[WISPA] Court Injunction
Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus amateur radio. Any ideas? Jerry Richardson VP Operations 925-260-4119 P Please consider the environment before printing this email <> WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
By the way, we have been up there for 4 years - this HAM only recently increased the power in the last three weeks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications From: Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 12:45 PM To: 'WISPA General List'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; 'Motorola Canopy User Group' Subject: Court Injunction Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus amateur radio. Any ideas? Jerry Richardson VP Operations 925-260-4119 P Please consider the environment before printing this email <> WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Jerry You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you can show "willful" interference from he ham. >From a business point of view anything is possible in court Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz and up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see if they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really accomplishes nothing these days Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Where are u located Jerry? Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Since I have no case, a work around is the way to go IMO. I'm not interested in dragging this out. I do have a plan for a work-around and I am confident it will work. It's just a PITA. Thanks for the input __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 1:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction Where are u located Jerry? Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always get business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz the distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch their own satellites. Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are the ones farting in their phone booth. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > Jerry > > You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have > much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you > can show "willful" interference from he ham. > >>From a business point of view anything is possible in court > > Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz and > up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see if > they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less > than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the > other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really > accomplishes nothing these days > > Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) > > Bob > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -Original Message- > From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 > To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General > List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User > Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
And the ARC? Spew And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one left needs to shut off the lights. Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs this year. And yes, I can say it. KD4RME Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: > > Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the > planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always > get > business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz > the > distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch > their own satellites. > > Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our > progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. > > They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are > the > ones farting in their phone booth. > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Jerry >> >> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you >> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >> >>>From a business point of view anything is possible in court >> >> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz and >> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >> if >> they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less >> than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the >> other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really >> accomplishes nothing these days >> >> Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) >> >> Bob >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >> >> -----Original Message- >> From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 >> To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General >> List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User >> Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
I got my HAM license about 9 years ago (gee its almost time to renew!) and I have never really used it. My original intent was to use it in a walkie-talkie type of way with my Dad... but besides the its cool I can talk to someone over the radio at this range, I never really saw the purpose... Of course I come from the "Internet Generation" :-) Daniel White - KC0GIR 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Blake Bowers Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:54 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction And the ARC? Spew And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one left needs to shut off the lights. Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs this year. And yes, I can say it. KD4RME Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: > > Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the > planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always > get > business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz > the > distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch > their own satellites. > > Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our > progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. > > They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are > the > ones farting in their phone booth. > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Jerry >> >> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you >> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >> >>>From a business point of view anything is possible in court >> >> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz and >> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >> if >> they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less >> than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the >> other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really >> accomplishes nothing these days >> >> Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) >> >> Bob >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >> >> -Original Message- >> From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 >> To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General >> List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User >> Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Arc
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: > > Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the > planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always > get business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 > MHz the distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and > launch their own satellites. > > Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our > progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. > > They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are > the ones "stinking up" their phone booth. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
I personally worked in the 911 system during 9-11 and I can say that most of the "emergency traffic" was self generated and duplicate to info that was already exchanged by other means. While I agree that they may have a place during emergencies I say that they should use 2 meters and 440 for emergency comm only and forfeit everything else above 50 Mhz. There is not a lot of experimental work going on out there on amateur spectrum and for what there is anyone could get an experimental license in other spectrum like Part 90 snd do the same thing. If there was no ARRL this conversation would be moot. Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 14:50:53 To: WISPA General List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always get business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz the distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch their own satellites. Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are the ones farting in their phone booth. - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > Jerry > > You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have > much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you > can show "willful" interference from he ham. > >>From a business point of view anything is possible in court > > Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz and > up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see if > they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less > than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the > other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really > accomplishes nothing these days > > Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) > > Bob > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -Original Message- > From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 > To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General > List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User > Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
"Last one out turn off the light". LOL That was classic! Tnx Blake Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction And the ARC? Spew And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one left needs to shut off the lights. Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs this year. And yes, I can say it. KD4RME Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: > > Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the > planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always > get > business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz > the > distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch > their own satellites. > > Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our > progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. > > They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are > the > ones farting in their phone booth. > > - Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Jerry >> >> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you >> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >> >>>From a business point of view anything is possible in court >> >> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz and >> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >> if >> they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less >> than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the >> other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really >> accomplishes nothing these days >> >> Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) >> >> Bob >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >> >> -Original Message- >> From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 >> To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General >> List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User >> Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
