<div dir="ltr">What it definitely does is provide a refutation to anyone capable of using logic (anyone not in AMSAT leadership for example) that what was being said and believed is true from both objective party and regulatory authority.<div><br></div><div>AMSAT did not want to believe they were forced to do everything open source. In fact, they are not, but then they have the burden of trying to follow the regulations with no regular legal assistance to keep them out of trouble. Who hear thinks they can and survive? They are afraid of their own shadows and have been a long time since Harold Price got fined a huge fine for violating ITAR with Martin Sweeting. Enough so that they killed participation with AMSAT-DL and scared everyone in AMSAT engineering ranks. Frank, Jan and I were beyond pissed with Barry for doing a mea culpa without our input in any form.</div><div><br></div><div>Librespace, ORI, and others like them are going to do things in a way that allows forward motion and accomplishment even in the United States.</div><div><br></div><div>Good work Michelle and ORI.</div><div><br></div><div>Bob</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 11:04 AM Michelle Thompson via Ground-Station <ground-station@lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Yes, that's fair to say. <br><br>The question about what counts as public has been clarified. <br><br>This is a big step forward, greatly reduces risk, and provides a framework and reference for wider use. <br><br>The challenges specific to amateur radio and amateur satellite were known about and incorporated into the work from the beginning. For example, deliberately including encryption instead of taking the easier road and leaving it out. Leaving it out would have greatly weakened the results and incompletely covered privileges under part 97. <br><br>There are legitimate critiques of and limitations on this work. I'm motivated to find them and address them in future work and filings. <div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">-Michelle W5NYV<br><br><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 3:32 PM Frank Brickle <<a href="mailto:brickle@pobox.com" target="_blank">brickle@pobox.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Yes, that was the message we got during the original AMSAT screw-up that led to Lyle and Chuck heading for the hills. But part of the message then was that what counted as "public" was subject to interpretation. I would like to believe this has been clarified.<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 3:20 PM Bruce Perens <<a href="mailto:bruce@perens.com" target="_blank">bruce@perens.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Yes, I wrote this a long time ago and I believe it's still on the ORI site. Essentially the rule is absolutely everything has to be done in the public. </div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 8, 2021, 15:14 Frank Brickle via Ground-Station <ground-station@lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Q: Is there one simple rule of thumb that can be relied on to keep you out of trouble with ITAR/EAR?<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 11:02 AM Michelle Thompson via Ground-Station <ground-station@lists.openresearch.institute> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Call for Input: Meeting tomorrow (Thursday, 9 September 2021) with Thomsen and Burke about the ITAR/EAR regulatory results. They want me to bring misconceptions and frequently asked questions in order to better craft a FAQ and implementation guidelines. <br><br>Quotes would help, but paraphrasing any objections you have heard would be just as useful. <br><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br>-Michelle W5NYV<br><br><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:small"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">Dr. Robert W McGwier, Ph.D.</span><br style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">Adjunct Faculty, Virginia Tech</span><br style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">ARDC Member of Board</span><br style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">N4HY: ARRL, TAPR, AMSAT, EARC</span><br style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80)">Sky: AAVSO, SkyHub, Auburn AS, Skyscrapers</span><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>