January 2003 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[ARRL-ODV:8318] Re: Please clarify
by Jim Weaver 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Jim, Thanks. I thought it would, but have no background in copyright law. Now, if you need someone other than an actual attorney who has a fair amount of background in product liability/personal injury law . . . 73, Jim Weaver k8je(a)arrl.org

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8317] Re: Draft Board Meeting Minutes
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Absolutely right, Kay. The obvious typos are always the ones that get overlooked. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Craigie, Kay (2nd Vice President) Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 9:42 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8300] Re: Draft Board Meeting Minutes I believe Minute 1should say, "met in annual session," rather than "met in second session." 73 - Kay WT3P

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8316] Re: Draft Board Meeting Minutes
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Of course, Art. Arline Bender, too. We'll fix. 73, Dave -----Original Message----- From: Goddard, Art (Vice Dir, SW) Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 8:40 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8306] Re: Draft Board Meeting Minutes Would it be appropriate to list Bob White, W1CW, in minute 2? Art ----- Original Message ----- From: Sumner, Dave, <mailto:dsumner@arrl.org> K1ZZ To: arrl-odv <mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:29 PM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8299] Draft Board Meeting Minutes Here are draft Board Meeting minutes for your review and comment. Take your time; I will be in Washington tomorrow and will finalize the minutes first thing Monday morning. Dave Patton had the first draft completed on Monday. Other things got in the way of my review of his draft until today. Thanks for your patience. 73, Dave K1ZZ <<2003 Annual Meeting of the ARRL.doc>>

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8314] Re: Please clarify
by W3KD＠aol.com 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

In a message dated 1/26/2003 11:46:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, K8JE(a)ARRL.org writes: > > I clearly understand that Amateur Radio Today should not be broadcast > over commercial outlets whether cable (including "city/community > channels") or the like; however, do closed circuit student TV "stations" > in grade and high schools (not broadcast over commercial or > non-commercial channels of commercial outlets) fall under the same > caveat? > Greetings, Jim. Let me weigh in with a response here, for what it is worth; school transmissions on non-commercial, non-broadcast outlets such as ITFS and school video distribution systems would not constitute broadcasting in the general sense of the term, and you are referring to a strictly educational use, which is one of the main purposes of the Cronkite video. So, I would suggest that you go ahead. Chris

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8313] Re: Please clarify
by W5JBP＠aol.com 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

In a message dated 01/26/2003 10:46:19 PM Central Standard Time, K8JE(a)ARRL.org writes: > however, do closed circuit student TV "stations" > in grade and high schools (not broadcast over commercial or > non-commercial channels of commercial outlets) fall under the same > caveat? > Jim this would be fine. No problem. Jim Haynie

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8312] Please clarify
by Jim Weaver 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

President Haynie and others who know more about the legal convolutions of copyrighted materials that do I, I clearly understand that Amateur Radio Today should not be broadcast over commercial outlets whether cable (including "city/community channels") or the like; however, do closed circuit student TV "stations" in grade and high schools (not broadcast over commercial or non-commercial channels of commercial outlets) fall under the same caveat? Thanks to whoever provides the legal skinny on this situation. 73 Jim Weaver, K8JE k8je(a)arrl.org

