Next step is to formally petition the FCC to allow SS if the bandwidth
does not exceed 3000 Hz, or the width of a SSB phone signal.
Mark Miller, N5RFX, has experience in submitting petitions to the FCC,
and had one granted. In case anyone wishes to pursue this further, he
may be able to help. If ROS is really worth saving for US hams, it is
worth fighting for!
73 - Skip KH6TY
Andy obrien wrote:
The FCC has stated , today, that IF the author describes it as spread
spectrum, the USA ham is responsible for determining the accuracy of
this claim. They also affirmed that SS is not legal below 220 Mhz.
The ARRL technical folks said today that , based on the description
available, they believe it is SS and not legal in the USA below 220 Mhz.
So the ARRL seems pretty clear. The FCC leaves some wiggle room for
the ham that feels confident enough to withstand a potential future
challenge from the FCC. Logic would dictate that if the FCC comes
knocking, it world be hard to say it is NOT SS...if the author AND the
FCC decide that it is.
e,g. If I came out with a "new" mode that was just CW, but claimed
it was SS, the average ham would be able to easily prove my claim
wrong IF the FCC ever tried to take action against someone for using
it. However, if a new mode appeared technically close to SS, it
would be hard to prove the FCC wrong. If Jose re-wrote his
description and dropped any reference to spread spectrum and frequency
hopping, those USA hams using it would be safe unless the FCC decided
for some odd reason to investigate the mode formally and make a
ruling. If Jose maintains his description, the mode is not likely to
get any use in the USA.
Andy K3UK
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:15 PM, wd4kpd <wd4...@suddenlink.net
<mailto:wd4...@suddenlink.net>> wrote:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com>, "ocypret" <n5...@...> wrote:
>
> So what's the consensus, is ROS legal in the US or not?
>
it seems to be whatever you want !
david/wd4kpd
