QRZ! Ham Radio 3/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 3.iso/digests/infoham/940236.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-06-04 | 30KB

Date: Fri,  4 Mar 94 08:10:10 PST
From: Info-Hams Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: Bulk
Subject: Info-Hams Digest V94 #236
To: Info-Hams


Info-Hams Digest            Fri,  4 Mar 94       Volume 94 : Issue  236

Today's Topics:
                       Anyone using JPS NIR 10?
                   CW trainer for Sun workstation?
                          Electric Fence RFI
                        FTP address for World
              Help: Neighbor's CW interference (2 msgs)
                           Jerk on 20 mtrs
              Medium range point-to-point digital links
                      Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #149
       Probable demise of the online repeater directory project
                      tax exempt 501 (c) status

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

Archives of past issues of the Info-Hams Digest are available
(by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/info-hams".

We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party.  Your mileage may vary.  So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 23:13:17 GMT
From: news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!swrinde!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!markeh.slip.netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: Anyone using JPS NIR 10?
To: [e-mail]

I have both a NIR-10, latest ROM, and a W9GR DSP II (commercial, non-kit
version). They are hooked up with a switch to let me quickly change between
the two.

Overall, I have 4 reactions.

1. NEITHER makes a signal audible that would otherwise be uncopyable (SP?).
They simply make it somewhat more plesant to listen to.

2. I prefer the NIR-10. IMO, the signal quality is better, but this is
probably a matter of opinion. However, the NIR-10 also has a delay in
passing the sound through, so it needs to by bypassed when monitoring on
xmit - there is circuitry inside the NIR-10 to do this.

3. BOTH units generate enought high-pitched audio whine that they require a
high-cut filter following them. I think that I am relatively sensitive to
high pitched noise, but I still think that this shouldn't happen.


4. I am not using them in a mobile application, so I have no opinion on
ignition noise. However, I do have an occasional/regular/annoying problem
with power line noise (S-9, sometimes higher), as I have a 12KV line
outside my house. The noise blanker on my xcvr is better for this than
either of the DSP units. (And, of course, the NB is before the AGC point,
which external filters cannot be)  In fact, when this noise is present, the
impulse noise seems to cause lower quality with the DSPs. Meaning, that
when I am having a noise problem I always turn on the NB, and then
sometimes turn on one of the DSPs.

Hope this helps

73  Mark KM6FM



In article <wier-020394204509@198.213.12.252>, [e-mail] (Bob
Wier) wrote:

> I have LOTs of ignition noise in the mobile while operating
> on HF.  Although I've been warned that DSP won't do much
> towards knocking down impulse type noise, I've been using
> a W9GR homebuilt unit and find that the improvement is
> worthwhile.
>
> About the only DSP unit which specifically mentions noise
> reduction is the JPS NIR10 (which now had a Rev. 3.0
> firmware upgrade).  I'd be interested in opinions of
> how well the current software works for noise reduction.
>
> I know there was a QST review of the original unit in
> (I think) Oct 91, but I don't have that issue here in
> Texas (home qth is normally west of here).
>
> Please e-mail or post here.
>
> THANKS & 73's de WB5KXH
>
>     ======== insert usual disclaimers here ============
>       Bob Wier, East Texas State U., Commerce, Texas
> keeper of the Adobe Photoshop, MC68HC11, ICOM mailing lists
>       [e-mail] (watch for address change)

------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 94 13:35:49 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!library.ucla.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: CW trainer for Sun workstation?
To: [e-mail]

   Anybody know where I can find a morse training program which
   will run on a sun?

   Thanks!
   Bill Ross
   [e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 94 12:54:34 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!rohvm1![e-mail]
Subject: Electric Fence RFI
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Gilbert Baron) wrote:

> >I've got some bad interference on 80 through 10
> >meter bands from an electric fence about 500
> >feet away. The effect is very sharp clicks
> >about 3-4 per second. Analog noise blanker
> >works some but not 100%.
> >
> >Anyone have any cures?
>
> Well, if you ground the fence, case closed.
>

Missed the original posting, but we've got electric fencing, and I offer
these thoughts.
1.  The fence in question appears to be using a battery-operated charger.
See if you can convince the owner to move to an a-c line operated charger;
the ones we use are basically pretty quiet.