* Jerry Richardson wrote, On 8/4/2008 3:44 PM: > Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a > 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our > ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however > there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus > amateur radio. > > Any ideas? > Jerry...sorry Part 97 licensees override anything on part 15. Part 15 devices must accept interference. Have you tried talking with him? Leon WA4ZLW > > > Jerry Richardson > VP Operations > 925-260-4119 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
KD4RME if you were KA4RME you might have a different perspective. Katrina proves the worth of ham radio. Give me a 20 and 40 meter rig, and I will never ever be out of communication irrespective of where you place me on the planet. NO OTHER communications medium can make that claim. Everyone on this list wants more spectrum. Broadcasters and Hams, move out of the way because we are more important, right? To heck with the fact they were there first and are actually licensed. Who cares that all of the original research in RF was done by hams. Wonder how many WISP operators can pass an extra class (or 1st phone) FCC exam? If the WISPs of the nation conducted themselves in a manner similar to the ethos of most hams we wouldn't have these problems. (former KA7WMG) > -Original Message- > From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > And the ARC? Spew > > And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one > left needs to shut off the lights. > > Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the > great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. > > Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs > this year. > > And yes, I can say it. KD4RME > > > Don't take your organs to heaven, > heaven knows we need them down here! > Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. > > - Original Message - > From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: >> >> Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the >> planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always >> get >> business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz >> the >> distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch >> their own satellites. >> >> Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our >> progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. >> >> They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are >> the >> ones farting in their phone booth. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >>> Jerry >>> >>> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >>> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you >>> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >>> >>>>From a business point of view anything is possible in court >>> >>> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz >>> and >>> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >>> if >>> they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less >>> than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the >>> other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really >>> accomplishes nothing these days >>> >>> Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) >>> >>> Bob >>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 >>> To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General >>> List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User >>> Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> -
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Ok. You can have 20 and 40 meters. Give up the Vhf and Uhf. It goes back to all licenseesuse it or loose it Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:34:03 To: WISPA General List Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction KD4RME if you were KA4RME you might have a different perspective. Katrina proves the worth of ham radio. Give me a 20 and 40 meter rig, and I will never ever be out of communication irrespective of where you place me on the planet. NO OTHER communications medium can make that claim. Everyone on this list wants more spectrum. Broadcasters and Hams, move out of the way because we are more important, right? To heck with the fact they were there first and are actually licensed. Who cares that all of the original research in RF was done by hams. Wonder how many WISP operators can pass an extra class (or 1st phone) FCC exam? If the WISPs of the nation conducted themselves in a manner similar to the ethos of most hams we wouldn't have these problems. (former KA7WMG) > -Original Message- > From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > And the ARC? Spew > > And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one > left needs to shut off the lights. > > Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the > great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. > > Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs > this year. > > And yes, I can say it. KD4RME > > > Don't take your organs to heaven, > heaven knows we need them down here! > Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. > > - Original Message - > From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: >> >> Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the >> planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always >> get >> business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz >> the >> distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch >> their own satellites. >> >> Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our >> progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. >> >> They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are >> the >> ones farting in their phone booth. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >>> Jerry >>> >>> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >>> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you >>> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >>> >>>>From a business point of view anything is possible in court >>> >>> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz >>> and >>> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >>> if >>> they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less >>> than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the >>> other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really >>> accomplishes nothing these days >>> >>> Wow. That last paragraph should get the list warmed up. ;-) >>> >>> Bob >>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:45:17 >>> To: Jerry Richardson<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; WISPA General >>> List; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Motorola Canopy User >>> Group<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? I never said ham radio is useless, I just said its dying. The homebrew activity is just a shadow of what it used to be. Most of the traffic on any of the bands will put you to sleep. And I would take issue with your claim that no other communications medium can make that claim. I reach down below my desk and pull out my Micom, and I have voice, data, fax capabilities WITH ALE capability. On HF. With the tuner I can load up a wet string. Oh, did I mention, it is not a HAM radio, although capable. We use it on commercial and federal frequencies. And I seem to remember that during Katrina wireless internet lived in various configurations, and provided invaluable service. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 4:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > KD4RME if you were KA4RME you might have a different perspective. > > Katrina proves the worth of ham radio. Give me a 20 and 40 meter rig, and > I > will never ever be out of communication irrespective of where you place me > on the planet. NO OTHER communications medium can make that claim. > > Everyone on this list wants more spectrum. Broadcasters and Hams, move > out > of the way because we are more important, right? To heck with the fact > they > were there first and are actually licensed. Who cares that all of the > original research in RF was done by hams. > > Wonder how many WISP operators can pass an extra class (or 1st phone) FCC > exam? > If the WISPs of the nation conducted themselves in a manner similar to the > ethos of most hams we wouldn't have these problems. > > (former KA7WMG) > > >> -Original Message- >> From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> And the ARC? Spew >> >> And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one >> left needs to shut off the lights. >> >> Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the >> great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. >> >> Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs >> this year. >> >> And yes, I can say it. KD4RME >> >> >> Don't take your organs to heaven, >> heaven knows we need them down here! >> Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >>> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: >>> >>> Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the >>> planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always >>> get >>> business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz >>> the >>> distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and >>> launch >>> their own satellites. >>> >>> Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our >>> progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by >>> hams. >>> >>> They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are >>> the >>> ones farting in their phone booth. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>>> Jerry >>>> >>>> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >>>> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless >>>> you >>>> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >>>> >>>>>From a business point of view anything is possible in court >>>> >>>> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz >>>> and >>>> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >>>> if >>>> they can talk accross the state on sp
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) Long time hams have more passion for the subject. But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been dying for a very long time. I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham freqs. There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and merge their work world with their hobby world. Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of the week. - Original Message - From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
