[BC] DA Bandwidth

[Barry McLarnon]

On Thursday 01 June 2006 06:57, Tom Taggart wrote:
> Preparing the Canadian response Barry?

I'm not involved in preparing a response, but they have heard from me. :-)

> I suspect full time IBAC would involve some treaty violations somewhere,
> somehow.

Yep, there is no question that IBOC/IBAC on the AM band violates the ITU 
regional agreement ("Rio" treaty), as well as the bilateral agreements 
between the U.S. and Canada and Mexico.  Even iBiquity admits that.  There 
have been movements towards reopening the agreements, but they don't seem 
to be moving very fast.  I think folks in the U.S. assume that this will 
be a rubber stamp process - after all, even daytime operation is 
technically in violation of the agreements, but that didn't stop the FCC 
from authorizing it back in 2002.  It wouldn't surprise me if they go 
ahead and authorize full time operation in advance of any treaty changes.
There is probably an underlying assumption that the broadcasters in the 
other countries will succumb to the hype, and push their administrations 
to authorize the buzz.  That could easily happen.

Bottom line: don't count on protests from other countries to halt the buzz.
Resistance will have to come from within the U.S.

Barry

-- 
Barry McLarnon VE3JF  Ottawa, ON