France Says D-Star Ham Radio Mode Is Illegal 282
gyrogeerloose writes "Citing 'national security concerns,' the French Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes (ARCEP, France's equivalent of the US's FCC) has ruled that D-Star, an amateur radio digital signal mode used world-wide, is illegal because it could allow operators to connect to the Internet.The ARCEP also cites alleged concerns regarding cryptography and national security as well as the use of a proprietary codec. While it's true that the D-Star codec is proprietary, its owner has openly licensed it (for a fee, of course) to any manufacturer who wants to build it into their equipment. Any licensed amateur radio operator who lives within the EU can sign an online petition protesting this decision."
Good morning, cum guzzler (Score:0, Insightful)
Just move to a better country. thanks.
D-Star sucks (Score:4, Insightful)
I've got nothing good to say about D-Star until the voice CODEC is free-to-use. That's not amateur radio. As it stand now, D-STAR simply means "made by ICOM"...even the Kenwood-badged D-STAR radios are in fact manufactured by ICOM.
de K3XS
Re:Wait, What? (Score:4, Insightful)
He doesn't understand the issue, so he asked a question. Sorry that offends your sensibilities.
Re:every modulation method can be 'net-connected (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wait, What? (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't think of those. I just thought of the issue of SSL across the radio.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:3, Insightful)
If it is like the US, ham radio is not supposed to supplant other services. For instance, last time I checked (several years ago, so I don't know if this changed) you could not do broadcasts over ham radio. That's for regular radio services. Ham was for person to person communication. I could see prohibiting connecting to the internet to fall under that kind of policy.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Be thankful it is how it is. If commercial interests got access to the amateur bands, they'd push individual "amateurs" out. Just imagine if the bands were crowded with business traffic, with powerful stations paid for by commercial interests. The regular Joe would never be able to get through the din.
Historically, that's the reason the word "amateur" is in "amateur radio" -- to differentiate the service from "commercial radio", which is nearly everything else.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder if they're going to ban carrier pidgeons as well since they also allow connections to the net.
http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/ [linux.no]
They seem to be claiming that it would allow somone to set up an unofficial ISP.
By that kind of logic just about anything at all could be used to connect to the internet.
If I was a big electronics geek I could theoretically set up a pair of toy laser pointers + some light sensors to allow me to relay internet traffic by line of sight (with crappy bandwidth) but that wouldn't be that much more complex than what they seem to be talking about.
Hell you could set up a piece of string with some motors and sensors to relay ip data IPOP (IP Over Pullies)
ham-to the internet=ampr.org (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:every modulation method can be 'net-connected (Score:5, Insightful)
But this unsecured link is legal everywhere but France, so the French could not shut down a link in Belgium, Spain, the UK, or anywhere else nearby that wants to host one.
Re:... and Winlink 2000? (Score:4, Insightful)
Follow the money. Anybody in power in France have a financial interest in not allowing this mode of communication?
Packet Radio is ALREADY on the Internet (Score:4, Insightful)
The French have basically outlawed something because of interoperability. The D-Star stuff can be networked. They could have simply said "Don't connect it to the Internet" instead of making it illegal to use.
Re:simple solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, it's kinda like Rugby, only the players are so wimpy that they wear protective padding and follow rules.
Isn't it interesting that those with brains that are protected desire to continue with that protection, while those that have been scrambled through insufficient protection don't understand the problem.
Re:D-Star sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
D-Star concept is fine, but using a patent encumbered codec definitely goes against the spirit of ham radio.
SSB US patent 1449382
Armstrongs Superregen RX patent 1342885
I was never totally clear if Armstrong patented the concept of FM.
Just saying that the "spirit of ham radio" certainly has never excluded patented modes or gear in the past.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:3, Insightful)
Its not - there is a real risk that a dstar to wifi gateway (which setting up is trivial) being used by a non ham would be however - even here in the states.
I wouldn't say its a reason to ban the protocol though as it can be used for a great number of things other than internet stuff.
Re:Where's the petition for to praise the decision (Score:2, Insightful)
97.113 Prohibited transmissions. (a) No amateur station shall transmit: (4) Music using a phone emission except as specifically provided elsewhere in this section; communications intended to facilitate a criminal act; messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except as otherwise provided herein; obscene or indecent words or language; or false or deceptive messages, signals or identification."