i n l i n e . . . Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > KD4RME if you were KA4RME you might have a different perspective. > > Katrina proves the worth of ham radio. Give me a 20 and 40 meter rig, and I > will never ever be out of communication irrespective of where you place me > on the planet. NO OTHER communications medium can make that claim. > > Everyone on this list wants more spectrum. Broadcasters and Hams, move out > of the way because we are more important, right? To heck with the fact they > were there first and are actually licensed. Who cares that all of the > original research in RF was done by hams. > > Wonder how many WISP operators can pass an extra class (or 1st phone) FCC > exam? > I think it works the other way around; experience gained by FCC licensees made the WISP business possible. FCC license experience led to much of the technical innovation which today ENABLES successful WISP operation. I've had my Amateur Extra license for 48 years and my 1st Class Radiotelephone (now called "General Radiotelephone") License for 30 years. WITHOUT the learning and the experiences that having these licenses allowed me to obtain, no way would I have been able to now be in my 16th year in the WISP industry. Any WISP who does not take the time to learn at least a little ham radio and commercial radio history has NO IDEA of the roots or the heritage of their business. It's kind of like a new-car salesman who has no idea about how an internal combustion engine works. > If the WISPs of the nation conducted themselves in a manner similar to the > ethos of most hams we wouldn't have these problems. > Agreed. > (former KA7WMG) > > > >> -Original Message- >> From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> And the ARC? Spew >> >> And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one >> left needs to shut off the lights. >> >> Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the >> great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. >> >> Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs >> this year. >> >> And yes, I can say it. KD4RME >> >> >> Don't take your organs to heaven, >> heaven knows we need them down here! >> Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> >>> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: >>> >>> Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the >>> planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can always >>> get >>> business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 MHz >>> the >>> distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and launch >>> their own satellites. >>> >>> Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our >>> progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by hams. >>> >>> They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we are >>> the >>> ones farting in their phone booth. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>> >>>> Jerry >>>> >>>> You may get an initial injunction but as a Part 15 user you don't have >>>> much in the line of rights as far as federal law is concerned unless you >>>> can show "willful" interference from he ham. >>>> >>>> >From a business point of view anything is possible in court >>>> >>>> Unfortunately amateur radio becomes pretty moot on high freqs (30 Mhz >>>> and >>>> up). Its amazing that a business csn suffer bcause someone wants to see >>>> if >>>> they can talk accross the state on spectrum that is meant to talk less >>>> than 10 miles. Especially when they can get a Skype account or call the >>>> other ham on the phone. General conversation amateur radio really >>>> accomplishes nothing
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth of SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham radio manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to the military, so they must be on to something. Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at levels 30dB below the noise floor. Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't understand is very common, particularly in election years. Rick, W7RAF Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) Long time hams have more passion for the subject. But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been dying for a very long time. I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham freqs. There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and merge their work world with their hobby world. Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of the week. - Original Message - From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
But when 802.11 became "easy" it invited all the people to use it who thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too. Doesn't the more amateur HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power rather than look at the engineering of their systems? Isn't removing a barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less experienced, less responsible users into the band? Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else? - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The > amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) > requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > of > SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > radio > manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more > innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > the > military, so they must be on to something. > > Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as > digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > levels > 30dB below the noise floor. > > Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of > it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > understand is very common, particularly in election years. > > Rick, W7RAF > Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chuck McCown > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. > (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) > Long time hams have more passion for the subject. > > But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been > dying > for a very long time. > I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham > freqs. > There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and > merge > their work world with their hobby world. > > Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. > If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. > > I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of > the > week. > > - Original Message - > From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
That is good to hear. I was the president of my university ham club many years ago. I let my license expire due to ignorance of the due date. I have never bothered to renew it. I never made extra 'cause I couldn't do one minute of perfect copy @ 20 wpm. I had some mistakes. - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The > amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) > requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > of > SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > radio > manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more > innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > the > military, so they must be on to something. > > Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as > digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > levels > 30dB below the noise floor. > > Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of > it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > understand is very common, particularly in election years. > > Rick, W7RAF > Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chuck McCown > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. > (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) > Long time hams have more passion for the subject. > > But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been > dying > for a very long time. > I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham > freqs. > There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and > merge > their work world with their hobby world. > > Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. > If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. > > I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of > the > week. > > - Original Message - > From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Well spoken Jack. If I had not earned my ham ticket almost 40 years ago, and used it as a platform for endless home-brewing, I'd never have started this company. Tom Sharples WA6HAS, ARRL, QCWA Qorvus Systems, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 6:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >i n l i n e . . . > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> KD4RME if you were KA4RME you might have a different perspective. >> >> Katrina proves the worth of ham radio. Give me a 20 and 40 meter rig, >> and I >> will never ever be out of communication irrespective of where you place >> me >> on the planet. NO OTHER communications medium can make that claim. >> >> Everyone on this list wants more spectrum. Broadcasters and Hams, move >> out >> of the way because we are more important, right? To heck with the fact >> they >> were there first and are actually licensed. Who cares that all of the >> original research in RF was done by hams. >> >> Wonder how many WISP operators can pass an extra class (or 1st phone) FCC >> exam? >> > I think it works the other way around; experience gained by FCC > licensees made the WISP business possible. FCC license experience led to > much of the technical innovation which today ENABLES successful WISP > operation. I've had my Amateur Extra license for 48 years and my 1st > Class Radiotelephone (now called "General Radiotelephone") License for > 30 years. WITHOUT the learning and the experiences that having these > licenses allowed me to obtain, no way would I have been able to now be > in my 16th year in the WISP industry. Any WISP who does not take the > time to learn at least a little ham radio and commercial radio history > has NO IDEA of the roots or the heritage of their business. It's kind of > like a new-car salesman who has no idea about how an internal combustion > engine works. >> If the WISPs of the nation conducted themselves in a manner similar to >> the >> ethos of most hams we wouldn't have these problems. >> > > Agreed. >> (former KA7WMG) >> >> >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>> And the ARC? Spew >>> >>> And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one >>> left needs to shut off the lights. >>> >>> Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the >>> great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. >>> >>> Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs >>> this year. >>> >>> And yes, I can say it. KD4RME >>> >>> >>> Don't take your organs to heaven, >>> heaven knows we need them down here! >>> Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>> >>>> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: >>>> >>>> Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the >>>> planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can >>>> always >>>> get >>>> business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 >>>> MHz >>>> the >>>> distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off the moon and >>>> launch >>>> their own satellites. >>>> >>>> Ham emergency communications networks are tested each day. Much of our >>>> progress in microwave propagation and antenna work has been done by >>>> hams. >>>> >>>> They were here first and will be here last. Pardon the image but we >>>> are >>>> the >>>> ones farting in their phone booth. >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" >>>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:16 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>>> >>>> >>&g
