Slashdot Mirror
France Says D-Star Ham Radio Mode Is Illegal
gyrogeerloose writes "Citing 'national security concerns,' the French Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes (ARCEP, France's equivalent of the US's FCC) has ruled that D-Star, an amateur radio digital signal mode used world-wide, is illegal because it could allow operators to connect to the Internet.The ARCEP also cites alleged concerns regarding cryptography and national security as well as the use of a proprietary codec. While it's true that the D-Star codec is proprietary, its owner has openly licensed it (for a fee, of course) to any manufacturer who wants to build it into their equipment. Any licensed amateur radio operator who lives within the EU can sign an online petition protesting this decision."
So how does Winlink 2000, a digital protocol (using a patented codec, too, I think) that supplies email service over the amateur shortwave bands, escape notice? It's a lot harder to communicate a significant distance at the VHF and UHF ranges typically used by D-Star than the HF bands used by Winlink systems.
The ways of bureaucracies are often mysterious.
What is the /real/ reason for this law, please, French hams?
"illegal because it could allow operators to connect to the Internet."
Surfing the web is a crime in France?
Tell them it is being used to fix their football program.
I've got nothing good to say about D-Star until the voice CODEC is free-to-use. That's not amateur radio. As it stand now, D-STAR simply means "made by ICOM"...even the Kenwood-badged D-STAR radios are in fact manufactured by ICOM.
de K3XS
-=Maggie Leber=-
Did they just now figure out that IP, and thus the Internet, can be routed over ham radio? Have they never heard of AMPRnet? How about AX.25? I was able to get (very very slow) Internet access back in 1997 with a KPC-3, an old Yaesu HT, and the Linux AX.25 stack.
Methinks some PHB at France Telecom just got wind of it and is throwing a hissy fit.
In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
Wait 'til they find about IP over pigeon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers .
Honey get out the Gordon Ramsay recipes for pigeons shot out of the sky for internet connection violations.
open source sub sim. I might start coding again for this. http://dangerdeep.sourceforge.net/contribute/
"connect to the internet"? jeeze hey France, ever hear of a Rose node or KISS? or any of the hundreds of available(since about 1994) packet radio bbs systems that connect and use the internet at will? How about xxx.ampr.org? For the non hams, that stands for AMateur Packet Radio and when used in AMPRNet it is AMateur Packet Radio Network. Thats ok France, I've been around for years and have well over 200 countries on my list of contacts, I can do without you. Just don't get in the way of my signals with your plea for help next time your in a jam....pun intended.
"Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
The French have basically outlawed something because of interoperability. The D-Star stuff can be networked. They could have simply said "Don't connect it to the Internet" instead of making it illegal to use.
In the US, I would argue that using D-Star on amateur radio is already illegal, under Title 47 part 97(a)(4). Since the codec is proprietary, and documentation on the encoded format is not available, the use of the code is clearly an attempt to obscure the meaning of the communication from anyone that doesn't buy D-Star equipment that contains the proprietary codec.
Eric Smith
N2ES
Sorry, that's Part 97.113(a)(4).
...the French Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques et des Postes...
They had to add in the regular mail, you see, else the acronym could have been "FARCE"...
Using PACTOR III it is possible to (1) connect to the Internet. It is (2) unencrypted and not only (3) proprietary -- it's sole source is SCS. Applying the same logic which prohibits the use of D-Star, PAC III stations should be prohibited too.
French here giving some explanation (all obtained from the document sent by ARCEP. I have no special knowledge on the subject)
In france, you need an authorization from ARCEP to broadcast radio amateur signals.
The article does not says that D-Star is illegal, just that they are not authorizing it on radio amateur.
The reason why they are not authorizing it is that radio amateur can not be connected to any other communication network (By law), except for some temporary pedagical explanation.
In fact radio amateur are design to learn and study about radio signals. Therefore communication over a radio amateur is not permitted.
The bottom line is that this prohibition is only radio amateur signals. If you are licensed, you are not amateur an can do it. If it is not on radio amateur frequencies (such as IP-over-pidgeon or IP-over-yelling as suggested by other slashdotters) then this decision does not apply.
