How about this?
All those guys who are operating /3, 4 /5 /6 /etc....
if they come back to their original state feom from the district
where they insist that THEY WERE NOT PORTABLE,
do they have to sign portable.
So, if KI3V/7 didn't sign the /7, but moved (or visited PA) back
he would have to be PA?
Does h this get silly?
73
Dave/KA1NCN
>From georgen@redwood.stortek.com (George Noyes x5698) Wed Nov 17 14:59:47 1993
From: georgen@redwood.stortek.com (George Noyes x5698) (George Noyes x5698)
Subject: signing portable, again
Message-ID: <9311171459.AA18563@redwood.stortek.com>
Hmmmmmm, you know it would be most appropriate if I go back
to visit my parents in New England to sign
portable one, as I truely would be portable.....
in New England.... W1XE/1
73 de George, W1XE (/0) That
's COLORADO!!!! (not connecticut.....)
>From John Dorr K1AR" <p00259@psilink.com Tue Nov 16 22:24:45 1993
From: John Dorr K1AR" <p00259@psilink.com (John Dorr K1AR)
Subject: Bootleg software
Message-ID: <2962573904.0.p00259@psilink.com>
Here's a topic for those of you burned out on contest score
equalization. It probably comes as no surprise that use of stolen
software is a big problem these days. In ham radio circles, it is no
different.
While thinking about this the other day, the thought occurred to me: Do
contest administrators have any responsibility in policing this problem?
Put another way, do you feel that CQ/ARRL/or any other contest sponsor
should accept a log from a proven "unregistered user" or is this outside
the scope of their responsibility?
Technically, this concept is easy to administer with cooperation from
the publishers of programs such as CT/NA/N6TR etc. Having said that, however,
there are several points to consider:
1) Does the contest community even care about the issue?
2) If we do care, what are some possible solutions to eliminate
the problem.
3) If one of the solutions is to "copy protect" future releases,
how do we go after the installed base of pirates? (e.g., peer
pressure, ......)
My feeling is that the publishers of contest logging software work
extremely hard to earn what little they make from their efforts. The
stories of "mass distribution" at club meetings and the like are
troublesome to me. What do you guys think??
73 John, K1AR
>From stevej@pillock.moron.vware.mn.org (Steven Jarosh, KA0VYB) Wed Nov 17
>15:46:44 1993
From: stevej@pillock.moron.vware.mn.org (Steven Jarosh, KA0VYB) (Steven Jarosh,
KA0VYB)
Subject: unsubscribe
Message-ID: <Lo26cc3w164w@pillock.moron.vware.mn.org>
unsubscribe
>From dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com (Dave Curtis) Wed Nov 17 16:54:15 1993
From: dcurtis@mipos2.intel.com (Dave Curtis) (Dave Curtis)
Subject: signing portable
Message-ID: <9311171654.AA01288@climax.intel.com>
When the FCC lets us pick our own callsigns, I want "N"
-Dave ng0x
>From USACLU::MMI"@nmpost.nmp.nokia.com (Marko Myllymaki 450-4020x107 Wed Nov
>17 17:16:47 1993
From: USACLU::MMI"@nmpost.nmp.nokia.com (Marko Myllymaki 450-4020x107 (Marko
Myllymaki 450-4020x107)
Subject: email address change
Message-ID: <931117171647.19a27@nmpost.nmp.nokia.com>
It looks that I no longer have Internet connection through our MOBIRA node,
first went transmitting and now receiving is gone too. Please note my new
address:
mmi@nmoy.nmp.nokia.com
Or You can email to the address this message is sent from but most systems don't
like that address.
Marko ab6nj = oh6do
>From Susan M. King (8-695-3688)" <ku2q@vnet.IBM.COM Wed Nov 17 17:51:01 1993
From: Susan M. King (8-695-3688)" <ku2q@vnet.IBM.COM (Susan M. King
(8-695-3688))
Subject: Piracy
No, the contest administrators should not be responsible for tracking
down and punishing purveyors or users of pirated software.
The world of amateur radio is built on the concept of self-policing
and individual integrity.
Because my own livelihood is based on people's paying for the things
they use, I don't use pirated software. And, I don't want to be a
policeman. The volunteer log checkers have too much to do now; they
can't add another task.
