home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!ames!agate!agate!usenet
- From: pschleck@cwis.unomaha.edu (Paul W Schleck KD3FU)
- Newsgroups: comp.archives
- Subject: [comp.dcom.telecom] FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP
- Followup-To: comp.dcom.telecom
- Date: 3 Sep 1992 21:19:48 GMT
- Organization: TELECOM Digest
- Lines: 63
- Approved: adam@soda.berkeley.edu
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <185vhkINNpas@agate.berkeley.edu>
- References: <telecom12.679.4@eecs.nwu.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
- X-Original-Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
- X-Original-Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 12:20:33 CDT
-
- Archive-name: auto/comp.dcom.telecom/FCC-Docket-92-136-Available-via-Anonymous-FTP
-
- Just a short note to let everyone know that a copy of FCC PR Docket
- 92-136 (Ammendment of Part 97 of the Commission's Rules to Relax
- Restrictions on the Scope of Permissible Communications in the Amateur
- Service) is available via anonymous FTP from ftp.cs.buffalo.edu in
- file /pub/ham-radio/pr_docket_92-136.
-
- As any reader of rec.radio.amateur.policy knows, the subject of
- permissible communications in Amateur Radio is a matter of some
- dispute. Historically, amateurs had great latitude on content, the
- FCC only being concerned with the pecuniary interest of the operator
- himself, rather than that of incidental 3rd parties who may benefit
- from that communication. In 1972, however, in response to an inquiry
- (isn't it always some poor sucker asking a leading question of the
- Commission that causes them to do really undesirable things?) the FCC
- decided to take a much more restrictive view of business
- communications, making illegal any communications that could POSSIBLY
- benefit third parties. The docket attempts to restore the rules to
- their pre-1972 state.
-
- This has put a serious crimp on many types of public-service
- communications (the Idiatrod dog race in Alaska is a prime example) as
- well as up-and-coming amateur packet networks (remember the Desert
- Storm message of 1990?).
-
- Some of the interesting questions raised by the docket (and subsequent
- discussion on rec.radio.amateur.policy) include:
-
- 1. Are amateur operators responsible enough to insure that the service
- isn't exploited by commercial interests?
-
- 2. Would simplified rules concerned only with operator compensation be
- a help or a hindrance? Would this open the door to commercial
- exploitation?
-
- 3. Is the Amateur Radio Service an experimental service, a
- communications service, or both? Where do we draw the line between
- the two?
-
- 4. Is the transmission of "incidental music" (such as when making a
- telephone call via radio patch and you get hold music, or some
- occasional background music during FCC-authorized retransmissions of
- "NASA Select" shuttle audio/video) something that should be permitted,
- with restrictions, or prohibited?
-
- 5. What consitutes "regular use" of amateur radio for communications
- and when should such communications be relegated to alternative
- services such as cellular phone?
-
- 6. Should transmissions by a compensated control operator, when such
- transmissions are for the purpose of classroom instruction at an
- education institution, be permitted? (Currently the only exception is
- for the transmission of bulletins and Morse Code practice, with
- certain scheduling and frequency-use requirements).
-
- Interested parties should submit comments to the FCC by October 1, 1992
- and reply comments by December 1, 1992.
-
-
- Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU pschleck@unomaha.edu
-
-
-