Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Deeper story on FCC versus open source SDR

[zuzu (sean)]

forgive my ignorance if this has already been discussed, but how much  
overlap of communication is actually occurring here (among the  
GNUradio / software defined radio / cognitive radio scene) with the  
Open Spectrum movement vis-a-vis Larry Lessig, David P. Reed, et. al.?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_spectrum
http://www.greaterdemocracy.org/framing_openspectrum.html
http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2003/03/12/spectrum/index.html
http://www.reed.com/dprframeweb/dprframe.asp?section=openspec
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/003708.shtml

On 7/26/07, Philip Balister <address@hidden> wrote:
> Some more takes on the FCC position.
>
> My favorite is the second. The line "The Software Defined Radio (SDR)
> Forum politely responded that the FCC did not know what it was doing
> and asked it to get a clue." amuses me.
>
> http://internetcommunications.tmcnet.com/topics/enterprise/ 
articles/8305-sflc-releases-white-paper-fcc-rules-software-defined.htm
> http://reclaimthemedia.org/legislation_and_regulation/ 
fcc_doesnt_know_what_its_talki=5340
> http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/communications/0%2c39044192% 
2c62028023%2c00.htm
>
> Philip
>
> On 7/26/07, David Young <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 04:05:07PM -0700, John Clark wrote:
> > > , but because of the FCC's paranoia (and other regulatory  
agencies
> > > around the world...),
> >
> > John,
> >
> > Does any written statement from the FCC give credence to the  
"regulatory
> > excuse" for keeping the Atheros HAL closed?  Atheros cites the  
FCC's
> > SDR NPRM, which doesn't really apply.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > --
> > David Young             OJC Technologies
> > address@hidden      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part