<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16788" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY text=#000000 bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>There has been a ton of discussion on this, and all
sorts of suggestions ranging from attempts to block it in the network to
directly confronting the driver or interfering with his gear.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First - has anyone laid eyes on the vehicle?
Do we know what trucking COMPANY it is? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Second - it seems that there are more than one ETI
unit? If so, has anyone laid eyes on the second (third,
etc.)?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It sounds great to go straight to the FCC, and if
that is the goal then visual confirmation (if possible, photos along with a
photo of a GPS showing that you are right next to their position and an APRS log
showing their position report) would go a long way to getting them to work on
it. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>However, is going straight to the FCC the best way
to handle this? Tattling to the teacher can sometimes be effective, but
sometimes it backfires. I had the chance to talk with Riley Hollingsworth
a few years back, and he felt that hams could solve a lot of issues themselves
without involving the FCC. Sometimes, we also need to take a step back and
take another look at the situation - is it really worth the
hassle? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Granted this appears that it might be a commercial
endeavor trying to use amateur frequencies. That IS a violation. But
consider this.... </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>What about talking to the COMPANY after we have
confirmation of what is going on? Not confronting the driver, but a
verified communication with the company? They do bear significant
financial risk if the FCC does take action. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'd be willing to bet that the honchos at the
company don't even know what's up. I wouldn't put it past some
honcho to tell their IT folks "Find us a cheap way to track our
vehicles". Someone doing a search on vehicle tracking would surely have
found APRS information. They would realize that they could buy a radio,
GPS, and TNC (or something like a TinyTrack, etc.) and do it for free after the
cost of the initial equipment. It would be very easy to ignore
the fact that an FCC Amateur Radio Operators License is
required. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Free is a very good price, and would impress their
superiors. So they go and do it, get praises from their superiors (or at
least don't get chastised over the price), and no one really knows what's up
except for the guy that set it up, and he may not really understand (or
care). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Going to the FCC with clear proof will give them
what they will need to go on, and they do have vans that can track things down
at the local level. But perhaps contact with an executive at the company -
using a simply advisory tone - letting them know that it seems that an employee
using company property is engaged in an activity that could expose them to
liability - would be more effective and would keep the FCC from hearing yet
another complaint from those "hams". </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Just a thought. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=vk4tec@tech-software.net href="mailto:vk4tec@tech-software.net">Andrew
Rich</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=jdv@iglou.com
href="mailto:jdv@iglou.com">jdv@iglou.com</A> ; <A title=aprssig@tapr.org
href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">TAPR APRS Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, January 06, 2009 2:27 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [aprssig] Another Bootlegger?</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Can you just go and find him</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jdv@iglou.com href="mailto:jdv@iglou.com">John Vause</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=aprssig@tapr.org
href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">TAPR APRS Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 07, 2009 1:54
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [aprssig] Another
Bootlegger?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Ok, here's a suggestion from a "no code tech":<BR>How about the
Igate sysops (in the area where ETI-1 is transmitting RF if nowhere else) put
ETI-* in their exclude lists (or suplists) depending on IGATE
software/hardware. Block his packets from being<BR>transmitted to the
Internet.<BR>If the bootlegger's packets don't make it to the APRS IS
then what good is his tracking hardware?<BR>If this guy IS legal then he'll
soon be asking why his tactical call is not making it to the APRS
IS.<BR><BR>Beats some of the other suggestions I've read here including
injecting bogus positions into the APRS IS.<BR><BR><BR>Daron Wilson wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:00e101c96f73$80023400$80069c00$@org type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><PRE wrap="">Whatever happened to the good old days, when you just pinned their coax and
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap=""><!---->smoked their finals?
Those folks sold their CB's and got no code tech licenses I think...
_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</A>
</PRE><PRE wrap=""><HR width="90%" SIZE=4>
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - <A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.avg.com">http://www.avg.com</A>
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.2/1876 - Release Date: 01/05/2009 9:44 AM
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><PRE class=moz-signature cols="72">--
* My favorite law: The Law of Unintended Consequences *
* -- John Vause *
* "Over here, over there, everywhere, *
* Today, tomorrow, always: *
* Bad men there are. *
* Hate you they do. *
* Kill you they will. *
* Watch out you better!" -- Shoshone refrain *
* *
* You can fool yourself if you want, and you can fool *
* as many as will follow for as long as you can get *
* away with it. But you can't fool reality. *
* - James P. Hogan in "Kicking The Sacred Cow" *
* *
* Si vis pacem, para bellum - Cicero *
</PRE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>aprssig mailing
list<BR>aprssig@tapr.org<BR>https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig<BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P><BR>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG -
http://www.avg.com <BR>Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.3/1878 -
Release Date: 1/6/2009 7:56 AM<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>aprssig mailing
list<BR>aprssig@tapr.org<BR>https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig<BR></BODY></HTML>