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Ditto. My first transmitter (home built, toilet paper tube for coil form) was a hartley VCO connected to an antenna. Was so unstable that it sounded like wandering fsk. - Original Message - From: "Tom Sharples" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > Well spoken Jack. If I had not earned my ham ticket almost 40 years ago, > and > used it as a platform for endless home-brewing, I'd never have started > this > company. > > Tom Sharples > WA6HAS, ARRL, QCWA > Qorvus Systems, Inc. > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 6:48 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >>i n l i n e . . . >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >>> KD4RME if you were KA4RME you might have a different perspective. >>> >>> Katrina proves the worth of ham radio. Give me a 20 and 40 meter rig, >>> and I >>> will never ever be out of communication irrespective of where you place >>> me >>> on the planet. NO OTHER communications medium can make that claim. >>> >>> Everyone on this list wants more spectrum. Broadcasters and Hams, move >>> out >>> of the way because we are more important, right? To heck with the fact >>> they >>> were there first and are actually licensed. Who cares that all of the >>> original research in RF was done by hams. >>> >>> Wonder how many WISP operators can pass an extra class (or 1st phone) >>> FCC >>> exam? >>> >> I think it works the other way around; experience gained by FCC >> licensees made the WISP business possible. FCC license experience led to >> much of the technical innovation which today ENABLES successful WISP >> operation. I've had my Amateur Extra license for 48 years and my 1st >> Class Radiotelephone (now called "General Radiotelephone") License for >> 30 years. WITHOUT the learning and the experiences that having these >> licenses allowed me to obtain, no way would I have been able to now be >> in my 16th year in the WISP industry. Any WISP who does not take the >> time to learn at least a little ham radio and commercial radio history >> has NO IDEA of the roots or the heritage of their business. It's kind of >> like a new-car salesman who has no idea about how an internal combustion >> engine works. >>> If the WISPs of the nation conducted themselves in a manner similar to >>> the >>> ethos of most hams we wouldn't have these problems. >>> >> >> Agreed. >>> (former KA7WMG) >>> >>> >>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> >>>> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:54:01 >>>> To: WISPA General List >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>>> >>>> >>>> And the ARC? Spew >>>> >>>> And amateur radio is dying. Its a fact. The last one >>>> left needs to shut off the lights. >>>> >>>> Just look at the hamfests. (I call them the land of the >>>> great unwashed) Numbers are diminishing all the time. >>>> >>>> Springfield MO just announced they are canceling theirs >>>> this year. >>>> >>>> And yes, I can say it. KD4RME >>>> >>>> >>>> Don't take your organs to heaven, >>>> heaven knows we need them down here! >>>> Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:50 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> OK, to warm things up, I proffer the following: >>>>> >>>>> Ham radio is essential to the emergency communications network of the >>>>> planet. When all else fails, hams and the American Red Cross can >>>>> always >>>>> get >>>>> business done. At 5.7 GHz, the distance record is 3,982 km. At 903 >>>>> MHz >>>>> the >>>>> distance record is 4,064 km. They bounce signals off
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Comments inline - Original Message - From: "Doug Ratcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > But when 802.11 became "easy" it invited all the people to use it who > thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too. I don't get your point here.You're talking about licensed vs unlicensed... Doesn't the more amateur > HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power > rather than look at the engineering of their systems? Isn't removing a > barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less > experienced, less responsible users into the band? What does learning CW have to do with "experienced and knowledgeable"?I studied to get my HAM license all the way back in the early 70's. I dug into the books and burned the mindnight oil and spent my weekends studying the Handbook and learning the bands and rules and all that stuff. But I could no more learn to send or understand CW than I could sprout wings and fly. I can't. I am not the only one. Many have struggled and given up, who were both responsible and very well educated and knowledgeable, because of that physical incapacity. Given that I was in grade school back then, I am surprised at my lifelong continued interest. The question is, what will replace that "wow cool" factor? I can communicate farther and faster and do more than most, over my internet service. There's no real magic left in that regard. The only thing that interests me is now a sense of need of community service. I recently looked over a practice test and it appears to me I could pass it even today without preparation. I understand the historical value of CW, but exactly what purpose does it serve today?It would be like being required to be proficient in telegraphy in order to be licensed to use a fax machine. I, too, have noticed a serious decline in the activity of our local ham club...at least I see nothing public anymore. The swapmeets used to be so big they clogged up several city blocks and huge parking lots. I don't know if they even have any, anymore. I haven't seen one in years. I haven't seen a public announcment, sign, event, booth, display, or PR effort from them in at least 15 years. But the dropping of the code requirement renewed my interest in getting my license and when I have time, I may very well pursue it again. I'm not sure if I got together with my local club, if I'd be learning or educating, but one thing does come to mind, that the purpose for which they exist is NOT out of style, nor is it useless. But could use some updating. I am going to go and offer to coordinate with thier field days and offer them my assistance in creating yet another means of communication in the event of a disaster. > > Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a > massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else? > I used CB radios for years, too. And the vast majority of CB users were nothing like that. I lived where we had no phones, and cell phones were not yet invented. CB's were our mode of communication for chat, for emergency, for whatever. And for the most part, all but one person I knew was "legal". And he did a lot of other "not legal" stuff, too.I think most people would resent being lumped in with him. Even the local Ham buff was an avid CB'er. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Removing a "barrier" is the only hope that HAM radio has. Come on, in the 50's 60's, 70's CW was still cool, and we could introduce youth into talking to far away places on HF. Now, with technology being what it is, the Internet has removed all "kewlness" of HF. Look at the average age of HAMS, it says it all. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Doug Ratcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > But when 802.11 became "easy" it invited all the people to use it who > thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too. Doesn't the more amateur > HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power > rather than look at the engineering of their systems? Isn't removing a > barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less > experienced, less responsible users into the band? > > Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a > massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else? > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
The entry level code requirement and tech plus license was created in 1991. In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed. Thats a decrease. Even the FCC states that after the most recent license changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have seen a big increase in UPGRADES. I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft and Flex-radio. Being privately held, those figures are usually pretty closely held. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The > amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) > requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > of > SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > radio > manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more > innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > the > military, so they must be on to something. > > Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as > digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > levels > 30dB below the noise floor. > > Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of > it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > understand is very common, particularly in election years. > > Rick, W7RAF > Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly. A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's time to get back to work gentlemen... Blake Bowers wrote: > The entry level code requirement and tech plus license > was created in 1991. > > In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed > in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed > in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed. > > Thats a decrease. > > Even the FCC states that after the most recent license > changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they > have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have > seen a big increase in UPGRADES. > > I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft > and Flex-radio. Being privately held, those figures are usually > pretty closely held. > > > Don't take your organs to heaven, > heaven knows we need them down here! > Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. > > - Original Message - > From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > >> You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The >> amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) >> requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and >> innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth >> of >> SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham >> radio >> manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more >> innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and >> Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to >> the >> military, so they must be on to something. >> >> Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as >> digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at >> levels >> 30dB below the noise floor. >> >> Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency >> allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of >> it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio >> today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't >> understand is very common, particularly in election years. >> >> Rick, W7RAF >> Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone >> >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger> Phone 818-227-4220 Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
