewhere on the NET. If you can't find it, let me know and if someone
- tells me how to get permission to PUT it on their FTP server, I can send it
- there.
-
- 73 de dino
-
- --
- """""""""""""""""""""
- | Dino Moriello """"""""""""""""""""""
- | PO BOX 105 Internet: dino@CAM.ORG """""""""""""""""""""
- | Radisson,Quebec Compuserve: 76120,1472 Tel.: 514-974-0773 |
- | CANADA J0Y 2X0 Packet: VE2DM@VE2FKB 819-638-8281 |
- """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
- Please E-mail replies since I can't always read the USENET postings.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: 24 Feb 1994 17:06:23 GMT
- From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.columbia.edu!watsun.cc.columbia.edu!jbaltz@ames.arpa
- Subject: The *language* requirement!
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- In article <2kgpoi$rp5@chnews.intel.com>,
- Jim Bromley, W5GYJ <jbromley@sedona.intel.com> wrote:
-
- >You'll get my vote in a nanosecond if you also include computer
- >languages on the approved list.
-
- You speak much assembler through your mouth? Or maybe you whistle Baudot?
- (Does that count as music?)
-
- The whole point behind the introduction of a language requirement was that
- it be a *spoken* language (since we speak with others) or maybe just a
- language whose orthography can be translated into Morse Code unambiguously...
-
- And I thought that *I* was a geek!
-
- //jbaltz
- jerry b. altzman Entropy just isn't what it used to be +1 212 650 5617
- jbaltz@columbia.edu jbaltz@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (HEPNET) NEVIS::jbaltz
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 20:09:17 GMT
- From: mvb.saic.com!unogate!news.service.uci.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!col.hp.com!srgenprp!alanb@network.ucsd.edu
- Subject: Two meter frequency allocations
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- Gary Davis (gdavis@griffin.uvm.edu) wrote:
- : Our University station is struggling with the student association for
- : funding and as a result we put a 2 meter- cross band- remote base on
- : the air. ... Soon we we pounced on by
- : the local coordinator who said we were in violation of part 97 since
- : what we had was not a remote base, rather a repeater.
-
- : I called ARRL legal counsel and he concluded that we did not have a
- : repeater since we do the following:
-
- : 1. turn it on and off when used
-
- : 2. do-not operate or occupy the frequency 24 hours a day
-
- : However, the local coordinator has said that any radio that uses any
- : form of automatic T/R switching constitutes a repeater!
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 20:02:49 GMT
- From: world!drt@uunet.uu.net
- Subject: Two meter frequency allocations
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- Gary Davis (gdavis@griffin.uvm.edu) wrote:
- : Our University station is struggling with the student association for
- : funding and as a result we put a 2 meter- cross band- remote base on
- : the air. At the time it seemed as if an acceptable input frequency
- : would be in the miscellaneous (uses) allocation. We put our input on
- : 145.775 ( an unused frequency in the area). Soon we we pounced on by
- : the local coordinator who said we were in violation of part 97 since
- : what we had was not a remote base, rather a repeater.
-
- : I called ARRL legal counsel and he concluded that we did not have a
- : repeater since we do the following:
-
- : 1. turn it on and off when used
-
- : 2. do-not operate or occupy the frequency 24 hours a day
-
- : However, the local coordinator has said that any radio that uses any
- : form of automatic T/R switching constitutes a repeater!
- : Therefore, he contends we are in violation of part 97?
- : In any event we change frequencies today, but are there any opinions
- : on exactly what constitutes a repeater.
-
- : In my opinion, when the law was enacted, a repeater was construyed to
- : be a remote system with inputs/outputs in the same band and not a box
- : which is turned on or off before and after use.
-
- : I cannot see how our occupany of the frequency is much different from
- : sporatic "simplex" operation.
-
- : 73-- Gary
-
- You're not taking the position that this is an auxiliary operation,
- instead, are you? They're illegal on 2. I'd rather admit it was a
- repeater, because then you don't have to change bands! But I'm not
- really clear on your exact setup.
-
- -drt
-
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
- |David R. Tucker KG2S drt@world.std.com|
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: (null)
- From: (null)
- 97.3 Definitions
- (a) The definitions of terms used in part 97 are:
- ...
- (7) Auxiliary station. An amateur station transmitting
- communications point-to-point within a system of
- cooperating amateur stations.
- ...
- (34) Repeater. An amateur station that automatically
- retransmits the signals of other stations.
-
- If the station is used in a point-to-point fashion as part of a larger
- system, then you can call it an auxiliary station, even if it
- has automatic T/R switching. Many groups try to get around the
- repeater rules by setting up a "remote base" and defining every
- member of the club to be a "control point".
-
- It's clear that such a "system" is really a repeater in disguise.
- I don't know if that applies to your group.
-
- AL N1AL
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: 24 Feb 1994 20:35:09 GMT
- From: news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.kei.com!ssd.intel.com!chnews!scorpion!jbromley@network.ucsd.edu
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- References <CLMt8E.3xE@world.std.com>, <2kgpoi$rp5@chnews.intel.com>, <2kimqf$9e1@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>d.com
- Subject : Re: The *language* requirement!
-
- In article <2kimqf$9e1@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>,
- Jerry B Altzman <jbaltz@watsun.cc.columbia.edu> wrote:
-
- >>I wrote:
- >>You'll get my vote in a nanosecond if you also include computer
- >>languages on the approved list.
-
- >You speak much assembler through your mouth? Or maybe you whistle Baudot?
- >(Does that count as music?)
-
- You would be surprised what I hear over the cubicle walls.
-
- >The whole point behind the introduction of a language requirement was that
- >it be a *spoken* language (since we speak with others) or maybe just a
- >language whose orthography can be translated into Morse Code unambiguously...
-
- In some universities one may fulfill the foreign language requirement
- by learning a computer programming language. And some graduate
- programs only require a *reading* comprehension of a foreign language
- for admission. Amateur radio might be able to follow their lead.
-
- >And I thought that *I* was a geek!
-
- If you walk like a geek and talk like a geek, you *are* a geek! ;-)
-
- >//jbaltz
- >jerry b. altzman Entropy just isn't what it used to be +1 212 650 5617
- >jbaltz@columbia.edu jbaltz@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (HEPNET) NEVIS::jbaltz
-
- +-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
- | Jim Bromley W5GYJ | |
- | Intel Corp. m/s C11-91 | These are my own opinions. |
- | 5000 W. Chandler Blvd. | They are definitely not Intel's. |
- | Chandler,AZ 85226 | |
- | tel: 602-554-5183 | Internet: jbromley@sedona.intel.com |
- +-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------+
-
- ------------------------------
-
- End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #85
- ******************************
- ******************************
-