Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

marine AIS and BCD396XT

Expand Messages
  • brunovianna
    Sorry about the newbie question. Is there anyway I can decode AIS info - such as used by http://www.marinetraffic.com/ - with the bcd396xt without having to
    Message 1 of 41 , Apr 13 9:30 AM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Sorry about the newbie question.

      Is there anyway I can decode AIS info - such as used by http://www.marinetraffic.com/ - with the bcd396xt without having to solder the discriminator tap? any program that could be used with the data output port could decode it?

      thanks in advance
      bruno
    • Lance
      UPMan, Smoke Signals.. Very funny... Thanks your input with 396XT. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 41 of 41 , Apr 18 4:17 PM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        UPMan,

        "Smoke Signals.."

        Very funny...

        Thanks your input with 396XT.


        On Apr 18, 2011, at 12:27 PM, Uniden UPMan wrote:

        > Ignore the thread title. The discussion of legality was regarding MDT (Mobile Data Terminals used in police cars) decoding, which is illegal to decode in the US under a Federal law known as the ECPA (Electronic Communications Privacy Act). This is the law that also makes intentionally monitoring a cell phone or cordless phone call that you are not a party to illegal (and does not discriminate between analog, digital, encrypted, encoded, or smoke signals).
        >
        > UPMan
        >
        > From: Bruno Vianna <brunovianna.listas.0@...>
        > >To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
        > >Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 1:18 PM
        > >Subject: Re: [BCD396XT] Re: marine AIS and BCD396XT
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >I don't know about the legality of decoding in the US (I'm Brazilian) but a
        > >system like AIS would worthless if the regular amateur boat owner couldn't
        > >decode the messages. Its main goal is to avoid collisions.
        > >
        > >On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 5:08 AM, tvnewsnj <tvnews@...> wrote:
        > >
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> It has been many years since I looked at the laws regarding DECODING.
        > >>
        > >> I THINK the federal laws make decoding of ENCRYPTED communication illegal.
        > >> I don't think decoding of non encrypted communications is a problem. I must
        > >> admit that as I type this I find myself using the word "communications" and
        > >> not the word "data". The more I think about this data may be covered under
        > >> another part of the law from communications. Just shows how you word
        > >> something can give a totally different message. Oh well!
        > >>
        > >>
        > >> --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "shelleysh1@..." <shelleysh1@...> wrote:
        > >> >
        > >> > *smile* This will be my one and only post on this (and technically, this
        > >> topic shouldn't be on this group anyway)...
        > >> >
        > >> > I'm sorry Walter, your attorney is mistaken (attorneys are fallible, you
        > >> know LOL). It is illegal to decode (decode being the keyword, not capture)
        > >> the transmissions. Contrary to your friends in law enforcement, who clearly
        > >> don't know the law, I do work with law enforcement and have for over 16
        > >> years. And I do know the law on decoding MDTs and the like...you cannot, as
        > >> a citizen, do it legally. It's against Federal law. Capturing coded
        > >> transmission is fine, as long as one is not using any hardware or software
        > >> which can decode what's being transmitted, unless they're working within the
        > >> guidelines of the law.
        > >> >
        > >> > No need for me to be any further involved in the discussion. I've not
        > >> given an opinion, I'm simply (and clearly) pointing out the Federal
        > >> guideline/law for you and anyone else who might (or might not) be
        > >> interested.
        > >> >
        > >> > Shell
        > >> >
        > >> > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "Walter Jinright" <ipnfla124@> wrote:
        > >> > >
        > >> > > Well for one, I do not always have the PC tied up decoding stuff, so if
        > >> any given moment I was "raided", they would not find anything unlawful going
        > >> on. Second, It is ONLY "Federal Time", if you are caught, prosecuted, lose
        > >> and are CONVICTED! Again, at any given period in time, I do not have the
        > >> equipment even put together, and a PC and a scanner is not unlawful for me
        > >> to have, so again, "they" would not find anything, and I could then litigate
        > >> against "them", for unlawful search from a simple post I could have "made
        > >> up", to post in an open forum, as there is not one soul in this forum or
        > >> that will read this forum, and say they have ever seen me decode anything!
        > >> > > So it is all a matter of interpretation of facts, not hearsay that one
        > >> write in an open forum. But I could walk through Disney World and find
        > >> probably 100 people easy using GMRS "bubble pack" radios with no license,
        > >> which is just as great of offense, or if you interpret it a few different
        > >> ways, a greater offense? It is all relative, and what does it matter if no
        > >> one is causing interference, harm, or using the information to commit a
        > >> crime?
        > >> > > I have an attorney / family member that specializes in patents and
        > >> media (like broadcast), and is very knowledgeable about the laws, and agrees
        > >> with what I just wrote (the very reason I wrote this much later, as to get
        > >> REAL legal input).
        > >> > >
        > >> > > Walter J. - In The Middle of; Pensacola NAS, KPNS, NAS Whiting KNSE &
        > >> KNDZ, 2R4, and Eglin AFB / Hurlburt Field
        > >> > >
        > >> > >
        > >> > >
        > >> > > ----- Original Message -----
        > >> > > johnstark wrote:
        > >> > > > I'm still at
        > >> > > > a loss why the OP openly admits in a public forum
        > >> > > > to decoding this stuff, that's Federal Time! There are however
        > >> provisions
        > >> > > > for law enforcement to be able to monitor these transmissions for
        > >> > > > investigations but that's the ONLY exception to the law.
        > >> > > >
        > >> > >
        > >> > >
        > >> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >> > >
        > >> >
        > >>
        > >>
        > >>
        > >
        > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.