I don't see how this applies to DSTAR. There is nothing implied or explicit in the language above, about encoding communications using proprietary or patented protocols.The language focuses on intent "purpose of obscuring". I interpret this as the difference between compressing and encrypting. If I use G729 to compress voice transmission, it doesn't mean my intent is to obfuscate, but merely improve the efficiency of my communication.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:3, Insightful)
France is probably the most "big brother like" european country. the government is also quite corrupt.
Actually you can find most stuff in english here: http://www.laquadrature.net/en [laquadrature.net]
there's also not directly france related stuf there.
good! (Score:4, Insightful)
Amateur radio should only use open standards, codecs, and protocols; anything else should not be allowed on the air and people using anything else should lose their license.
There really is no reason to use anything proprietary anyway: the necessary technologies and protocols have been known for a while.
Re:D-Star sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know about other countries, but in the US that is flat out wrong. Anyone without authority who makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention infringes the patent (35 USC 271). There is no 'it must be commercial' clause.
Re:D-Star sucks (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you have a reference for that?
35 U.S.C. 271 Infringement of patent.
(a)Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States, or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.
There is no requirement to sell or otherwise have a commercial interest.
Re:Where's the petition for to praise the decision (Score:3, Insightful)
There is nothing implied or explicit in the language above, about encoding communications using proprietary or patented protocols.The language focuses on intent "purpose of obscuring". I interpret this as the difference between compressing and encrypting.
Arguably, the intent is to obscure the data in such a way that you can only receive it using another proprietary device.
If I use G729 to compress voice transmission, it doesn't mean my intent is to obfuscate, but merely improve the efficiency of my communication.
It's not just your intent that matters. For a company to use a proprietary codec has multiple purposes: one probably is to achieve a given level of voice quality without much effort, another is to gain market share and create barriers to entry.
It's reasonably possible to do what D-STAR does without using proprietary codecs or protocols; therefore, the use should not be permitted.
Re:French Fag POV (Score:2, Insightful)
They don't monitor the messages (they don't have the right and don't care ) but the use of the radio frequencies resources and who emit from where. As long they could identify who's behind the signal they really don't care.
As i said, you could put Internet in the loop if you want and do X phone VOIP radio Y, as long as X and Y are registered operator with the right to use this frequency, the ARCEP don't really care.
What they really don't want is some thing like anonymous radio anonymous. It's a question of liability, you can broadcast what you want but you assume complete liability and responsibility of the communication. You couldn't hide behind "the internet" or something else if some one miss use your equipment.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:3, Insightful)
Tin cans and wet string should be prohibited too, because you could send "secret messages" to your pal on the other side of your yard.
Re:It ain't that simple (Score:3, Insightful)
But why bother ? (Score:3, Insightful)
D-Star = pay-for-play (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you kidding? (Score:3, Insightful)
[ACERP] has ruled that D-Star, a amateur radio digital signal mode used world-wide, is illegal because it could allow operators to connect to the Internet.
They've obviously never heard of Packet Radio then, which has been around much longer and enabled digital data packets to be transmitted over any radio link. Hell, it's pretty much how Taxi booking systems and Police response systems work.
The French are right, but for the wrong reason (Score:3, Insightful)
Since there is a proprietary chip made by a single manufacturer and a fee must be paid for the use then this would seem to violate the above rule. Every other digital and analog mode of communication is defined to the extent that an amateur radio operator could construct hardware to send, receive, encode, and decode the information
However, the French couldn't see the big oak in front of them, they had to decide that their big brother authority is threatened.
Re:Wait, What? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think SSL violates the "no ciphers" prohibition of Part 97.113[0].
[0] "Part 97" refers to CFR (US Code of Federal Regulations) Title 47, which governs telecommunications. Part 97 covers the Amateur Radio Service.
Probably scared... (Score:1, Insightful)
That citizens (oh, sorry, "consumers") could use the tech to bypass the up and coming internet filters, packet inspections and other assorted freedom-killing shite. How do you dare challenging the might of the corporate-backed government, consumer? Step in line or this friendly private security officer will bash your head in, kill your wife and rape your dog.
Re:every modulation method can be 'net-connected (Score:3, Insightful)
Heard yesterday on the most important French national radio network, from the mouth of one person in the government, something that essentially was :"Internet is a lawless place, but fortunately we're in the process of doing something about it".
All of this, of course, to satisfy the very much entrenched IP interests.