It comes down to this.. Amateur Radio operators are licensed and Part 15 users are not. If you want to guarantee yourself minimal interference, then you must use the licensed part of the RF spectrum. I do believe that hams and part 15's can coexist with a little communication and the sharing of info. As far as being experienced and responsible, I would say that the Ham is licensed and therefore is the only user of 900MHz that has a requirement to be knowledgeable and responsible for his/her operating activities. Everyone else is unlicensed and therefore the FCC has no way of mandating any educational requirments. This is not to say they are not educated and knowledgable, just no way of mandating that. Good Basic Radio Practices is a start.. Proper Electrical Ground, Proper RF ground, Best possible SWR, High quality Radios, Bandpass Filters... Lance, KB5ZFO - Original Message - From: "Doug Ratcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > But when 802.11 became "easy" it invited all the people to use it who > thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too. Doesn't the more amateur > HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power > rather than look at the engineering of their systems? Isn't removing a > barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less > experienced, less responsible users into the band? > > Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a > massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else? > > - Original Message - > From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 10:26 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The >> amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse >> Code) >> requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and >> innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth >> of >> SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham >> radio >> manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the >> more >> innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and >> Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to >> the >> military, so they must be on to something. >> >> Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as >> digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at >> levels >> 30dB below the noise floor. >> >> Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency >> allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use >> of >> it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio >> today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't >> understand is very common, particularly in election years. >> >> Rick, W7RAF >> Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Chuck McCown >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. >> (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) >> Long time hams have more passion for the subject. >> >> But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been >> dying >> for a very long time. >> I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham >> freqs. >> There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and >> merge >> their work world with their hobby world. >> >> Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. >> If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. >> >> I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of >> the >> week. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >>> Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference?
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Someone had mentioned on another list that ISM is above part 97 in 900 MHz. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Motorola Canopy User Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:44 PM Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
I have had to deal with a similar situation. I talked to the guy and told him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior notice. On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Jack Unger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty > good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly. > A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks > that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that > already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's > time to get back to work gentlemen... > > Blake Bowers wrote: > > The entry level code requirement and tech plus license > > was created in 1991. > > > > In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed > > in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed > > in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed. > > > > Thats a decrease. > > > > Even the FCC states that after the most recent license > > changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they > > have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have > > seen a big increase in UPGRADES. > > > > I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft > > and Flex-radio. Being privately held, those figures are usually > > pretty closely held. > > > > > > Don't take your organs to heaven, > > heaven knows we need them down here! > > Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "'WISPA General List'" > > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > > > > > >> You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: > The > >> amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse > Code) > >> requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > >> innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > >> of > >> SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > >> radio > >> manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the > more > >> innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > >> Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > >> the > >> military, so they must be on to something. > >> > >> Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well > as > >> digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > >> levels > >> 30dB below the noise floor. > >> > >> Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > >> allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use > of > >> it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > >> today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > >> understand is very common, particularly in election years. > >> > >> Rick, W7RAF > >> Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > > > > -- > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. > Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 > Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" > Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting > FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger> > Phone 818-227-4220 Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- Victoria Proffer CEO St. Louis Broadband Visit us @ www.StLBroadband.com 314-974-5600 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Jerry, As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then you have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him (IMHO). If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he put up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. The iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he knew you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an argument both ways as to whether he is liable. I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were operating on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. Regards, Larry Yunker Network Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be construed to be legal advice. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus amateur radio. Any ideas? Jerry Richardson VP Operations 925-260-4119 P Please consider the environment before printing this email WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Victoria, That sounds like an excellent solution. I would hope that all WISPs would follow your example. jack Victoria Proffer wrote: > I have had to deal with a similar situation. I talked to the guy and told > him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free > internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior > notice. > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Jack Unger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty >> good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly. >> A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks >> that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that >> already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's >> time to get back to work gentlemen... >> >> Blake Bowers wrote: >> >>> The entry level code requirement and tech plus license >>> was created in 1991. >>> >>> In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed >>> in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed >>> in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed. >>> >>> Thats a decrease. >>> >>> Even the FCC states that after the most recent license >>> changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they >>> have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have >>> seen a big increase in UPGRADES. >>> >>> I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft >>> and Flex-radio. Being privately held, those figures are usually >>> pretty closely held. >>> >>> >>> Don't take your organs to heaven, >>> heaven knows we need them down here! >>> Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "'WISPA General List'" >>> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: >>>> >> The >> >>>> amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse >>>> >> Code) >> >>>> requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and >>>> innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth >>>> of >>>> SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham >>>> radio >>>> manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the >>>> >> more >> >>>> innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and >>>> Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to >>>> the >>>> military, so they must be on to something. >>>> >>>> Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well >>>> >> as >> >>>> digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at >>>> levels >>>> 30dB below the noise floor. >>>> >>>> Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency >>>> allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use >>>> >> of >> >>>> it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio >>>> today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't >>>> understand is very common, particularly in election years. >>>> >>>> Rick, W7RAF >>>> Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >> >> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> &g