Susan - ku2q
>From raid5!davep@csn.org (Dave Palmer) Wed Nov 17 16:43:29 1993
From: raid5!davep@csn.org (Dave Palmer) (Dave Palmer)
Subject: WYOMING on Phone SS!
Message-ID: <9311171643.AA05629@raid5>
Hi All,
A while back I mentioned I was looking for some low-visual-impact
antenna ideas. Got some good insights from K1VR, N2ALE/6, N4OGW,
WB5VZL, K7GM/4, WA7BNM, K7YNO, and KA9FOX, MANY THANKS!!! I have
read all the antenna books I can get my hands on, but there's nothing
like actual experience...
Among the options I tossed out for consideration were
* get a vertical like an HF6V
* go to quasi-rare section like Wyoming.
Turns out I am now planning BOTH of these, so please look for N6KL
this weekend on the Phone SS from WYOMING! Picked up a used HF6V
Monday, and will cart it plus the IsoLoop to Guernsey, WY (Platt County).
Should be fun!
73, Dave Palmer N6KL (/0 --> /7 ??) davep@arraytech.com
>From Robert A. Wilson" <n6tv@vnet.IBM.COM Wed Nov 17 18:50:10 1993
From: Robert A. Wilson" <n6tv@vnet.IBM.COM (Robert A. Wilson)
Subject: dual receive radios
Ref: Note from ERIC.L.SCACE AT adn.sprint.com (attached)
K3NA asked me to forward this to the reflector since his mail transmissions
to the reflector are no longer working:
----------------------------- Note follows ------------------------------
Received: from sprintf.merit.edu by vnet.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP;
Wed, 17 Nov 93 03:33:53 EST
Received: by sprintf.merit.edu (5.64/1123-1.0-X.500)
id AA14684; Wed, 17 Nov 93 03:34:27 -0500
From: ERIC.L.SCACE@adn.sprint.com
Received: by sprint.com (SXG 7.0a/sprintf2.0) with X.400
id 00guS8Gua001; 17 Nov 93 08:34:07 UT
P1-Message-Id: US*TELEMAIL;GGJD-5729-3929/27
To: cq-contest@TGV.COM
Cc: n6tv@vnet.IBM.COM
Subject: RE: dual receive radios
<"GGJD-5729-3929/27"*/PN=ERIC.L.SCACE/O=ADN/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com>
Bob -- K5ZD said "stick with two radios". I agreed with this recommendation.
Besides being less expensive, you also get the advantage of "complete
redundancy"; i.e., if a radio fails, you are not completely out of the
game. In contrast, if you lose a power supply or another common element
in one of the FT-1000-type radios, you are completely off the air.
Another complication is in the computer contesting software. So far neither
CT nor NA seem to have come up with any solution for running more than one
radio unless you buy two computers (and two DVPs) and fidget with two key-
boards on the desktop. While this again has the advantage of redundancy
and protection against failures, it raises the costs (again).
-- Eric K3NA
>From Jim Hollenback <jholly@hposl42.cup.hp.com> Wed Nov 17 18:57:40 1993
From: Jim Hollenback <jholly@hposl42.cup.hp.com> (Jim Hollenback)
Subject: bootleg software
Message-ID: <9311171857.AA19912@hposl42.cup.hp.com>
>
> Here's a topic for those of you burned out on contest score
> equalization. It probably comes as no surprise that use of stolen
> software is a big problem these days. In ham radio circles, it is no
> different.
probably worse
>
> While thinking about this the other day, the thought occurred to me: Do
> contest administrators have any responsibility in policing this problem?
> Put another way, do you feel that CQ/ARRL/or any other contest sponsor
> should accept a log from a proven "unregistered user" or is this outside
> the scope of their responsibility?
perhaps, perhaps not. One big question, would they accept such responsibility?
Anothere question, can or would the authors of the software start version
stamping the printouts? Or better yet, start stamping the software as being
registered to <insert call sign>. I think this would be needed.
>
> Technically, this concept is easy to administer with cooperation from
> the publishers of programs such as CT/NA/N6TR etc. Having said that, however,
> there are several points to consider:
>
> 1) Does the contest community even care about the issue?
I care. I think the people that develop this software should receive the
monitary benifit. The prices charged are really not out of line for
service rendered. Actually the prices are dirt cheap.
> 2) If we do care, what are some possible solutions to eliminate
> the problem.
