K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam? Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

73 de Jim, N2EY

FCC & ARRL partners in the Culture of Corruption.

The guys in the Pirate Radio groups will find the below
interesting:



wrote in message
ups.com...
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam? Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

73 de Jim, N2EY

hey, care to join us for a mutual jacking session.
FM Community Radio wrote:
The guys in the Pirate Radio groups will find the below
interesting:



wrote in message
ups.com...
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam? Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

73 de Jim, N2EY

HEY...............

WOULD YOU PIRATE GUYS CARE TO JERK OFF WITH US?

WE BEAT OUR MEATS ON CHANNEL 38
FM Community Radio wrote:
The guys in the Pirate Radio groups will find the below
interesting:



wrote in message
ups.com...
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam? Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

Perhaps.

I think prison was more in order, but OK...take his license.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

OK..I can buy those.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

Jim, if I physically reach in to a persons wallet and take their
money, that's theft.

Is it any LESS theft if I demand that they take it out and hand it
to me?

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam?

Sure was when I tested, in Ohio, Atlanta and Long Beach, CA
offices all three. My High School science teacher who administered my
Novice read his part of the insructions which stated it was unlawful to
divulge the contents of the test.

I just don't know how many ways you can say "Don't discuss the
test", Jim!

Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

If they HAD gone after him, at least it would have set case
law...Or at the very least SHOULD have pushed the reg writers in
Washington to "get hot".

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

Our loss, then and ever since.

73

Steve, K4YZ

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

Perhaps.

I think prison was more in order, but OK...take his license.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

OK..I can buy those.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

Jim, if I physically reach in to a persons wallet and take their
money, that's theft.

Of course it is theft because the person no longer has
the money. If, on the other hand, you allow me to
look in your wallet and I see you have 53 dollars, is it
theft if I tell someone else I saw $53 dollars (one 20,
three 10s and three ones).

Is it any LESS theft if I demand that they take it out and hand it
to me?

This analogy is totally off the mark because it involves
a physical removal which is NOT what Bash did.

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam?

Sure was when I tested, in Ohio, Atlanta and Long Beach, CA
offices all three. My High School science teacher who administered my
Novice read his part of the insructions which stated it was unlawful to
divulge the contents of the test.

I just don't know how many ways you can say "Don't discuss the
test", Jim!

The other legal question comes down to: is it legal to
prohibit post test discussion.

Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

If they HAD gone after him, at least it would have set case
law...Or at the very least SHOULD have pushed the reg writers in
Washington to "get hot".

Too late. The answer will never be known now.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

Our loss, then and ever since.

A waste of tme to discuss. You can't go back and that's
the bottom line.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Reposted for the guys in the Pirate Radio groups:




"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
nk.net...

"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

Perhaps.

I think prison was more in order, but OK...take his license.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

OK..I can buy those.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

Jim, if I physically reach in to a persons wallet and take their
money, that's theft.

Of course it is theft because the person no longer has
the money. If, on the other hand, you allow me to
look in your wallet and I see you have 53 dollars, is it
theft if I tell someone else I saw $53 dollars (one 20,
three 10s and three ones).

Is it any LESS theft if I demand that they take it out and hand it
to me?

This analogy is totally off the mark because it involves
a physical removal which is NOT what Bash did.

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam?

Sure was when I tested, in Ohio, Atlanta and Long Beach, CA
offices all three. My High School science teacher who administered my
Novice read his part of the insructions which stated it was unlawful to
divulge the contents of the test.

I just don't know how many ways you can say "Don't discuss the
test", Jim!

The other legal question comes down to: is it legal to
prohibit post test discussion.

Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

If they HAD gone after him, at least it would have set case
law...Or at the very least SHOULD have pushed the reg writers in
Washington to "get hot".

Too late. The answer will never be known now.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

Our loss, then and ever since.

A waste of tme to discuss. You can't go back and that's
the bottom line.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Bill Sohl wrote:
"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

Perhaps.

I think prison was more in order, but OK...take his license.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

OK..I can buy those.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

Jim, if I physically reach in to a persons wallet and take their
money, that's theft.

Of course it is theft because the person no longer has
the money. If, on the other hand, you allow me to
look in your wallet and I see you have 53 dollars, is it
theft if I tell someone else I saw $53 dollars (one 20,
three 10s and three ones).

Is it any LESS theft if I demand that they take it out and hand it
to me?

This analogy is totally off the mark because it involves
a physical removal which is NOT what Bash did.

So is the "show me the money" analogy. Here's why:

The alleged "theft" was of intellectual property, not a thing like
money. Try this analogy:

Last Friday I saw the new Harry Potter movie at the local theater.
(Excellent, btw). Suppose I had videotaped it while it was being
shown - wouldn't that be theft? After all, the theater still has the
film!

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam?

It says right on the movie tickets that you're not to copy what's
shown.

Sure was when I tested, in Ohio, Atlanta and Long Beach, CA
offices all three. My High School science teacher who administered my
Novice read his part of the insructions which stated it was unlawful to
divulge the contents of the test.