2.  With the a-c operated charger, the problems occur when the fence
grounds itself through a bit of resistance, as through a bit of grass or
honeysuckle, or worst of all, we used (briefly) a fencewire that was fine
wire reinforced with plastic to give a "yellow ribbon" effect--the
conductor broke at a couple of spots, and the plastic carbonized, giving a
few inches of semiconductor carbon--fence wasn't obviously shorted, but the
noise was terrible.  Cure to all this: keep the fence absolutely clear of
any paths to ground, and keep good, solid connections at splices (my wife
insists on making single-point contacts with a pair of eye loops).

It'll work better to work _with_ the fence owner to keep the fence clear,
than _against_ him by deliberately grounding it out.  (Don't forget you've
got some vulnerable coax.)

--
73  de  John Taylor   W3ZID
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 94 14:16:49 GMT
From: netcomsv!netcom.com![e-mail]
Subject: FTP address for World
To: [e-mail]

This is a reminder for everyone that World (world.std.com) has changed
their FTP address.

The new anonymous FTP address is: ftp.std.com (192.74.137.7)

This address is said to permit unlimited anonymous FTP connections.

Scott


--
===============================================================================
| Scott Ehrlich         Internet: [e-mail]     BITNET: wy1z@NUHUB  |
| Amateur Radio: wy1z          AX.25: [e-mail]                    |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Maintainer of the Boston Amateur Radio Club hamradio FTP area on      |
|   the World - ftp.std.com  pub/hamradio                 |
===============================================================================

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 22:06:05 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!cupnews0.cup.hp.com![e-mail]
Subject: Help: Neighbor's CW interference
To: [e-mail]

Sam Watson ([e-mail]) wrote:
: I'm not a radio operator, just trying to get along with one.  Need advice on
: how to eliminate neighbor's 100 watt 10 meter CW transmissions from my house
: intercom speakers.  Only thing that works is turning down the volume at each
: speaker, then we can't hear the doorbell since it's part of the
: intercom/radio.  We have put a hi-pass filter on the FM lead, disconnected the
: AM lead, soldered .01mf caps across the speaker terminals, and grounded his
: antenna to an 8' copper clad rod.  Nothing works.  I'm betting some of the
: ARRL guys on the net have the answer.  Any ideas?
: Thanks very much!

: Sam Watson        |  [e-mail]
: Texas Instruments |
: Dallas Texas      |  [phone]

The place to bypass is at the amplifier, not many feet from it at the speaker.
Right at the output of the audio amp should be bypassed. Also, you might
try line filtering. By the way, what does the CW transmission sound like?
Jim, WA6SDM
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 3 Mar 1994 21:56:57 GMT
From: news.acns.nwu.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Help: Neighbor's CW interference
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>,
Sam Watson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>I'm not a radio operator, just trying to get along with one.  Need advice on
>how to eliminate neighbor's 100 watt 10 meter CW transmissions from my house
>intercom speakers.  Only thing that works is turning down the volume at each
>speaker, then we can't hear the doorbell since it's part of the
>intercom/radio.  We have put a hi-pass filter on the FM lead, disconnected the
>AM lead, soldered .01mf caps across the speaker terminals, and grounded his
>antenna to an 8' copper clad rod.  Nothing works.  I'm betting some of the
>ARRL guys on the net have the answer.  Any ideas?

I commend you for taking the initiative to reduce RFI.  A few notes/questions:

Fact:   unplugging antenna/high pass filter did not help
        Probably the RFI is coming in through other wires.

Fact:   level of clicks are affected by volume control
Q:      Where is the volume control?

    if the vol control is at the console then the rfi is comming in from other
    wires such as from door mic to console.  Try ferrite bead and/or
    capacitors.

Fact: capacitor at speakers did not help
     i) common mode (capacitor would have helped differential mode) rfi
        i.e., rf voltage is present at both wires of the speaker
        Try ferrite beads.  I think that Radio Shack carries them. Pass
        both the wires through them.  If you can get a toroid then wrap a
        number of turns with both wires.
     ii) rfi is coming in from from other wires such as from door

Other suggestions:

One possibility is that the field strength at you house is so large
that it would be tough to isolate long stretches of wire in you intercom
system.  Can the ham locate the antenna further away from you?