> 3) If one of the solutions is to "copy protect" future releases,
> how do we go after the installed base of pirates? (e.g., peer
> pressure, ......)
No copy protection! NO,please! virus protection is nearly impossible with the
"key" approach. that was the reason I buy W7EL's product instead of K6STI's.
>
> My feeling is that the publishers of contest logging software work
> extremely hard to earn what little they make from their efforts. The
> stories of "mass distribution" at club meetings and the like are
> troublesome to me. What do you guys think??
I think it is wrong to distribute like this. If this happens, and can be
verified reliabily, perhaps all computer logs from this club should be
disqualified...for a long time.
One question, because I have not read the license that closely, but if I
sell or give away a down version, would that person that recieves it a
be a pirate? What if a spouse buys a version for a gift? does that make the
recipient a pirate? There are some very old versions of CT floating around
on BBS's and ftp sites...a shareware version. Would these come under
the pirate clause?
Maybe a good start is a statement on the summary sheet that the software
used was a legal copy, much like the "I obeyed the license rules" statement.
But yes, John, I think it is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Jim, WA6SDM
jholly@cup.hp.com
End of returned message
>From jembry@monitor.win.net (Jeff Embry) Wed Nov 17 14:09:26 1993
From: jembry@monitor.win.net (Jeff Embry) (Jeff Embry)
Subject: Pirated Software
Message-ID: <27@monitor.win.net>
Hi Folks,
While thinking about this the other day, the thought occurred to me: Do
contest administrators have any responsibility in policing this problem?
Put another way, do you feel that CQ/ARRL/or any other contest sponsor
should accept a log from a proven "unregistered user" or is this outside
the scope of their responsibility?
John,
I feel that the contest sponsors should stick with the
administration aspects of the contest. Taking care of a major
contest is quite a job in inself without the extra burden of
worrying about if the software is legal or not. By and large I
feel the the amateur community is a pretty honest bunch of people
-- or at least I would like to think so. It should be the
responsibility of the end user to make sure that everything on his
computer is legal. As a Systems Analyst for Naval Media Center in
Washington, DC, when a person sign for his computer there is a
clause on the document stating that he is responsible for the
software on his machine. We have had a couple of people to try and
use pirated software on these machines (because they prefer it over
our standard) and they have been punished. It was their
responsibilty, not the administrators'. I have been a registered
user of CT and NA for a couple of years. I even register shareware
if I use it frequently. I feel that a lot of effort has gone into
the thought and development of software and should be rewarded if
requested.
Technically, this concept is easy to administer with cooperation
from the publishers of programs such as CT/NA/N6TR etc. Having said
that, however, there are several points to consider:
1) Does the contest community even care about the issue?
I care.
2) If we do care, what are some possible solutions to eliminate
the problem.
How about the developers offering club discounts on the
purchase/upgrade of the software if purchased in bulk. If
a ham sees a good deal being offered he is more likely to
take it.
3) If one of the solutions is to "copy protect" future releases,
how do we go after the installed base of pirates? (e.g., peer
pressure, ......)
My feeling is that the publishers of contest logging software work
extremely hard to earn what little they make from their efforts. The
stories of "mass distribution" at club meetings and the like are
troublesome to me. What do you guys think??
Mega-dittos
Just my $.02 worth.
--
Jeff Embry (WI2T) Internet: jembry@monitor.win.net
8550 Welbeck Way MILNET: embry@nbs-onet.navy.mil
Gaithersburg, MD 20879
>From David Robbins (KY1H) 413-494-6955(w) 413-655-2714(h)
><robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com> Wed Nov 17 19:27:09 1993
From: David Robbins (KY1H) 413-494-6955(w) 413-655-2714(h)
<robbins@guid2.dnet.ge.com> (David Robbins 413-494-6955 413-655-2714 (KY1H w h))
Subject: portable in peru
Message-ID: <9311171922.AA23210@thomas.ge.com>
at least once a contest we are asked what country we are in. the stock answer
has become 'peru', that really gets the pileup confused! maybe all of us with
'strange' prefixes should have to sign /w1, /w2, /w3, etc so that everyone
will know for sure where we are.
73, dave. ky1h from Peru, Ma.. yes thats Massachussettes, not Maine!