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments. 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have to deal with it again in six months or a year. Life's too short. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Larry Yunker Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction Jerry, As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then you have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him (IMHO). If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he put up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. The iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he knew you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an argument both ways as to whether he is liable. I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were operating on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. Regards, Larry Yunker Network Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be construed to be legal advice. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus amateur radio. Any ideas? Jerry Richardson VP Operations 925-260-4119 P Please consider the environment before printing this email WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Jerry, >From where you are located, I believe you are being hit by a new repeater on Mt Diablo. It seems the HAMs were using another freq and it was interfering with military operations. They kept reducing power til it was down to nothing. They then decided to use 900 mhz, it is only going to get worse as they intend to add more AMP to it. It will most likely take out all 900 in the Central Valley, your area and the Bay Area. I wonder what all the power co's meters that are on 900 also will do. this is not going to be a pleasant thing for HAM's... right or wrong. - Original Message From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:16 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and > re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments. > > 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the > frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have > to deal with it again in six months or a year. > > Life's too short. > > __ > Jerry Richardson > airCloud Communications > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Larry Yunker > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Jerry, > > As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". > > If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then > you > have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him > (IMHO). > If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he > put > up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. > The > iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he > knew > you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an > argument both ways as to whether he is liable. > > I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were > operating > on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. > > Regards, > Larry Yunker > Network Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be > construed to be legal advice. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jerry Richardson > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM > To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group > Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a > 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our > ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however > there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus > amateur radio. > > Any ideas? > > > Jerry Richardson > VP Operations > 925-260-4119 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Jack, Don't get me wrong - I am not advocating any relinquishing of spectrum from HAM use. I will say that if we don't get more into the hobby, there will be more and more pressure for the FCC to reallocate spectrum, as they have in the past. It may seem like a small drop, but when you figure that HAM licenses are 10 year licenses, any drop is significant. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:27 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty > good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly. > A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks > that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that > already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's > time to get back to work gentlemen... > > Blake Bowers wrote: >> The entry level code requirement and tech plus license >> was created in 1991. >> >> In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed >> in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed >> in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed. >> >> Thats a decrease. >> >> Even the FCC states that after the most recent license >> changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they >> have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have >> seen a big increase in UPGRADES. >> >> I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft >> and Flex-radio. Being privately held, those figures are usually >> pretty closely held. >> >> >> Don't take your organs to heaven, >> heaven knows we need them down here! >> Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >> >>> You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: >>> The >>> amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse >>> Code) >>> requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and >>> innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth >>> of >>> SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham >>> radio >>> manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the >>> more >>> innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and >>> Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to >>> the >>> military, so they must be on to something. >>> >>> Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well >>> as >>> digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at >>> levels >>> 30dB below the noise floor. >>> >>> Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency >>> allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use >>> of >>> it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio >>> today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't >>> understand is very common, particularly in election years. >>> >>> Rick, W7RAF >>> Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> > > -- > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. > Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 > Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" > Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting > FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger> > Phone 818-227-4220 Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
They already added the bigger amp. They worked with me by trying to move to 919 however it's too noisy for their purposes so they will be moving back to 910. This will affect 906 and 915. 924 is virtually unusable so things will be interesting. I was just wondering if there was any legal precedence. Since there is not, and I am not interested in trying to set one, I'll work around it. Fortunately we are not completely dependent on 900. We'll upgrade the antennas, re-assign freq's as best we can, raise the minimum signal level, and move weaker users to another band so I'm not completely hosed. It's just a PITA and costly. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Kerns Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:31 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction Jerry, >From where you are located, I believe you are being hit by a new repeater on Mt Diablo. It seems the HAMs were using another freq and it was interfering with military operations. They kept reducing power til it was down to nothing. They then decided to use 900 mhz, it is only going to get worse as they intend to add more AMP to it. It will most likely take out all 900 in the Central Valley, your area and the Bay Area. I wonder what all the power co's meters that are on 900 also will do. this is not going to be a pleasant thing for HAM's... right or wrong. - Original Message From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:16 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and > re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments. > > 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the > frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have > to deal with it again in six months or a year. > > Life's too short. > > __ > Jerry Richardson > airCloud Communications > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Larry Yunker > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Jerry, > > As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". > > If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then > you > have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him > (IMHO). > If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he > put > up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. > The > iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he > knew > you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an > argument both ways as to whether he is liable. > > I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were > operating > on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. > > Regards, > Larry Yunker > Network Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be > construed to be legal advice. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jerry Richardson > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM > To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group > Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a > 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our > ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however > there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus > amateur radio. > > Any ideas? > > > Jerry Richardson > VP Operations > 925-260-4119 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > ---
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