Does the ham have a good rf ground?

Rajiv
aa9ch
[e-mail]

------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 94 14:22:46 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsrelay.iastate.edu!news.iastate.edu![e-mail]
Subject: Jerk on 20 mtrs
To: [e-mail]

Hi All,

I upgraded from tech to advanced this last weekend and decided to listen in
on 20 meters to get a feel for what goes on there. (I worked 15 mtrs since
it was wide open to Europe!>.

There was some JERK that was running up and down the band causing all kinds
of intentional interference: from belching and whistling to calling people
sh*theads to keying on a frequency to disrupt a QSO.

He gave his call (obviously bogus) as W?OOQ. (don't remember what area he
gave.)

Is this guy a fixture on 20 meters, or did I just get lucky?

73,
Ken



--
Ken Anderson   N0ZEM [e-mail]  PH: 515.294.8996
126 Soil Tilth Bldg., Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 22:28:48 GMT
From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!srgenprp![e-mail]
Subject: Medium range point-to-point digital links
To: [e-mail]

Zack Lau (KH6CP) ([e-mail]) wrote:

: BTW--how else does one improve a point to point link,
: besides using bigger antennas and more power?  The only
: solutions I can think of are changing frequencies or
: adding sites.  Obviously, if there is an interference

 With radio, once you've acquired quality paths, improvements on a
single link are through increased antenna gain (whether by increasing
the frequency or increasing the physical antenna size), except for a few
rare propagation mechanisms, improving the receiver (until it's KT(ant)B
limited) and increasing transmit power.

  For a point-point circuit  another improvement comes from decreasing
rms path length.  This means adding hops.  This works since dividing a
path in two (say) and adding one additional hop costs 3 dB (maybe less)
in hardware but improves C/N by at least 6 dB (which is why I made a
point of correcting one of Gary's previous errors).

  The only other mechanism for improvement I can think of is to find a
way to get guided waves instead divergant ones.  In a wide area wireless
context, I can't think of any that offer a lot of amateur networking
potential.  Inversions and ducts fit into this camp, as perhaps does
some skywave and even groundwave propagation.  Total internal reflection
(fiber optics) is the miracle worker in this area but I don't know where
or how we might apply it to amateur radio.

Glenn n6gn

------------------------------

Date: 27 Feb 94 19:57:54 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!alberta!fantom!crs-sys!ersys!adec23!ve6mgs![e-mail]
Subject: Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin #149
To: [e-mail]

SB DX @ ALLBBS $OPDX.149
Ohio/Penn DX Bulletin No. 149

The Ohio/Penn Dx PacketCluster
DX Bulletin No. 149
BID: $OPDX.149
February 28, 1994
Editor Tedd Mirgliotta, KB8NW
Provided by BARF-80 BBS Cleveland, Ohio
Online at 216-237-8208 14400/9600/2400/1200/300 8/N/1

Thanks to the Northern Ohio Amateur Radio Society, Northern Ohio DX
Association, Ohio/Penn PacketCluster Network, DL7VEE & DXNL, DF4RD,
OH2BH, N3II, K3ZO, K4CEF & Southeastern Cluster Group, KJ4VH, WA4MCZ,
WB4IUX, PI4KGL and IK5AAX for the following DX information.

3Y0PI, PETER I ISLAND (UPDATE). Last week OPDX forgot to list one of
the 3Y0PI operators; Luis, XE1L, should have been included in the list.
Thanks to Bill, WA4MCZ, for bringing it to our attention. As this
bulletin was being prepared, information from Tony, WA4JQS, by telephone
to Ada (Tony's mom), indicated that the 3Y team is now on South Shetland.
The team, as of February 25th, are unable to fly out of South Shetlands
at the moment due to fog and blizzard. (ed. GEEEE! How much can these
guys endure?)

