On Mon, 25 Apr 1994, Phil G. Fraering wrote:
Evidence, how did the cases the FCC brought turn out?
I don't really remmeber. I think they ended up settling-- the guy got a small fine in return for a guilty plea. But, that is just a guess!
If the network had used commercial radio licenses, how much more would it have cost them (per node; I have a vague idea of the size and power of a random Amateur Packet Radio node (in computer terms and cost))? A lot more. Commercial licenses are expensive, and the number of frequencies available is smaller. Also, commercial equipment is more expensive. Finally, if it were on commercial freq's, then Amateur Radio Op's couldn't use it... What would be the point?
Would this have given them greater immunity in prosecution?
Yes, the FCC reg's against commercial transmission only apply to amateur radio. If they had been using commercial freq's, it would not have been illegal.
(Hmm.. if you're passing it on, you're broadcasting it? Could encryption tech be used to "enhance" APRN to give sysops "plausible deniability?"
No, the FCC interpretation was that Amateurs have an obligation to make sure that all transmissions from their stations conform to the requirements of the FCC Part 97 rules. Broadcasting encrypted communcations on amateur radio is itself a violation of the rules. That's right!! the government has already banned encryption.... on Ham Radio. Evidence Inc. Evidence@Nowhere.Nil