I just don't know how many ways you can say "Don't discuss the
test", Jim!

The other legal question comes down to: is it legal to
prohibit post test discussion.

I would say "yes", *if* it's clearly explained as a condition of
license
grant. If not, the situation is legally murky in this nonlawyer's
opinion.

Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

If they HAD gone after him, at least it would have set case
law...Or at the very least SHOULD have pushed the reg writers in
Washington to "get hot".

Too late. The answer will never be known now.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

Our loss, then and ever since.

A waste of tme to discuss.

I disagree! It's important to understand the history and what *really*
happened.

You can't go back and that's
the bottom line.

Actually we could "go back" to FCC exams - if FCC could somehow be
convinced that they were necessary. Good luck doing that one!

One more thought:

9) The FCC may have been aware of Bash's activities, and decided that
they did not really harm the ARS, even if they were technically
illegal. His
activities may have convinced them to make the pools public, which
incidentally put him out of business because then anyone could publish
them.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Reposted for the guys in the Pirate Radio groups:




wrote in message
oups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:
"K4YZ" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
K4YZ wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

Dick Bash disagreed with you then and he disagrees with you now.

No.

Dick Bash disagreed with the federal government.

Yes, he did.

He violated federal law in the process.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't. He was never charged with anything
for his publishing activities, let alone convicted. (Innocent until
proven
guilty, right?).

He should have gone to prison a long time ago.

IMHO a fine and license revocation would have been more appropriate.

Perhaps.

I think prison was more in order, but OK...take his license.

The fact is that FCC never went after him, despite folks like K2ASP
wanting to do so, because the folks at the top said no. Seems to me
there are several possible explanations for that lack of action:

1) Corruption (no evidence of that)

2) Incompetence (?)

3) Lack of hard evidence. IANAL, but IMHO the books themselves are not
hard evidence; and Bash would not have had to testify against himself.
FCC would have had to get someone with firsthand evidence of what Bash
was doing.

OK..I can buy those.

4) Unclear law. Bash didn't steal or copy the exams. He didn't ask
others to do so. All he did was ask people questions and write down
their answers. It could be argued that those who talked to Bash and
accepted the money were breaking the law, not Bash himself.

Jim, if I physically reach in to a persons wallet and take their
money, that's theft.

Of course it is theft because the person no longer has
the money. If, on the other hand, you allow me to
look in your wallet and I see you have 53 dollars, is it
theft if I tell someone else I saw $53 dollars (one 20,
three 10s and three ones).

Is it any LESS theft if I demand that they take it out and hand it
to me?

This analogy is totally off the mark because it involves
a physical removal which is NOT what Bash did.

So is the "show me the money" analogy. Here's why:

The alleged "theft" was of intellectual property, not a thing like
money. Try this analogy:

Last Friday I saw the new Harry Potter movie at the local theater.
(Excellent, btw). Suppose I had videotaped it while it was being
shown - wouldn't that be theft? After all, the theater still has the
film!

And was it clearly spelled out to everyone who took an FCC exam that
they were not to divulge the contents of that exam?

It says right on the movie tickets that you're not to copy what's
shown.

Sure was when I tested, in Ohio, Atlanta and Long Beach, CA
offices all three. My High School science teacher who administered my
Novice read his part of the insructions which stated it was unlawful to
divulge the contents of the test.

I just don't know how many ways you can say "Don't discuss the
test", Jim!

The other legal question comes down to: is it legal to
prohibit post test discussion.

I would say "yes", *if* it's clearly explained as a condition of
license
grant. If not, the situation is legally murky in this nonlawyer's
opinion.

Was it clearly
spelled out in the regulations that the exams were to be kept secret
and what the penalties were for making them public? If not, FCC might
have lost a very embarrassing case had they gone after Bash.

If they HAD gone after him, at least it would have set case
law...Or at the very least SHOULD have pushed the reg writers in
Washington to "get hot".

Too late. The answer will never be known now.

5) Planning for the future. The folks at the top who did not allow
prosecution of Bash might have already been thinking of going to
public
question pools when Bash did his thing. If so, it would have been a
waste of time to prosecute him, because by the time they got a
verdict,
what he did would not have been an offense any more.

It's clear he violated the *spirit* of the old exam rules. But whether
he violated the *letter* of those rules, and could have been
convicted,
will probably never be certain because he won't ever be charged or
tried.

Our loss, then and ever since.

A waste of tme to discuss.

I disagree! It's important to understand the history and what *really*
happened.

You can't go back and that's
the bottom line.

Actually we could "go back" to FCC exams - if FCC could somehow be
convinced that they were necessary. Good luck doing that one!

One more thought:

9) The FCC may have been aware of Bash's activities, and decided that
they did not really harm the ARS, even if they were technically
illegal. His
activities may have convinced them to make the pools public, which
incidentally put him out of business because then anyone could publish
them.

73 de Jim, N2EY