ACTIVITY ON THE SATELLITE (AO13). Look for the following stations on
AO13: 5T5JC - 145.919/2100z, 8P6SM - 145.900/2242z, 9K2WA - 145.891/1602z
9Y4DG - 145.908/2339z, PY5BYE - 145.915/2310z, UN7CY - 145.937/1527z,
VK4ABW - 145.889/0840z, VU2TS - 145.855/1708z and Z21HJ - 145.833/1445Z.

BV9P, PRATAS ISLAND. Word from Martti, OH2BH, is that preparations are
proceeding just fine with no problems so far for the upcoming DXpedition.
The targeted date is March 16 for 10-days. There are 14 operators
scheduled to go, and the group may include limited foreign participation
as well. Some detailed information may be released after Martti's visit
to Taipei during this coming week.

MORE ON THE VOA STORY ABOUT "BY" OPS. Fred, K3ZO, who has just recently
returned from Thailand where he operated as HS0ZAR, had doubts about the
Voice of America (VOA) report that all BY hams have been rounded up and
sent to labor camps. Fred stated he heard and worked plenty of BAs, BYs
and BZs while in Thailand, so he decided to investigated the Voice of
America broadcast and found the following information:

 Here is the exact VOA text, which was based on a news item that was on
 the REUTERS news wire on February 16th: "Police in China have cracked
 down on the country's largest group of amateur radio operators, and
 have sent three of the group's leaders to labor camps.

 The "Official China Business Times Today" (Wed. Fed. 16th) Identified
 the group as "Radio-Air-Salon", based in Henan Province (BY6). It said
 police have caught 61 members of the group -- which had effectively
 taken over some 27 radio channels.

 The report said Radio-Air-Salon members often interrupted regular
 broadcasts with their own conversations and illegally listened in on
 restricted frequencies. It said the use of technical equipment to
 create chaos in the airwaves is a new type of illegal activity.......

Fred comments he has tried to work as many different Chinese stations
as possible while he was in Thailand, but he never heard BY6. The ARRL
reports that their information shows only one licensed amateur radio
station in PRC, club station BY6SRA, licensed to the Shanxi Branch of
the China Radio Sports Association (CRSA). CRSA is the IARU member
society for China. Fred points out that the VOA broadcast only mentions
that three members of one club were sent to "re-education camps", this
is a far cry from "ALL BY's". This is a prime example of how RUMORS can
spread like wildfires and blow things out of proportion Also, the press
has often referred to all manners of radio hobbyists as "AMATEUR RADIO
OPERATORS." The group of hobbyists mentioned in the broadcast may be
engaging in SWL and CB type activities rather than actual amateur
operations. Fred states such activities are widespread in Asia and has
experienced pirate "CB" operations on the 40 meter band while operating
from HS-land. So in summary, amateur radio is alive and well in PRC.
Reports of activity this week by BY1QH on both 40 and 80 meters is
proof. Also, Martti, OH2BH, was in Beijing recently and visited the
operators and station of BY1PK. Martti stated things were just fine
and no one is rounded up in the labor camps. As matter of fact, foreign
operators may be licensed in PRC soon. (TNX to K3ZO, N8II and OH2BH)

P5, NORTH KOREA. During Martti's (OH2BH) recent visit to Beijing, where
he was involved in some tennis tournament, he was able to communicate
with some high level individuals not only from PRC administration but
also from P5-land. "We are getting there, sooner or later," states
Martti. (Keep Your Fingers Crossed!)

PACIFIC DXPEDITION (KC6/KH2/V63). JR6IQI and JK6UER are spending their
honeymoon at various places in the Pacific, and will operate all bands
both CW and SSB. Their itinerary is as follows: Belau - March 13-16 as
KC6KT and KC6UA; Micronesia (V63) - March 16-18, call unknown; Guam
(KH2) - March 18-20, KH2/JK6UER.

SU, EGYPT. The operation by SU2MT in the ARRL CW DX contest was by a
West Coast DXer who is presently working in Egypt. More operations are
planned for both CW and on the lower bands in order to make Zone 34 more
accessible. Activity is also being planned for the ARRL SSB DX Contest
on an all band operation for March 5-6.

