In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Phil Kane wrote:
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 03:33:43 GMT, Robert Casey wrote:


We are going to have to develop a new digital mode that looks a
lot like BPL, such that any BPL systems in the neighborhood
are trashed when we fire up the transmitter. Tough bananas
BPL providers, we are licensed...


On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 23:37:54 GMT, Dan/W4NTI wrote:


They (BPL) is the unlicensed user, we (hams) are the legal users.
Fire up a KW beacon on a dead ham band.


It's not that simple.

At present we have protection against non-licensed users including
BPL. When it becomes uncomfortable for the BPLers, they will
petition the FCC and with enough "juice" applied, the situation may
very well change 180 degrees as to who has to protect whom.

The protection that the Rules grant can be reversed at the stroke of
a pen.

Correct.

Do you have any idea how the rules might be rewritten so that they
exempt BPL, but don't apply to every other unlicensed service?

BPL isn't an unlicensed service. It's an incidental radiator - under present
rules..

One simple change that could happen would be to define BPL as a new class of
service - perhaps with a "license" of some sort.

THe act
of unlicensed services given carte blanche to interfere with the
licensed ones would indicate that they can interfere with other
unlicensed services!

(Insert standard "not a lawyer" disclaimer here)

Who defines what constitutes "harmful interference"?

Just wait until some intermod interferes with a baby monitor at the
wrong time! Guess Mr and Mrs Smith will be consoled that their neighbor
can download his porn via protected BPL.

Not a question of intermod. And since the baby monitors have to accept
interference today, they'd not be protected anyway.

Besides, it would be a simple matter to notch out a narrow band around 49 MHz
for old cordless phones, baby monitors, etc.

This is the opening of a brave new world of wonders! Just imagine once
those pesky "regulations" (a swearword in republicanese) go away.

Just the next step in "getting the government off your back"...

Those cheap Chinese TV's will be a couple bucks cheaper once they can
get rid of that stupid RFI shielding.

The same for computer monitors. Those sissies that are worried about
monitors pooping all over international distress frequencies can go take
a hike. The need for another broadband option and the needs of the many
far outweigh the needs of a crashed pilot. Hell he or she knew the risks
when taking off for that flight.

There are people who will argue that point.

So many electronic items can be made cheaper by removing those stupid
interference regulations, it is a wondrous thing. The free market rulez.

Sort of.

Consider that for many people today, "radio" below UHF almost doesn't exist.
They have broadband internet (wired), cable TV (wired), cell phones (UHF)
satellite radio (UHF), maybe a wireless lan (UHF) etc. Heck, conventional NTSC
TV is supposed to be replaced by digital HDTV a few years ago, etc.

Somewhere along the way, people will discover that *nothing* works
anymore tho'. ;^)

Nothing *old* works anymore. The solution will be simple: Go buy a new one.
(Made guess where).

Look at the history of consumer electronics since the '70s, Mike. LPs were
replaced by CDs. Beta was replaced by VHS which is being replaced by DVD in a
bunch of formats. (Remember the big old laserdiscs?) How many generations of
computers and various hardware formats have come and gone? Etc.

Our Ford had a phrase for it: "ending is better than mending"

This isn't anything new. More than 40 years ago, the major car companies knew
that, on average,a large part of the new-car-buying public was buying a new car
every 2 model years. Their goal was to get it down to every year. Back then the
average car lasted about 7-8 years, and it was a rare one to go 100,000 miles,
but the manufacturers paradigm was that it was better that way.

73 de Jim, N2EY