Encryption, per se, is not disallowed. What is prohibited is "messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning." A group of hams setting up a high powered 802.11 AP (which would be illegal for a non-ham to access) might use encryption, not for the purpose of obscuring meaning (it's not being done to hide anything from anyone), but simply for the purpose of restricting access to licensed hams. Likewise, a control link might be encrypted to disallow unauthorized control, not to hide the control operations which are actually being done. That would be perfectly legal, by a plain reading of the regulations. The regulations specifically state that with regard to telecommand of model aircraft, "The control signals are not considered codes or ciphers intended to obscure the meaning of the communication."
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
97.113 Prohibited transmissions. (a) No amateur station shall transmit: (4) Music using a phone emission except as specifically provided elsewhere in this section; communications intended to facilitate a criminal act; messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning, except as otherwise provided herein; obscene or indecent words or language; or false or deceptive messages, signals or identification."
I don't see how this applies to DSTAR. There is nothing implied or explicit in the language above, about encoding communications using proprietary or patented protocols.The language focuses on intent "purpose of obscuring". I interpret this as the difference between compressing and encrypting. If I use G729 to compress voice transmission, it doesn't mean my intent is to obfuscate, but merely improve the efficiency of my communication.
Amateur radio should only use open standards, codecs, and protocols; anything else should not be allowed on the air and people using anything else should lose their license.
There really is no reason to use anything proprietary anyway: the necessary technologies and protocols have been known for a while.
1. Internet, the ARCEP warn the HAM operator about the legislation. If you want to run a public telecommunication service you must conform to the pretty heavy legislation about it and it nearly impossible in the HAM environment. Plus HAM frequency aren't supposed to be connect to an open network for non HAM operator use.
2. Cryptografic & National Security, In fact most french HAM operator i know are pretty free software enthusiast and most of them are again proprietary codec and close standard. We have a large number of guys developing mixed HAM/VOIP service with ASTERISK or other kind of crazy stuff. The ARCEP simply said that in the current state of the D-Star standard, It not possible to the ARCEP and other HAM operator to monitor what's going on the frequency.
3. Patents, The standard is cover by many patent and that could be a problem for equal access and monitoring of the frequencies. In short, the ARCEP is again brand specific frequencies and standards for the HAM.
If you can read the ARCEP response letter, the situation is pretty simple. A guy from the DR@F Digital HAM group asked for a authorization for experimental use of the D-Star frequences bands. The ARCEP gave the authorization for 6 months, they asked for up to 10 members authorization they get it and 6 more months. Then they ask for a France wide general authorization for all registered HAM operator. Then the ARCEP politely explain that clearly out of the experimentation range and that clearly another story. For the ARCEP amateur radio group are suppose to be amateur and can't start negotiation for a national wide deployment in place of the manufacturer or consortium behind the standard or the equipment.
D-Star equipment manufacturer need to get in contact with the ARCEP to clarify some issue, like the patent and the possibility of interconnection with an open network ( internet, phone, etc. ). HAM frequence are suppose to be used only by and for registered HAM operator. You couldn't start your own nation wide pager network using HAM frequency.
This seem pretty reasonable to me.
Bruce Perens, K6BP, proposed replacing the proprietary AMBE codec with a new open codec. David Rowe, VK5DGR, has strted a project to replace the codec, but needs support in order to continue.
Anyone willing to help out or donate?
-molo
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
There is nothing implied or explicit in the language above, about encoding communications using proprietary or patented protocols.The language focuses on intent "purpose of obscuring". I interpret this as the difference between compressing and encrypting.
Arguably, the intent is to obscure the data in such a way that you can only receive it using another proprietary device.
If I use G729 to compress voice transmission, it doesn't mean my intent is to obfuscate, but merely improve the efficiency of my communication.
It's not just your intent that matters. For a company to use a proprietary codec has multiple purposes: one probably is to achieve a given level of voice quality without much effort, another is to gain market share and create barriers to entry.
It's reasonably possible to do what D-STAR does without using proprietary codecs or protocols; therefore, the use should not be permitted.