TM50DAY CANCELLED. Willem, PA3BIZ, informs OPDX that the special event
station in Normandy, France to commemorate the 50th anniversary of
D-DAY as been cancelled. The two Dutch groups who have been planning the
operation for more than a year were to be active from June 6-9, 1995.
The group was issued the special call sign in July 1993. But since then
the French license authorities have withdrawn the call sign stating they
made a mistake by giving the group a two digit prefix. Meanwhile, there
is word that the French operators might be organizing a special event
station.

FAX YOUR DX INFORMATION NOW! Faxing is available Monday/Wednesday/Friday
from 0430 to 2330z only. The number is 216-237-8208 and the FAX card is
sharing the same phone line as BARF-80 BBS using a data/fax/phone switch.

Excerpts and distribution of The OPDX Bulletin are granted as long as
OPDX/BARF80 receive credit. To contribute DX info, call BARF-80 BBS
online at 216-237-8208 14400/9600/2400/1200/300 and leave a message with
the Sysop or send InterNet Mail to: [e-mail] or send
BitNet Mail to: aq474%cleveland.freenet@cunyvm or send PRODIGY Mail to:
DFJH48A or send a message via packet to KB8NW @ WA8BXN.OH.USA.NA

/EXIT


----------------------------
Tedd Mirgliotta  KB8NW
InterNet: [e-mail]
Basic Amateur Radio Frequency BBS (BARF-80) +1 216/237-8208
"Totally devoted to Amateur Radio" - 24 Hrs a day 8/N/1 14.4k-300 baud

------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 94 13:07:59 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!hamblin.math.byu.edu!yvax.byu.edu!cunyvm!rohvm1![e-mail]
Subject: Probable demise of the online repeater directory project
To: [e-mail]

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Todd Jonz) wrote
(quoting me):

>  > I'm an ARRL member, and considering ARRL put a fair amount of effort
>  > into compiling the Repeater Directory, I'd feel they weren't using
>  > my money wisely if they did _not_ enforce their copyright to the
>  > Directory.
>
> I'm an ARRL member, too, but I couldn't disagree more with John's opinion on
> this issue.
>
> The ARRL Repeater Directory is a wonderfully handy little publication, and at
> six bucks a pop it's also one of the best deals around.   But for all its
> utility
> the Directory suffers from the same limitations as any hardcopy publication.
>
> While I certainly recognize the ARRL's right and obligation to protect its
> commercial interests, its primary purpose is supposed to be furthering the art
> and practice of amateur radio.  When these two objectives come into conflict I
> for one expect it League to support the latter objective without even a moment
> of hesitation.  The day the League's fiscal interests take priority over the
> best interests of amateur radio is the day my membership terminates.
>
> And just for the record, I'd *still* buy my three annual copies of the
> Directory even if an online database were available.
>

Me, too.  I'm not saying we don't _need_ an on-line repeater directory; I
think one would be great.  And I'm not even saying that nobody should
compete with the ARRL on a hard-copy directory.  All I was pointing out is
that copyright law says that your compilation of facts, and its particular
presentation, is _yours_, and nobody is supposed to rip it off.  Anybody
who wants to compile a list of repeaters and publish it, electronically or
otherwise, in their _own format_, is free to do so, and I'd probably buy
their product.

--
73  de  John Taylor   W3ZID     |To paraphrase Richard Nixon:  I am _not_
an
[e-mail]      | attorney.

------------------------------

Date: 4 Mar 94 15:04:28 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: tax exempt 501 (c) status
To: [e-mail]

I remember that when our club attorney reviewed this question for the
local club here, that a radio or hobby type club, even though not for
profit is not tax exempt per the IRS definition. If the club has a
seperate activity, e.g. a scholarship fund, or a purely charitible
function separate from the regular radio club activities, this would
qualify, but I would have an attorney structure the corporation to
permit this seperate activity. A radio "club" that is incorporated has
to file a report with the IRS if income is even zero if more than a
certain $$ amount is handled in the club treasury, even if the net
club profit is zero. Also when it comes to getting a cheaper rate at
the PO for newsletters etc., only IRS defined 501 C3 (charitable
organizations e.g. churches, temples, religious organizations, red cross
disaster relief etc.) are eligible. A radio "club" per se is treated
as a 501 C7 generally, and even though it is non profit, it is
considered a "social club" and not in the charitable class. An example
is the ARRL. They are probably a 501C7 however, if they have a schlor-
ship fund that is administered and seperated legally it could get
501c3 status, but only for activity and expenses asssociated with that
activity.



