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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24 > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss-gnuradio mailing list > Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio > _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
