FCC Rules threaten the future of innovation in Digital Ham Radio.

It is past time for ham radio to acknowledge than encryption and freedom are required for the future of innovation in our hobby.

Take a look sometime on an internet search engine for "wireless".  What you will find is literally thousands of websites on 802.11 wireless ethernet, for any one page of packet or other Ham Radio based network technology.  

The reason for this is that innovation is being driven out of Ham Radio by restrictions on the Ham bands which are not present in other parts of the spectrum.   Surely, having frequencies available to hams is important, but what can or cannot be done on those frequencies is probably at least as important, yet receives far less attention.    None of the existing organizations seem to see these restrictions as a threat, but they have already done serious damage.

Some examples of our "freedom-challenged" restrictions that are most damaging follow.

1.  Prohibitation of Encryption -

Nearly any modern computer protocol uses encryption - at least for password authentication.   Hams are not permitted to encrypt data, so it immediately follows that hams cannot use modern protocols on the air.    Sure, we can invent our own, or use antiquated substitutes if available, but is soon as we wish to exchange useful data with the rest of the encrypted world, we are forbidden from doing so by FCC rules.       Living without encryption was normal life ten years ago, but is not practical any more.  

2.  Prohibition of offensive content or lack of free speech -

Can anyone else appreciate the irony of telling a foreign station,  "Well, I would like to dicuss the freedom of speech we enjoy in America with you, but unfortunately I am prohibited from doing so.  I can only talk about unimportant things as per FCC rules part 97.117".   Too many good men and woman have died for our freedoms, for us to say, in effect,  "It's OK for us not to have these freedoms on the air."   It's NOT ok.   If foreign governments want to limit what is acceptable for their citizens, that is fine.  But not our government.  

"Why should it matter?", you might think.   Some of the limitations - such as profanity, etc. in the FCC rule list that for the most part, people support.  

The problem arises that in other freedom-enable venus, such as the internet, have no such restrictions.  If we wish to innovate with solutions that marry Ham Radio and internet technology, we must be able to pass traffic between the networks without reading through all traffic to determine if it is OK per FCC rules.  It is not that swearing would be common on internet to ham radio links (being as hams are still likely on both sides of the link).  It's just that once a link is made someone could send something that woud violate FCC rules.   This deters hams from making these links in the first place, because their license may be lost if someone abuses their trust.
 
Most people currently ignore the content-limitation rules, except those for profanity.   Ham radio is not the only place that obsurd rules are ignored.  There are many rules, regulations, and laws that would not stand, if they were actually enforced.    But the rules are not harmless.   Why risk your Ham license setting up a high-bandwidth 802.11 network on the ham bands, when you can rest easy knowing "anything goes" on the unlicensed spectrum?    

The result is that innovation on high-speed internet linked networks is being driven into the 802.11 unlicensed wireless spectrum.  The internet - quite possibly the best system available for emergency communications, due to its original fault tolerant design and universal availability - remains underutilized in Ham Radio emergency planning.  

For hams to innovate with high-speed wireless technology, rule changes would be required for both encryption and content limitations.

At a minimum, an exemption to the encryption prohibition for the following three situations would be necessary.
1.  Traffic being automatically passed between other networks and ham radio, or necessary for compatibility purposes.
2.  Authentication of passwords
3.  Handling of emergency situations   (codes for times/places/frequencies are frequently used by Ham Radio emergency service organizations, despite their dubious legality)

Better yet,  eliminate the encryption prohibition entirely.

For content limitations, at a minimum there must be an excemption  for traffic automatically passed between networks.    More ideal would be for content-related restrictions to be removed entirely.   A rule stating, in effect: "hams must honor restrictions imposed on citizens of foreign countries" would address the situation of extraterritorial contacts without burdening US citizens unnecessarily.  

In summary, a large part of the digital future of ham radio depends not on the frequencies we use, but how we are allowed to use them.   It is time for our ham radio related organizations make these rule changes a priority.

73s
Tim Neu
KC0LQL