I've seen it suggested several times and maybe I missed your reply but, have you talked to him? Brian Jerry Richardson wrote: > I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and > re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments. > > 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the > frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have > to deal with it again in six months or a year. > > Life's too short. > > __ > Jerry Richardson > airCloud Communications > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Larry Yunker > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Jerry, > > As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". > > If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then > you > have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him > (IMHO). > If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he > put > up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. > The > iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he > knew > you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an > argument both ways as to whether he is liable. > > I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were > operating > on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. > > Regards, > Larry Yunker > Network Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be > construed to be legal advice. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jerry Richardson > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM > To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group > Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a > 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our > ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however > there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus > amateur radio. > > Any ideas? > > > Jerry Richardson > VP Operations > 925-260-4119 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Yes. --- airCloud Communications Jerry Richardson 925-260-4119 Sent Mobile -Original Message- From: Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 10:43 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction I've seen it suggested several times and maybe I missed your reply but, have you talked to him? Brian Jerry Richardson wrote: > I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and > re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments. > > 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the > frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have > to deal with it again in six months or a year. > > Life's too short. > > __ > Jerry Richardson > airCloud Communications > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Larry Yunker > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Jerry, > > As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". > > If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then > you > have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him > (IMHO). > If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he > put > up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. > The > iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he > knew > you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an > argument both ways as to whether he is liable. > > I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were > operating > on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. > > Regards, > Larry Yunker > Network Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be > construed to be legal advice. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jerry Richardson > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM > To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group > Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a > 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our > ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however > there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus > amateur radio. > > Any ideas? > > > Jerry Richardson > VP Operations > 925-260-4119 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
They tried another freq but its not working out. Basically their position is that I am a guest, deal with it. --- airCloud Communications Jerry Richardson 925-260-4119 Sent Mobile -Original Message- From: Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 10:43 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction I've seen it suggested several times and maybe I missed your reply but, have you talked to him? Brian Jerry Richardson wrote: > I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and > re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments. > > 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the > frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have > to deal with it again in six months or a year. > > Life's too short. > > __ > Jerry Richardson > airCloud Communications > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Larry Yunker > Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Jerry, > > As with all good legal questions, the answer is: "It Depends". > > If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then > you > have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him > (IMHO). > If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he > put > up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action. > The > iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional. If he > knew > you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an > argument both ways as to whether he is liable. > > I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were > operating > on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy. > > Regards, > Larry Yunker > Network Consultant > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be > construed to be legal advice. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jerry Richardson > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM > To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group > Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a > 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our > ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however > there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus > amateur radio. > > Any ideas? > > > Jerry Richardson > VP Operations > 925-260-4119 > P Please consider the environment before printing this email > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
That's like saying that giving people drivers licenses who have no experience driving a horse team is producing bad drivers. Some of the worst hams I've encountered were old timers with great "fists" on a key. The CW requirement never filtered out bad operators any more than rigid testing of one's knowledge of electronics theory. What you describe is an issue of character and no one's figured out how to reliably test for that that I know of. In any event, I fail to see how this is a ham issue since the amateur service has a license for this band and wireless operators are forbidden to cause interference to the licensed users of the band and must accept any interference from the operations of licensed users. If a wireless ISP wants to avoid this interference, they're welcome to get a license like the big boys or figure out how to configure their systems, if possible, to avoid the interference. Don't make operating a wireless ISP business on the cheap a ham problem. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction But when 802.11 became "easy" it invited all the people to use it who thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too. Doesn't the more amateur HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power rather than look at the engineering of their systems? Isn't removing a barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less experienced, less responsible users into the band? Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else? - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 10:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The > amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) > requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > of > SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > radio > manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more > innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > the > military, so they must be on to something. > > Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as > digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > levels > 30dB below the noise floor. > > Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of > it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > understand is very common, particularly in election years. > > Rick, W7RAF > Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chuck McCown > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. > (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) > Long time hams have more passion for the subject. > > But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been > dying > for a very long time. > I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham > freqs. > There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and > merge > their work world with their hobby world. > > Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. > If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. > > I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of > the > week. > > - Original Message - > From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ >
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Chuck, I hope you'll consider going after that "Extra" now. It's never too late... Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:07 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction That is good to hear. I was the president of my university ham club many years ago. I let my license expire due to ignorance of the due date. I have never bothered to renew it. I never made extra 'cause I couldn't do one minute of perfect copy @ 20 wpm. I had some mistakes. - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The > amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) > requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > of > SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > radio > manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more > innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > the > military, so they must be on to something. > > Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as > digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > levels > 30dB below the noise floor. > > Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of > it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > understand is very common, particularly in election years. > > Rick, W7RAF > Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chuck McCown > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. > (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) > Long time hams have more passion for the subject. > > But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been > dying > for a very long time. > I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham > freqs. > There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and > merge > their work world with their hobby world. > > Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. > If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. > > I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of > the > week. > > - Original Message - > From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