Seth KC2WE

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 22:30:28 GMT
From: news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!library.ucla.edu!news.ucdavis.edu!chip.ucdavis.edu![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <rohvm1.mah48d-010394075503@136.141.220.39>, <[e-mail]>, <Anthony_Pelliccio-030394142257@138.16.64.49>
Subject : Re: The ARRL is a business (was "Re: ARRL--->Online Repeater directory")

Tony Pelliccio ([e-mail]) wrote:

: It is profitable for the executives of the corporation. That's right, why
: do you think some of these guys have made a career out of the ARRL? Not
: because of their love of amateur radio but because of their love of power
: and money. Very simple.
This should be easy to clear up immediately. Ed pleae post the salaries
of the ARRL execs. I believe this is public information due to the
non-profit status of the League.  DO you really think that someone who
doesn't love amateur radio really wants 'power' over a bunch of
techno-weenies like us?

: Actually you're pretty much correct but you can roll some of your
: non-profit dollars into other tax periods.
Yep, just can't distribute 'em to the club members.

cheers,
Dan
--
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Daniel D. Todd      Packet: KC6UUD@KE6LW.#nocal.ca.usa              *
*                   Internet: [e-mail]                      *
*                 Snail Mail: 1750 Hanover #102                       *
*                             Davis CA 95616                          *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*
*  All opinions expressed herein are completely ficticious any        *
*  resemblence to actual opinions of persons living or dead is        *
*  completely coincidental.                                           *
*---------------------------------------------------------------------*


------------------------------

Date: Thu, 3 Mar 94 21:11:05 GMT
From: news.acns.nwu.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!alberta!adec23![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <rohvm1.mah48d-220294100035@136.141.220.39>tp.cs.ub
Subject : Re: Probable demise of the online repeater directory project

[e-mail] (John E. Taylor III) writes:

>You should check with a lawyer on this, but it's my understanding that if
>you do the basic research to compile all the data _yourself_, and choose a
>format that is dissimilar to the existing, copyrighted work, you probably
>don't infringe it.

Why must he do it himself? If he gets submissions from every user on the
network indicating independant repeater status, even if it is in the same
format, he is not violating any copyright. The repeater directory, like the
phone book and the call book, are simply compilations of data.

Why must he hire a lawyer?

If he (or a submitter) used the ARRL repeater directory to generate the
data, then the ARRL can be miffed if it wants. However, the Repeater Project
that was being collected was intended to be an independantly generated
document.

Explain to me why CallBook Enterprises is not suing Devon (for maintaining the
buffalo.edu archive) or Fred (over his work in the QRZ CDROM)? ...

Ciao -- 73 de VE6MGS/Mark -sk-

------------------------------

Date: 28 Feb 94 14:26:40 GMT
From: nprdc!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!swrinde!gatech!wa4mei.ping.com!ke4zv![e-mail]
To: [e-mail]

References <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <2kqtae$[e-mail]>
Reply-To : [e-mail] (Gary Coffman)
Subject : Re: Keyboards at testing sessions

In article <2kqtae$[e-mail]> [e-mail] ([e-mail]) writes:
>It would seem to me that being alowed to use a keyboard doesn't conform
>to the whole reason CW is required.  It is used on an international scale, and
>if you are ever in any type of emergency or spontaneous situation where you
>need to receive code with no keyboard, then you would be worthless.

Well the purpose of the Morse test is to have a pool of trained operators
in case of National Emergency (IE draftee radio operators in case of war).
Since the Army today only trains those radio operators in Morse who will be
doing signals intercept work (IE intelligence gathering), and since the
Army trains these operators to copy by keyboard, it seems to me that keyboard
copying at test sessions would be the preferred mode.

Gary
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV          |    You make it,     | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems |    we break it.     | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way             |    Guaranteed!      | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244     |                     |

------------------------------

End of Info-Hams Digest V94 #236
******************************
******************************