A body covered by protection make a much better weapon than a bare body. You can pick up greater speed and have a greater shock. Otherwise, when bare, you get the pain yourself inflict without protection. I would wager that the energy involved in helmet+protection is allowed to be much greater, and when that protection fail the danger of greaver wound is probably higher. Maybe somebody with statistic on grevious wound in rugdby vs US football (more like handball) can chime in.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
40bit legilsation was never enforced even by state authority neither the 128bit, they never get an application decree. They are undead law, the law passed trough the chambers but never get used become the government never write an application decree with all the practical implication of the law. In short the law exist but no authority will chase you if you trespass it. It's a weird but common situation.
The situation was clarified in the 2004 law on the digital economy.
The official law text ( gouv.fr = French government )
http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/html/actualite/actualite_legislative/decrets_application/2004-575.htm
Article 30
I. - L'utilisation des moyens de cryptologie est libre.
I. - The use of means of cryptology is free.
II. - La fourniture, le transfert depuis ou vers un Etat membre de la Communauté européenne, l'importation et l'exportation des moyens de cryptologie assurant exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sont libres.
II. - The supply, transfer to or from a member state of the European Community, import and export of means of cryptology carrying out only functions of Authentication or integrity check are free.
III. - La fourniture, le transfert depuis un Etat membre de la Communauté européenne ou l'importation d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sont soumis à une déclaration préalable auprès du Premier ministre, sauf dans les cas prévus au b du présent III. Le fournisseur ou la personne procédant au transfert ou à l'importation tiennent à la disposition du Premier ministre une description des caractéristiques techniques de ce moyen de cryptologie, ainsi que le code source des logiciels utilisés. Un décret en Conseil d'Etat fixe :
III. - The supply, transfer from a Member State of the European Community or importation of an encryption function that does not ensure only authentication or integrity check are subject to prior declaration to the Prime Minister except in cases provided for in this b III. The provider or person making the transfer or importation give to the Prime Minister a description of the technical characteristics of this form of cryptography, and the source code of the software used. Etc.
Care to read the article you link to?
As a ham op, I question any need for digital modulation on the FM repeater bands. Public Safety needs digital because of congestion, and second for security. Hams are not exactly overrunning VHF/UHF bands, and security is a non issue for hams. Digital modes on HF make more sense, as they can work with very weak signal strengths, and they are usually open source. The same reasons don't work with digital VHF, most of which is point to point communications with repeaters mounted on high. I see no need to buy any digital equipment for VHF use. FM works just fine for typical repeater use.
Good for the French! D-star is just another way to exclude everyone who doesn't want to plop down a kilobuck for their radio...much like "private" repeater organizations in the states. Amateur radio should be free and open to everyone, and D-star clearly doesn't fall into this category! 73, KD5SFK
[ACERP] has ruled that D-Star, a amateur radio digital signal mode used world-wide, is illegal because it could allow operators to connect to the Internet.
They've obviously never heard of Packet Radio then, which has been around much longer and enabled digital data packets to be transmitted over any radio link. Hell, it's pretty much how Taxi booking systems and Police response systems work.
Arcep is a public service that does a good job overall. They have been single-handedly (well, pushed by the European Commission) responsible for opening up the local copper loop to competition, and as a result propelling us into the top 5 for broadband speed and availability. At the same time, the Bush FCC, thanks to Verizon-ATT-cable "political contributions", which are but in name only *actual* bribes, made sure no such competition happened in the US.
As an amateur radio operator I've questioned how D-Star could be legal. In a nutshell, D-Star implements a method of encoding radio communications in a way that can also be interpreted as encrypted (ie WEP/wifi on steroids). Since the FCC and the ITU (international telecommunications union) dictate that "no encryption or other privacy techniques may be used".
... except D-Star.
Since there is a proprietary chip made by a single manufacturer and a fee must be paid for the use then this would seem to violate the above rule. Every other digital and analog mode of communication is defined to the extent that an amateur radio operator could construct hardware to send, receive, encode, and decode the information
However, the French couldn't see the big oak in front of them, they had to decide that their big brother authority is threatened.