So I guess you, as a WISP, must be operating solely on licensed frequencies? - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > If a wireless ISP wants to avoid this interference, they're welcome to get > a > license like the big boys or figure out how to configure their systems, if > possible, to avoid the interference. Don't make operating a wireless ISP > business on the cheap a ham problem. > > Rick > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Have to take the written again. I guess if I had a manual to bone up on the freqs and regs and a test session close by... naw, too lazy. - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > Chuck, I hope you'll consider going after that "Extra" now. It's never > too > late... > > Rick > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:07 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > That is good to hear. I was the president of my university ham club many > years ago. I let my license expire due to ignorance of the due date. I > have never bothered to renew it. I never made extra 'cause I couldn't do > one minute of perfect copy @ 20 wpm. I had some mistakes. > > - Original Message - > From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:26 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The >> amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse >> Code) >> requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and >> innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth >> of >> SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham >> radio >> manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the >> more >> innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and >> Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to >> the >> military, so they must be on to something. >> >> Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as >> digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at >> levels >> 30dB below the noise floor. >> >> Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency >> allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use >> of >> it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio >> today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't >> understand is very common, particularly in election years. >> >> Rick, W7RAF >> Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Chuck McCown >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> A KA has been a ham longer than a KD. >> (assuming it is not a vanity call sign) >> Long time hams have more passion for the subject. >> >> But really, I agree with almost everything said. Ham really has been >> dying >> for a very long time. >> I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham >> freqs. >> There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and >> merge >> their work world with their hobby world. >> >> Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur. >> If anything they were the most professional people in the industry. >> >> I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of >> the >> week. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Blake Bowers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction >> >> >>> Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference? KD versus KA? >> >> >> >> > >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> > >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> > -
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
After a major change like dropping the CW requirement, it always takes a while for the word to get out but that's finally happening. All the VE's (Volunteer Examiners) I know across the country tell me that they've seen a huge increase in testees and class attendees in the past 6-8 months, not just for upgrades but also new entrants to the ham community. While you fail to mention the huge increase in licensees starting in 1991 (your data starts with 1997), the data you cite shows a slight decline due to the fact that the low-code and no-code Tech licenses brought a lot of new people into ham radio who eventually discovered that repeater-based operation wasn't all that exciting and they let their licenses expire. Now that they can get expanded ham privileges without CW, they're coming back. It will take a while for the FCC's data to reflect this change but it will, mark my words. I'm not sure what your point is about "sales figures". My point was that hams are still making important technological contributions and I used 3 Ham-founded and operated U.S. companies that are producing more advanced radios for a much lower price than the Japanese "Big 3" as an example. To illustrate further, TenTec (Omni VII) and Elecraft (K3) offer sophisticated SDR rigs for around $2500-3000 with receiver performance that equals or exceeds that of Icom's $10k flagship IC-7800. These companies are also selling a lot of their gear to the military because of its advanced features. Other ham-owned companies like Hi-Q make not only sophisticated ham HF antennas but also HF antennas for the military including submarine antenna systems. We can argue numbers of licensees until the cows come home and it won't prove anything. The important reality is that there are many technically sophisticated hams who are still pushing the envelope and innovating and producing commercially successful products. Ham-based educational programs like the CubeSats being produced by many of our leading universities are creating the next generation of satellite systems engineers. It is NOT a 'dead' or 'irrelevant' radio service. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Blake Bowers Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:13 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction The entry level code requirement and tech plus license was created in 1991. In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed. Thats a decrease. Even the FCC states that after the most recent license changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have seen a big increase in UPGRADES. I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft and Flex-radio. Being privately held, those figures are usually pretty closely held. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: The > amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code) > requirement was eliminated. Also, hams are still experimenting and > innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth > of > SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks. The Big 3 of ham > radio > manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more > innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and > Flex-Radio. These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to > the > military, so they must be on to something. > > Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as > digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at > levels > 30dB below the noise floor. > > Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and "parasites" with frequency > allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make "better use of > it" knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio > today. Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't > understand is very common, particularly in election years. > > Rick, W7RAF > Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscrib
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
Not at all, but I do recognize my limited 'privileges' as an unlicensed user. I also know how to mitigate many of the sources of interference I encounter. In the end, I went into this knowing that what I was doing was somewhat akin to driving without insurance and the risk of operating unlicensed was totally mine. Rick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:32 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction So I guess you, as a WISP, must be operating solely on licensed frequencies? - Original Message - From: "Rick Fletcher, W7RAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > If a wireless ISP wants to avoid this interference, they're welcome to get > a > license like the big boys or figure out how to configure their systems, if > possible, to avoid the interference. Don't make operating a wireless ISP > business on the cheap a ham problem. > > Rick > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Victoria Proffer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have had to deal with a similar situation. I talked to the guy and told > him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free > internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior > notice. > -- > Victoria Proffer > CEO > St. Louis Broadband > Visit us @ > www.StLBroadband.com > 314-974-5600 At first, I thought this was a good idea but then I thought what is the word gets out? Cool! Free internet from Victoria for turning up the power on the 900 band! -RickG WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_centimeters#The_beginning -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Motorola Canopy User Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:44 PM Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
"The industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) radio bands were originally reserved internationally for the use of RF electromagnetic fields for industrial, scientific and medical purposes other than communications." So, other than communications were primary, then HAM, then Part -15. My 25 kW induction furnace still trumps everyone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_centimeters#The_beginning > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > "Motorola > Canopy User Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:44 PM > Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction > > >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
> By the way, we have been up there for 4 years - this HAM only recently > increased the power in the last three weeks. What are they using the 900 band for? Voice, video or what? Are they bleeding into any cell towers nearby with that much power? Is this a small community? Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
LOL, not. They would all have to have Hams and be in my service area... On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:19 PM, RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Victoria Proffer > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have had to deal with a similar situation. I talked to the guy and > told > > him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free > > internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior > > notice. > > -- > > Victoria Proffer > > CEO > > St. Louis Broadband > > Visit us @ > > www.StLBroadband.com > > 314-974-5600 > > At first, I thought this was a good idea but then I thought what is > the word gets out? Cool! Free internet from Victoria for turning up > the power on the 900 band! -RickG > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