>From Ed Stratton 5637 <EStratto@chipcom.com> Wed Nov 17
>23:03:00 1993
From: Ed Stratton 5637 <EStratto@chipcom.com> (Ed Stratton 5637)
Subject: call districts
Message-ID: <2CEAADC9@msmailer>
Well I will add my comments to some of the discussion going on with this
topic.
I moved to New England from the 8th call area, WV. in 1980. I have held the
call AD8V since 78.
I did not change my call because of some inactivity until Sept. 90, when I
was able to purchase a house.
First the FCC does not require me to sign /1. This rule requirement was
dropped several years ago. Therefore I have never signed /1! I have always
signed AD8V, in normal operations, contests, and chasing DX. That means if a
DX station is going by the numbers, I call with the 8th area. I recently
thought about applying for a change of calls for a 1 district call. I even
had the 610 form all filled out and ready to send to Gettysburg, and at the
time, I would have recieved another 2x1 call in the 1 district.
My reasoning for deciding not to change are the following.
In making this decision, I weighed the following. First I always call with
the 8th area, regardless of where the end station is located in the world.
At times I feel that I may have an advantage over the real 8th district
going into Europe, Africa and the Middle East. However I do have an
disadvantage going to PAC-RIM, FAR EAST and long paths contacts going WEST.
So I feel that the pluses and disadvantages equal out in the scheme of
things. Note, going WEST I always call with the 8th district. Also I never
sign AD8V in Massachusetts and call with the rest of the 1 districts.
I can sympathize with all those that have moved from the east to the west,
or relocated significantly out of the regionalize propagation zone.
Everyone has the chance to change their call to match the call district
area. So there should be no complaints of unfairness when signing with the
original call and not a /# district. Each amateur makes their own decision
on this. It would again be much clearer if the FCC reinstated the rule that
all fixed permanent calls be identified with /#, or change the call to the
appropriate new call district. This would eliminate all inconsistency and
complaints about the unfair operating tactics that some have complained
about. And also eliminate complaints about DXpedition operations, when going
by the numbers.
In short when will I change to a W1 call.
When the FCC changes the regulation that requires proper district
identification. Or when the FCC allows me to pay for a specific 2x1 or 1x2,
1 district calls sign. Each of us should use letters to our political reps
to make this happen, all the AM,FM,TV stations have this pay for option, why
not amateurs. And the ARRL and other amateur organizations should pull
together to make this a reality in the next year. (Look at the in-fighting
now for Clubs call sign assignments, as an example of such in-fighting!)
Ridiculous, uh?
In short, I will always call the 8th district, and let the propagation gods
do the rest to get my signal there. I also will never sign /1.
73s & DX
Ed
AD8V not /1
>From rmarosko@bcm.tmc.edu (Ron Marosko) Wed Nov 17 13:56:25 1993
From: rmarosko@bcm.tmc.edu (Ron Marosko) (Ron Marosko)
Subject: Bootleg software
Message-ID: <rmarosko.119.000DF12E@bcm.tmc.edu>
In article "John Dorr K1AR" <p00259@psilink.com> writes:
>While thinking about this the other day, the thought occurred to me: Do
>contest administrators have any responsibility in policing this problem?
>Put another way, do you feel that CQ/ARRL/or any other contest sponsor
>should accept a log from a proven "unregistered user" or is this outside
>the scope of their responsibility?
Let's take a hypothetical situation. KX5XXX uses an illegal copy of CT or NA
during SS-Phone for logging. After the contest, he submits his log text file
through the internet to contest@arrl.org. Has KX5XXX sent anything illegal to
ARRL? No, he's sending a plain ASCII text file of his own creation. Now, if
KX5XXX were to UUENCODE a ZIP file of his entire CT or NA directory and send
that to ARRL, then yes, he's participated in sending copyrighted data to a
remote location. Trafficking software illegally.
Should ARRL refuse KX5XXX's log because it was created on an illegal copy of
CT or NA? First, how can they be totally sure that illegal software was used?
Second, they don't have any legal authority to enforce copyright laws. If they
were totally sure that illegal software was used to create the log file, they
could possibly be opening themselves up for legal action by KX5XXX if they
refused the log submission. The only recourse ARRL would have would be to
notify the software author/publisher and let *them* take whatever legal action
necessary against KX5XXX.