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8311] Trip Report, Jan 24 Washington meetings on 7 MHz
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Chris Imlay and I had a fairly productive day in Washington Friday although we didn’t come away with any guarantees. I put together several folders of material for our meetings, each consisting of: * a one-page briefing memo; * the IARU four-color booklet describing amateur spectrum requirements at 7 MHz; * excerpts from a 1995 NTIA spectrum requirements document acknowledging our 300-kHz worldwide requirement at 7 MHz and noting that it was consistent with U.S. proposals for WARC-92; * bar graph showing the increase in U.S. amateurs licensed to transmit on 40 meters from 1979 to 1992 to 2002, with a projection of a further dramatic increase before 2007, the probable implementation date of WRC-03 reallocations (the dramatic increase comes from the likelihood of a codeless HF license); * my analysis of the use of 7300-7600 kHz already being made by broadcasters, which concludes that the spectrum is already not very useful for fixed and mobile operations; * the FCC WRC Advisory Committee’s draft proposal, which conforms to Method A from the CPM Report; * the Draft Inter American Proposal that was introduced by Canada and is supported by the Dominican Republic and Argentina, and for which additional support will be sought at the CITEL PCC.II meeting in Orlando by the IARU Region 2 representatives, which is similar to Method D from the CPM Report; * the NTIA memo to the FCC advising of the NTIA’s objection to a proposal for this agenda item; * the Amateur Radio Today CD-ROM Our first meeting was with Bryan Tramont, FCC Chairman Powell's Senior Legal Advisor, who handles wireless and international issues for the Chairman. This was a fairly easy meeting, in part because we were there to ask the FCC to keep doing what it’s doing and in part because Bryan is such a quick study. He read the briefing memo, asked a few good questions, and asked us to let him know how the meeting with Nancy Victory went. We left feeling that we had an ally. Our luncheon with Frank Williams of the Department of State was cancelled because Frank had a snow emergency in his neighborhood that kept him home. (Frank is N4FK and is one of the four people who came up with the plan for the 10, 18 and 24 MHz bands back in 1974, when he was with the FCC.) Frank kindly fed me some ideas by telephone. With our luncheon plans cancelled, Chris and I called John Chwat and John invited us to come down to his office in Alexandria. I had not seen his new office, so I was glad to have the opportunity. Derek Riker joined the three of us for lunch and we discussed strategy on 7 MHz as well as on the reintroduction of our legislation in the 108th Congress. John discouraged us from pursuing Congressional or White House pressure on the 7-MHz issue at this point because in his view there was a high risk that this would cause NTIA to solidify its position. With regard to our legislation, Derek reported that the spectrum protection legislation is ready to be reintroduced in the House and Senate. He and John recommend that this be done in the next couple of weeks. The CC&R legislation is a bit trickier because of politics. Our original sponsor, Steve Israel, is in a district that was targeted by the Republicans last election. He won re-election, but the word is out from the Republican leadership that Republicans aren’t supposed to do anything that might help him in the future. This is complicating the question of who should reintroduce the legislation. There’s more work to do on this and Derek and John are now thinking in terms of a March introduction. On the bright side, they have a good lead on a possible Senate sponsor and it may be possible to arrange a coordinated introduction in the House and Senate at the same time. After lunch Chris and I headed to the Department of Commerce. On our way into the building (through the tunnel under 14th Street that connects it to the Reagan Building across the street) we ran into Jim Vorhies, who was on his way to grab a cup of coffee before the meeting. (We’ve known Jim a long time; he is an NTIA veteran with prior FCC experience.) We knew he was involved in the issue but didn’t know he would be at the meeting until then. Chris and I went ahead since we had to clear security and wait for an escort to Assistant Commerce Secretary Nancy Victory’s office (she is NTIA Administrator); this took so long that we arrived at about the same time as Jim despite the fact that her office is at the farthest corner of the huge Hoover Building and that Jim uses crutches to walk. We still had a few minutes to wait before she was ready for us, though. A few minutes after we got started Deputy Assistant Secretary Michael Gallagher joined us. Following our presentation most of Assistant Secretary Victory’s questions were directed to Jim. She was trying to get a clear statement of the nature of the agencies’ objections, which was a difficult question for Jim to answer because he knows as well as we do that the real problem is that they haven’t taken the time to study what their real requirements are and whether they could be reaccommodated elsewhere. (The agencies don’t appear to have given the matter much attention until June 2002, two years after the item was put on the WRC-03 agenda.) Again, Chris and I felt that we had a friendly audience – Nancy described how her 4th grade teacher, Mr. Kelly, had brought his ham rig into the classroom and Mike studied the IARU booklet quite carefully. He congratulated us on having such a large percentage of the amateur licensees as members; he said they seldom see an association that represents "nearly a quarter" of the potential number. Jim told her (and us) that the final decision is scheduled to be made in March. (This is consistent with word we have received separately from the Department of Defense, where there is a lot of activity on the issue.) The first set of U.S. proposals is slated to be submitted to the ITU on or shortly after February 7, but additional proposals can be submitted up to the opening of the conference. Jim Vorhies said the agencies were viewing the 7 MHz agenda item, 1.23, as being linked to 1.36, which is to examine the adequacy of broadcasting allocations between 4 and 10 MHz. I have mentioned in QST editorials that this agenda item was going to cause us trouble; HF fixed and mobile users are reluctant to agree to relinquishing anything at 7 MHz when they may face additional pressure elsewhere in the 4-10 MHz region. Aside from that it appears that our principal problems are the Department of Justice and the Coast Guard; I will discuss with Paul Rinaldo whether it would be desirable to try to schedule meetings there. We will also consider whether additional FCC visits would be helpful in solidifying our support. Chris is drafting followup letters to those we met with. The briefing memo is attached for your information. David Sumner, K1ZZ

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8310] New video
by Jim Weaver 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

I just returned from a nice, but rather small hamfest in New Philadelphia, Ohio. Driving to it was fine, but the 3+ inches of snow that fell over night messed up the Interstates as well as their attendance. But, this is not why I'm writing . . . I picked up a 13" TV/VCR player and used the new video (Dick Mondro had grabbed a VHS as well as disc format of it for me). It was very well received. I believe, that it and turning myself into a modified Jim Haynie (salesman, this is) resulted in at least 3 of the new memberships the club received during the show. The member-viewers went away with chests puffed out. Next step: Get it put onto a continuous loop so no one needs to restart it playing every few minutes. For the foreseeable future, the video and player will go with me whenever I staff a League table. Anyone know where I can get a decent quality projector to go with my laptop for about $300 to play it at meetings? HI! I understand we will have a heat waver in a week. Daily high temperatures up to around the 40s rather than the teens. 73, Jim Weaver k8je(a)arrl.org

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8309] Re: Draft Board Meeting Minutes
by R. B. Vallio 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

Draft Board Meeting MinutesYES, it would be appropriate to list W1CW! Bob -- W6RGG ----- Original Message ----- From: Art Goddard To: arrl-odv Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 5:39 PM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8306] Re: Draft Board Meeting Minutes Would it be appropriate to list Bob White, W1CW, in minute 2? Art ----- Original Message ----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ To: arrl-odv Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:29 PM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8299] Draft Board Meeting Minutes Here are draft Board Meeting minutes for your review and comment. Take your time; I will be in Washington tomorrow and will finalize the minutes first thing Monday morning. Dave Patton had the first draft completed on Monday. Other things got in the way of my review of his draft until today. Thanks for your patience. 73, Dave K1ZZ <<2003 Annual Meeting of the ARRL.doc>>

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8308] Fwd: [bod] ARRL's Comments to FCC in support of AMSAT's Petition
by W3KD＠aol.com 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

The following was received from Robin Haighton, President of AMSAT, relative to ARRL's support of the AMSAT petition seeking relief from the 27-month advance notification procedure for amateur space operation. AMSAT and ARRL have worked together on a cooperative basis for a long time. 73, Chris W3KD > Hi Chris, > I would like to thank ARRL, through you, for support of AMSAT's position > on > the > 27 month issue. > While reading your submission to the FCC, I was impressed with the clarity > of > the document that you had developed in support of our position. > Thank you again, it is wonderful to have such friends and colleagues in > Amateur Radio. > > 73 > Robin Haighton VE3FRH > President AMSAT >

1 0