ARRL Responds to WSJ Article on BPL
 

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/104/?nc=1

73 de Jim, N2EY

Keith wrote:
On 4 Mar 2004 09:28:09 -0800,
N2EY wrote:

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/104/?nc=1

73 de Jim, N2EY


At this point the ARRL is ****ing into a hurricane wind.
When BPL is deployed across America hams will find themselves
at the end of civil litigation lawsuits for intentional
interference to a computer system.
You can all rant about part 97, but civil litigation has
nothing to do with FCC rules. To defend yourself you
will need to pay an attorney a $50,000 retainer and years
of court fights.
Who has the money to spend on lawyers? Hams with home owner
insurance policies will find out their insurance will pay
off any lawsuit and if the ham refuses to stop operating
a ham station at the home they will lose their home owner
insurance.

The future for Ham Radio is a black hole.


Just get a number of hams in an area with mobile units, have them drive
around BPL areas engaging in legal HF contacts. That will knock out BPL
first here, then there, then over here, then over there. It will be very
difficult to pin it down to any one ham or even prove hams are doing it,
yet if they keep knocking users off often enough the users will get
tired of BPL and go back to whatever they were using before. Fight fire
with fire.

In article , radiobuff0
@mailcity.moc says...
Keith wrote:
On 4 Mar 2004 09:28:09 -0800,
N2EY wrote:

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/104/?nc=1

73 de Jim, N2EY


At this point the ARRL is ****ing into a hurricane wind.
When BPL is deployed across America hams will find themselves
at the end of civil litigation lawsuits for intentional
interference to a computer system.
You can all rant about part 97, but civil litigation has
nothing to do with FCC rules. To defend yourself you
will need to pay an attorney a $50,000 retainer and years
of court fights.
Who has the money to spend on lawyers? Hams with home owner
insurance policies will find out their insurance will pay
off any lawsuit and if the ham refuses to stop operating
a ham station at the home they will lose their home owner
insurance.

The future for Ham Radio is a black hole.


Just get a number of hams in an area with mobile units, have them drive
around BPL areas engaging in legal HF contacts. That will knock out BPL
first here, then there, then over here, then over there. It will be very
difficult to pin it down to any one ham or even prove hams are doing it,
yet if they keep knocking users off often enough the users will get
tired of BPL and go back to whatever they were using before. Fight fire
with fire.

Well think of it this way. It wouldn't be too expensive to design simple
RF devices that radiated in the band of say 14 to 27 MHz now would it? A
continuous wave at say, a couple watts and tossed in various points of
the city. Once the batteries died out they'd go crazy. Then of course
you could retrieve said devices (Very carefully mind you!) and it would
make the engineers go crazy.

But the mobile solution is nice too. Good luck finding the problem when
it's transient.

On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:21:24 -0700, JJ wrote:

Just get a number of hams in an area with mobile units, have them drive
around BPL areas engaging in legal HF contacts.

I'm sure the legal counsel for the utilities will use posts like this to
prove to the Congress that renegade ham radio operators are intentionally
interfering with BPL, business and home computer systems. Another nail
in the coffin of ham radio.

--
Best Regards, Keith http://kilowatt-radio.org/ NW Oregon Radio Page
Hobby Radio Group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hobby_radio_users
AOL IM: kilowattradio

All you would need is a couple of cases and I'd bet the ARRL would get into
the action with some rather deep pockets.

First, local courts have no jurisdiction. Go to the feds. The FCC isn't
going to be happy, but they'll have to side with the amateur station.
Meanwhile, a counter suit could be filed. Now, drop the suit or who might
loose what? Hey, you might make more money than the woman who spilled hot
coffee on herself and sued the fast food chain LOL.

Besides that, not all hams are poor. Of course, it will help immensly if
the ham has great internet service whilest he/she is operating (courtesy of
DSL or cable) :))

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

"Keith" -28723 wrote in message
...
On 4 Mar 2004 09:28:09 -0800,
N2EY wrote:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/03/104/?nc=1

73 de Jim, N2EY

At this point the ARRL is ****ing into a hurricane wind.
When BPL is deployed across America hams will find themselves
at the end of civil litigation lawsuits for intentional
interference to a computer system.
You can all rant about part 97, but civil litigation has
nothing to do with FCC rules. To defend yourself you
will need to pay an attorney a $50,000 retainer and years
of court fights.
Who has the money to spend on lawyers? Hams with home owner
insurance policies will find out their insurance will pay
off any lawsuit and if the ham refuses to stop operating
a ham station at the home they will lose their home owner
insurance.

The future for Ham Radio is a black hole.

--
Best Regards, Keith
NW Oregon Radio http://kilowatt-radio.org/
http://linux.com http://freebsd.org http://apple.com
Pax melior est quam iustissimum bellum.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 3/5/04