In the November issue of SWN we reported on the new Combo Card test device that is just now making its way to the market. It looks like that's not all thats new from the underground.
Another new product called the DDT or Data Trapper Card will soon be hitting the streets.
The folks involved with this product have informed SWN that you must already have a basic subscription on your "H" card to use the DDT device.
The DDT card was desigined to trap the authorization data from the data stream and create an authorziation packet or key for the unsubscribed channels.
The DDT device is installed between the DBS receiver and the access authorization card. Located on the DDT card, is a LED (light emitting diode) which is known as the authorization LED. Sources tell us that this LED flashes slowly when the DSS card is first inserted. At this point the card will function normally during this initialization period, which will last 10 minutes to 1 hour. After the initization period is completed the LED will glow continuously. At this point the DSS card is now authorizied for all channels and will retain the data for future use.
The Combo Card that we reported on last month is somewhat similar to the DDT unit with respect to its key building ability, however this is where the similarity ends. The reason is, for the Combo Card to work, the DSS access card must be read out and an Eprom located on the Combo device must be programmed with the DSS cards unique data. Also, each time the software in the Combo board has to be updated, the Eprom will have to be reprogrammed with unique data for every single unit in the field.
If the DDT device should need to be reporgrammed, only one file would be required for all units in the field. As we obtain more information on these devices we will pass it along in the SWN.
Howdy all
We are working on getting the DB-1 radio show on another Internet radio network, that being the GRIT radio network located at WWW.grit.net. Check this site out, as Grit offers a lot of good program-ming.
We have added another tech to our service bench. Gary Prentice. Gary is a welcome addition to our service depart-ment as his electronic abilities have reduced my workload some what.
Hey! It looks like News Corp.'s Star TV could be in trouble in India. Star TV will have to appear before an Indian court for trying to add a little SPICE into the lives of the folks who subscribe to Star TV in India.
Star TV is a Hong Kong based satellite net-work that is owned by News Corp. The com-pany has said that it will ask the Delhi High court to dismiss the case, which chargess the case which charges that four movies seen on Star TV were in violation of India's obscenity laws. The films in question are, "Strip to Kill," Big Bad Mama," "Dance of the Damned" and “Jigsaw Murders”.
Well Christmas is just around the corner. All of us here at the Satellite Watch would like to wish you the best Christmas ever...
Until 1998, Dan
Welcome once again to my little soapbox.This month we are following a court action of interest to low power broadcasters. Here are some pertinent excerpts from the court decision.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,Plaintiff, v. STEPHEN P. DUNIFER Defendant
.No. C 94-03542 CW ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND REQUESTING FURTHER BRIEFING
By this action, the United States, on behalf of its agency, the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"), seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against Defendant Stephen P. Dunifer for operating a radio station, "Free Radio Berkeley," without a license in violation of 47 U.S.C.S 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. S 151 et seq. Several amici curiae have filed a brief supporting the FCC. Mr. Dunifer does not dispute that he is broadcasting without a license and that he has never applied for a license. Mr. Dunifer does not question the constitutionality ot the statute that requires broadcasters to obtain a license. Mr. Dunifer asserts, however, that relief should not be granted to the FCC because he cannot obtain a license to broadcast under the FCC'S regulations, which he claims are unconstitutional. The FCC regulations do not allow for the licensing of micro radio broadcasters, that is, radio broadcasters who, like Mr. Dunifer, use ten watts or less to power their signals.(1) Presently before the Court is the FCC'S motion for summary judgement which Mr. Dunifer and several amici curiae oppose. The matter was heard on April 12, 1996. Having considered all of the papers filed by the parties and oral argument on the motion, the Court DENIES the FCC's motion without prejudice and requests further briefing.
DISCUSSION: JURISDICTION The FCC challenges this court's jurisdiction to entertain Mr. Dunifer's constitutional defenses to this action. The FCC invoked the jurisdictional grant of 47 U.S.C. S 401 (a) in filing the instant action. Section 401(a) provides that: The district courts of the United states shall have jurisdiction, upon application of the Attorney General at the request of the [Federal Communications] Commission, alleginq a failure to comply with or a violation of any of the provisions of this chapter by any person, to issue a writ or writs of mandamus commanding such person to comply with the provisions of this chapter. The court thus has jurisdiction to enjoin any violation by Mr. Dunifer of 47 U.S.C.S 3Ol, which, simply put, prohibits operating a radio station without a license. The FCC argues, however, that the jurisdictional grant of 47 U.S.C.S 401(a) is not broad enough to encompass Mr. Dunifer's constitutional defenses which challenge the regulations that make it impossible for a micro radio broadcaster to obtain a license. The FCC argues that any court challenge to the FCC's regulations regarding licensing must be brought either: (1) as an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia under 47 U.S.C.§ 402(b) (1) [2] of the FCC's denial of a request for a waiver of the regulation prohibiting low power stations to apply for a license; or (2) as an appeal to the court of appeals for any circuit of the FCC's denial of a petition for rule-making under 47 U.S.C. § 402(a) [3] and 28 U.S.C. § 2342[4]. In support or its position, the FCC principally relies on Sable Communications of California v. FCC, 827 F.2d 640 (9th Cir. 1987).
Therefore, the Court requests that the parties provide further briefing on the issue of whether the unconstitutionality of the FCC regulatory scheme would be a valid defense in an action brought by the FCC to enjoin broadcasting without a license. The FCC shall file with the Court and serve on Mr. Dunifer its brief on this issue 14 days from the date of this order. Mr. Dunifer's opposition is due 7 days thereafter. If the FCC wishes to file a reply, it may due so 7 days after the opposition is served. Dated November 12, 1997 Claudia Wilken UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
My Comments:
This is very important step in the establishment of the lack of jurisdiction of the District of Columbia, basically a foriegn country to the sovereign States of the union, to try under the color of law to regulate intrastate communication. This is where the case for the FCC falls apart. If you will notice that the court states that the case should be heard in the District. So far so good. This is NOT the end of the story. She (the judge) is trying to direct the venue back to DC. AS IN PUT THE GENIE BACK IN THE BOTTLE. This will be an ongoing fight but it is going well so far. The entire text is available on several of the low power sites on the net.
Happy surfing and a Happy and Peaceful holiday,
Good Night Sharon, Doccazoid