[RTTY] - "Freely available software"

[George Johnson]

Gentlemen,
This horse is dead.  Time to pay attention to the elephant in the tent...
73, George .. W1ZT

At 10:45 PM 1/16/2006, George Henry wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <k4ik at subich.com>
>To: "'George Henry'" <ka3hsw at earthlink.net>; <rtty at contesting.com>
>Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 5:08 PM
>Subject: RE: [RTTY] ARRL Bandwidth Proposal - FCC Invites Comments
>
>
> > I am simply saying that in order for the Amateur Service to
> > be effectively self- (or peer-) policing, the Commission has
> > every right (and the duty) to permit the use of only protocols
> > and modulation for which freely available software is available.
> >
>
>WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
>You seem to be forgetting that amateur radio is an INTERNATIONAL hobby...
>The requirement that digital protocols be publicly documented is an ITU
>rule, echoed in the FCC rules.  ONLY the ITU can impose a rule which is
>binding on ALL amateurs.  The Federal Communications Commission has NO
>authority under international law to regulate the actions of amateurs
>outside of the U.S.
>
>FACT:  Virtually every new digital protocol introduced in the last several
>years came from non-US hams.
>FACT:  Virtually all of the software for decoding said protocols was
>developed by non-US hams.
>
>Therefore, what you are proposing is both impossible, and impractical.
>
>
> > If a manufacturer believes a market exists for his product, he
> > will must make the software available in order to sell his
> > product into the amateur market.  If he is not willing to make
> > software available to support use of the product/protocol - it
> > has no place on the amateur bands.
> >
>
>And it is ENTIRELY UP TO THEM to decide whether to supply that market for
>free, or
>for a price, and NOT up to the FCC.  (And, given all the recent free trade
>agreements and
>digital copyright treaties meant to foster technological development, no way
>will the ITU
>go there, either!)
>
>
> > There is no "taking" involved ... simply a requirement that all
> > protocols/modulation methods can be freely monitored by the
> > average amateur.  To do otherwise would risk permanent damage
> > to the Amateur Service and particularly the HF allocations.  It
> > would be tantamount to turning large sections of Yellowstone
> > or Grand Teton National Park into a "private club" where anything
> > goes and the rest of the public are locked out.
> >
>
>Sorry....  THE FCC CANNOT DO WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING.
>
>PERIOD!
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>RTTY mailing list
>RTTY at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty