NYU Files Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Clarify 97.113(a)4 of the Commission's Rules

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by W6EM, Oct 25, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. DL6MAA

    DL6MAA Ham Member QRZ Page

    There simply seems to be a lack of interest. There was never much interest in PACTOR in these countries in the amateur domain.
    I do not really know why, but of course there was no advertising / lectures etc. outside of the German-speaking countries in Europe.
    The guys here now may accuse SCS of poor marketing... ;)

    73 de Peter
  2. KX4O

    KX4O Ham Member QRZ Page

    After examining modes other than Pactor at https://winlink.org/RMSChannels, I'm thinking it's not SCS, but something else that keeps Winlink "servers" off the air in France and Spain... perhaps what Ron says about 3rd party traffic restrictions and such.

    In contrast, a quick glance at the BPQ32 node map...

    ...reveals plenty of traditional "packet" node activity.
  3. DL6MAA

    DL6MAA Ham Member QRZ Page

    I am not aware of any such restrictions. To create interest at all, you need a little user group first.
    If this does not exist, simply no active community develops...

    The license terms in the EU are very similar in all countries, see "CEPT"...

    Please publish the legal requirements here, if there really exist any restrictions...
    I would like to avoid new rumors.

  4. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Since it's an island nation, I looked at UK regs, to see why there seems to be a lack of Pactor activity along their coast. Their bureaucratic agency seems much more lax than ours in the USA, and encryption is allowed in certain cases, so "lack of transparency" doesn't seems to be much of a concern. They can use Pactor and SailMail and Winlink, but they don't seem to use it much. Therefore, I think Peter's right, there's probably not much interest in Pactor. Parts of Germany and Switzerland use Pactor quite a bit. Marketing? Lack of perceived need or utility? I can't tell.

    Ofcom Deregulates Amateur Radio Licensing
    14 February 2006


    Ofcom Making communications work for everyone

    Amateur Radio Licence
    GUIDANCE for Licensees
    Publication Date: 15 October 2018

    2.98 It is for individual operators or licensees to determine how often a call sign or other identification is transmitted, to comply with the requirement in Clause 13(1)(a) that the station be clearly identifiable at all times. This includes digital transmissions, where, again, licensees must determine how to comply with the overall requirement. One solution might be to embed the call sign into the signal. It is unclear how a station would be clearly identified if it did not, as an absolute minimum, identify itself at the beginning and end of transmissions.

    2.99 We recognise that there is increasing use of digital equipment, modes and software that can embed call signs. Licensees must therefore exercise due care when borrowing equipment or installing software, to ensure that any previous or default embedded call sign is updated accordingly to ensure that the licence condition requiring clear identification is fully satisfied.

    2.102 If a station were to remain unidentified, particularly if it were causing interference or if we believed that it was deliberate, then we might take action to ensure that the station was clearly identifiable. If an operator deliberately uses a false identity, it places the UK in breach of its obligations under the RRs. It is a serious breach of licence conditions and we are more likely to take action to remedy that.

    2.87 Amateur Radio is designed as a hobby for the enjoyment of all participants, which is why licensees may not generally encrypt messages. The RRs allow[38] messages to be transmitted to another country on behalf of third parties in emergencies or for disaster relief but they specifically prohibit[39] the encryption of transmissions between the Amateur Radio stations of different countries. Licensees transmitting messages on behalf of user services should therefore ensure that, if a message is to be transmitted to another country, it is not encrypted.

    2.88 On occasion, a local user service incident commander may want information to be encrypted. Clause 11(2) of the Amateur Radio Licence permits an Amateur Radio licensee to encrypt such messages, when sent on behalf of a user service. As provided for by Clause:

    11(2)(b), encryption includes the intention of rendering the message unintelligible to other Radio Amateurs.

    2.89 We expect encryption to be needed only very rarely. The presumption is that messages will not be encrypted, unless there is a specific need for operational purposes, for example the transmission of a casualty’s personal data or the location of an incident. Encryption must only be used at the request of a local incident commander. It is not a decision for the individual licensee alone.

    2.90 UK Amateur Radio Licensees must exercise care when transmitting encrypted messages that can be received in another country. If the message is consciously being sent across a border, the Licensee must be satisfied that commanders on both sides of a border agree that the message must be encrypted before it is sent, unless a delay could imperil life. The Licensee must also ensure that the station is clearly identifiable, should foreign (or UK)
    stations wish to trace the signal.

    2.91 As soon as practicable, the UK Amateur Radio licensee should record in the station log the times, dates and frequencies used, in broad terms why the message had to be encrypted and who requested it. The log should also record the encryption method and key used.


    The Yachting community has several pages that advertise SailMail and WinLink as follows:

    Winlink 2000 - SSB email service via amateur radio
    To use the Winlink 2000 SSB email system, you must hold an Amateur Radio licence or be a member of a supported organization or agency. Use of the system and all software is free of charge for those who qualify. Winlink 2000 is very similar to SailMail and uses the same Airmail software. Basically Winlink is SailMail but over amateur radio frequencies where SailMail uses marine frequencies. For further details on free SSB email visit the Winlink 2000 web site.

  5. SM0AOM

    SM0AOM Ham Member QRZ Page

    The "Euro-Whackers" are few and far between, as EMCOMM as the general justification for amateur radio has been essentially unsellable here.

    This is one of the reasons.

    I do not know about any current EU legal restrictions against Pactor and/or Winlink-based systems.

    The only that may be applicable could be a few countries may
    require access control in some cases of linked repeater systems.

    In the deregulated EU telecom landscape, the little regulation that may be left is very cogniscient of the fact that micromanagement has become quite futile and that it is not 1932 or 1947 any more, hence no explicit prohibitions against Internet-based or other third-party traffic.

    Amateur radio is mostly seen as a minor nuisance which will go away sooner or later by attrition.

    It remains to be seen if the never-ending bun-fights right before the eyes of the FCC staff, which are presumably human and consequently quite fed-up with amateur radio, will accelerate this process also in the US.

    KA9Q, KX4O and (deleted member) like this.
  6. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    ARRL and "Emcomm" non-profits keep it alive here, with increasingly less credibility.

    One can only hope we're approaching an OFCOM style deregulatory process. Enforcement is hapless and inconsistent, and bun fights are a pandemic here, mostly do to the efforts of ARRL tinkering with the rules to benefit their organization, which boasts membership of about 20% of hams, many of whom seem to yearn for the formality of the 1930's and recognition as an arm of the US government.


  7. SM0AOM

    SM0AOM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Ofcom, like most other regulators, wants to off-load all adminstration of amateur radio by outsourcing it to the lowest bidder.

    More often than not, the taker is the national society.
    Today, everything except the actual issuing of call-signs, is done in the UK by the RSGB.
    Ofcom wants to outsource also this part.

    If the FCC should follow in the foot-steps of Ofc0m, the net result may become that the "control-freaks" at the ARRL will be going to handle all aspects of amateur radio; form policies, administer examinations, do enforcement, issue licences and call-signs, against a suitable fee of course...

    I am not entirely convinced that everybody would like this outcome.

    "Be careful of what you wish for, because you might get it..."

    WZ7U likes this.
  8. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I'm sure they'd like nothing better.

    That's why we need to guard against the Balkanization of ham radio into petty fiefdoms controlled by 'non-profit' agencies.

    It becomes more important every day.
    K0IDT likes this.
  9. SM0AOM

    SM0AOM Ham Member QRZ Page

    The Balkanisation of amateur radio is already a reality, and it will cause its eventual demise in the industrialised world.

    The ARRL flavour of amateur radio puts quantity before quality, and it is quite far from the letter and spirit of the definition in the ITU Radio Regulations that ultimately provides the foundation for the privileges.

    WA9SVD, W6EM, K0IDT and 1 other person like this.
  10. K0IDT

    K0IDT Ham Member QRZ Page

    Radio Relay International is trying to drum up comments from official emergency agencies with a scare letter. More misinformation and distortions to generate comments on a petition, that most have not read, to support an activity that is rapidly becoming obsolete.

    True, and unfortunately it may be too late to change the organization, still too many in power that are stuck in "quantity", or "emcomm" mode, or both.
    WA9SVD and (deleted member) like this.

Share This Page