I see similar situations in the FidoNet BBS community, as well as on my own
BBS quite often. The only difference on BBSes, however, is that instead of
sending some data file created by the illegal copy of software, the illegal
copy itself is sent. For system operators who don't keep a tight rein on
their system, they themselves could unwillingly be drawn into any legal action
undertaken by the software publisher, as they are serving as a traffic point
for that illegal copy of software.
What can I, the Sysop, do in a case like that? If someone uploads an illegal
copy of software to my BBS, my legal recourse is limited. I can delete the
file and terminate the user's access, and if I'm feeling particularly nasty, I
could submit the user's name and personal data, and log files of the user's
transgressions to the software publisher, and let THEM take whatever legal
action. However, if someone uploads a plain vanilla text file, I have no 100%
foolproof way of knowing that it was created with an illegal copy of software,
and therefore have no legal right to refuse it's submission on the basis of
that fact alone. I do, of course, have other rights to refuse submission, but
that isn't one of them.
Interesting concept either way. Might we see K8CC and K1EA start including key
encryption in the ASCII log files their programs create? How would contest
sponsors handle going to the detail of validating whether or not a log
submission was created by an illegal software copy? Who would be responsible
for the reimbursement of man-hours spent doing this validation?
This should make for some activity on the reflector. <grin>
Vy 73,
Ron KB5NFN
Sysop @ Pegasus (The official Texas DX Society BBS) (Fido 1:106/9636)
USR 16.8k HST/19.2k V.32ter - 713-777-0821
#include <std.disclaimer.h>
As usual, the views expressed here do not represent the views of
the BCM management, staff, or any living person.
+-------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Ron Marosko | AKA Striker on several MU*s. |
| The Computing Resource Center | Ex-God of TinyHorns MUSH |
| Baylor College of Medicine | Retired Admiral Striker of the |
| rmarosko@bcm.tmc.edu | original NetTrek server at |
| kb5nfn@amsat.org | foghorn.cc.utexas.edu |
+-------------------------------+--------------------------------+
>From tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) Wed Nov 17 19:24:13 1993
From: tree@cmicro.com (Larry Tyree) (Larry Tyree)
Subject: Three things
Message-ID: <9311171924.AA23489@cmicro.com>
1. Vote for your favorite date for the next SprINT. Either Dec 26 or Jan 2.
I think we will start it an hour earlier.
2. I sometimes sign portable 7 and sometimes not. Wish the FCC would let me
become N7TR.
3. I will be radio active from TI1C starting Tuesday next week until the
end of the CQ WW CW contest. Lots of precontest CW activity planned on the
low bands and the goal is to work zero SSB QSOs during my trip. QSL to N6TR.
Tree N6TR
>From Chris Gay" <KU4A@LEXVMK.VNET.IBM.COM Wed Nov 17 20:50:46 1993
From: Chris Gay" <KU4A@LEXVMK.VNET.IBM.COM (Chris Gay)
Subject: Bootleg software
> While thinking about this the other day, the thought occurred to me:
> Do contest administrators have any responsibility in policing this
> problem? Put another way, do you feel that CQ/ARRL/or any other
> contest sponsor should accept a log from a proven "unregistered user"
> or is this outside the scope of their responsibility?
What happens if someone works a contest (and submits a log) with a
stolen rig? Should contest administrators review receipts or other
documentation to verify that you are not using stolen equipment?
Methinks it is indeed outside the scope of their responsibility.
Chris KU4A
>From rmarosko@bcm.tmc.edu (Ron Marosko) Wed Nov 17 15:00:48 1993
From: rmarosko@bcm.tmc.edu (Ron Marosko) (Ron Marosko)
Subject: Problems?
Message-ID: <rmarosko.122.000F03DF@bcm.tmc.edu>
Hmm, I just tried sending a message in reply to K1AR about piracy. Didn't
get reflected, nor did it bounce. Let's see what this one does.
....KB5NFN
#include <std.disclaimer.h>
As usual, the views expressed here do not represent the views of
the BCM management, staff, or any living person.
+-------------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Ron Marosko | AKA Striker on several MU*s. |
| The Computing Resource Center | Ex-God of TinyHorns MUSH |
| Baylor College of Medicine | Retired Admiral Striker of the |
| rmarosko@bcm.tmc.edu | original NetTrek server at |
| kb5nfn@amsat.org | foghorn.cc.utexas.edu |
+-------------------------------+--------------------------------+
|