Xref: utzoo news.sysadmin:2099 news.admin:4566
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!killer!dcs!wnp
From: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.admin
Subject: Re: Alternate methods?
Summary: HAM not a viable alternative to phone in Europe
Message-ID: <312@dcs.UUCP>
Date: 27 Jan 89 06:33:23 GMT
References: <1219@altger.UUCP> <361@skep2.ATT.COM> <1236@altger.UUCP> <102@i2ack.UUCP> <9198@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <1989Jan23.183420.7803@utzoo.uucp> <64@artsnet.UUCP>
Reply-To: wnp@dcs.UUCP (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: DCS, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 28

In article <64@artsnet.UUCP> gatech!dscatl!artsnet!mgresham (Mark Gresham) writes:
>But I was wondering:
>  Apparantly there are a few newsfeeds around here that are
>transferred via HAM radio.  Is this kind of thing a viable
>alternative vs. the phone lines in Europe?  It seems there
>*should* be some kind of available transmission frequencies that
>could be used, but don't know about the legal aspects re various
>countries.
>  It also might be useful in fairly remote regions of the world,
>too.

The latter -- probably.

The former -- not likely. Don't forget that in Europe the PTTs not
only control the phone companies, but also have the function of the FCC --
they assign and control the use of radio frequencies. They are not likely
to approve use of the essentially free broadcast medium for something that
currently generates revenue for them.

That is also true of modems -- the main reason US modems (even CCITT compatible
modems!) are illegal to use in Europe is that the PTT's expect lots of $$
from manufacturers wanting to market their modems there. Each modem officially
imported and approved is revenue -- every modem imported privately, by
the user, is LOST revenue.
-- 
Wolf N. Paul * 3387 Sam Rayburn Run * Carrollton TX 75007 * (214) 306-9101
UUCP:     killer!dcs!wnp                 ESL: 62832882
DOMAIN:   dcs!wnp@killer.dallas.tx.us    TLX: 910-380-0585 EES PLANO UD