
- ITAR--opensource-GPS
- 02-01-2007
![]() Re: ITAR - opensource GPS.
| Marc Brett | 02-15-2007 |
![]() ![]() Re: ITAR - opensource GPS.
| Iwo Mergler | 02-16-2007 |
![]() ![]() ![]() Re: ITAR - opensource GPS.
| Ian Stirling | 02-16-2007 |
![]() ![]() Re: ITAR - opensource GPS.
| Ian Stirling | 02-16-2007 |
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
I'm interested in a project to make an open source phone - specifically,
the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
This has GPS hardware, which is currently using a program - without
source - supplied by the vendor.
Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
My question is severalfold.
I assume the ITAR regulations are still in place.
Are they export only, or can devices be imported. (to the US)
Do the regulations tend to be followed by other countries?
Does anyone have a view on whether supplying a open source program that
took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits) and
then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
but it would not come by default in that state.
Oh, yes.
>Are they export only, or can devices be imported. (to the US)
ITAR covers both exports and imports. Exports are the business of the
Department of Commerce, and imports the Treasury.
>Do the regulations tend to be followed by other countries?
I doubt it. One of the ironies of ITAR is that it restricts US industries and
gives free reign for foreign companies to develop ITAR-restricted products for
foreign markets. An "own goal" in LA Galaxy-speak
>Does anyone have a view on whether supplying a open source program that
>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits) and
>then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>but it would not come by default in that state.
>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits) and
>then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>but it would not come by default in that state.
Well, this is USENET, where views are free, and worth every penny!
If developed in the USA, you're walking on eggshells. You might get done for
conspiracy even if you produce nothing illegal. Would a -DNO_LIMITS C
preprocessor macro count as conspiracy? I have no idea.
If developed outside of the USA, you're still not safe, as Jon "DVD Jon"
Johansen found out when the grubby hands of US lawyers reached across the pond
to Norway to make his life hell.
End use counts as well. If the product is designed or modified for use by the
military or for UAVs capable of delivering large bombs, it's covered by ITAR.
Ditto if it's P(Y) code capable.
If there is no strong encryption/decryption , no expected use in a WMD, and the
source code is indeed published on a free website, you'll have covered the major
bases.
FWIW, GPS Creations http://www.gpscreations.com/ sell receiver boards running
OpenSource GPS software which incorporate the ITAR limits. They recommend
against removing these limits (but then they would, wouldn't they?) and claim to
have a PDF document which covers this. Ask them for a copy.
The general Usenet advice still applies -- if you have legal questions, speak to
a lawyer.
Sorry, I missed the original post, so I'll answer
to this one.
>>I'm interested in a project to make an open source phone - specifically,
>>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
>>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
It is Linux, not a sort of. It's based on X11 and GTK+, with
an additional widget library for the OpenMoko look.
>>This has GPS hardware, which is currently using a program - without
>>source - supplied by the vendor.
>>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
>>source - supplied by the vendor.
>>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
Maybe (see Marc's answer), but it's much more than that. It's a
Hammerhead GPS:
http://www.globallocate.com/SEMICONDUCTORS/SEMI_HAMMER_Frameset.htm
The chip is not an autonomous GPS receiver, as you seem
to expect. An autonomous receiver contains a processor
with associated RAM/ROM for receiver management and
calculating the position.
Hammerhead has your main processor do that job. Your closed
source program is about 90% (in code size) of the firmware of
a normal GPS receiver. The chip only covers the hard-realtime
part of the solution.
>>My question is severalfold.
>>I assume the ITAR regulations are still in place.
>>I assume the ITAR regulations are still in place.
>
> Oh, yes.
>
> Oh, yes.
>
>>Are they export only, or can devices be imported. (to the US)
>
> ITAR covers both exports and imports. Exports are the business of the
> Department of Commerce, and imports the Treasury.
>
> ITAR covers both exports and imports. Exports are the business of the
> Department of Commerce, and imports the Treasury.
>
>>Do the regulations tend to be followed by other countries?
>
> I doubt it. One of the ironies of ITAR is that it restricts US industries
> and gives free reign for foreign companies to develop ITAR-restricted
> products for
> foreign markets. An "own goal" in LA Galaxy-speak
>
> I doubt it. One of the ironies of ITAR is that it restricts US industries
> and gives free reign for foreign companies to develop ITAR-restricted
> products for
> foreign markets. An "own goal" in LA Galaxy-speak
>
I know of at least one European GPS receiver design which
had no artificial limitations in that respect. It probably
would have stopped working long before 1000kt, for completely
unrelated reasons.
>>Does anyone have a view on whether supplying a open source program that
>>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits)
>>and then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>>but it would not come by default in that state.
>>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits)
>>and then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>>but it would not come by default in that state.
It's not necessarily as simple as that. The correlator
hardware and loop filters could, in principle, also
limit you. Of course, it won't be an exact 1000kt/60000ft
limit.
Unless the manufacturer plans to sell the receiver in the
military market, parts of the receiver may well be designed
such that reaching military-grade performance is unlikely.
As in "failed to design" for high altitude/speed.
Kind regards,
Iwo
>
> Sorry, I missed the original post, so I'll answer
> to this one.
>
> Sorry, I missed the original post, so I'll answer
> to this one.
>
>>>I'm interested in a project to make an open source phone - specifically,
>>>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
>>>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
>
> It is Linux, not a sort of. It's based on X11 and GTK+, with
> an additional widget library for the OpenMoko look.
>
'Sort of' - in the same sense that redhat is a sort of linux.
> It is Linux, not a sort of. It's based on X11 and GTK+, with
> an additional widget library for the OpenMoko look.
>
>>>This has GPS hardware, which is currently using a program - without
>>>source - supplied by the vendor.
>>>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
>>>source - supplied by the vendor.
>>>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
>
> Maybe (see Marc's answer), but it's much more than that. It's a
> Hammerhead GPS:
>
> http://www.globallocate.com/SEMICONDUCTORS/SEMI_HAMMER_Frameset.htm
>
> The chip is not an autonomous GPS receiver, as you seem
> to expect. An autonomous receiver contains a processor
> with associated RAM/ROM for receiver management and
> calculating the position.
> Maybe (see Marc's answer), but it's much more than that. It's a
> Hammerhead GPS:
>
> http://www.globallocate.com/SEMICONDUCTORS/SEMI_HAMMER_Frameset.htm
>
> The chip is not an autonomous GPS receiver, as you seem
> to expect. An autonomous receiver contains a processor
> with associated RAM/ROM for receiver management and
> calculating the position.
Yes, I know, that's why it's a tricky question.
That's why I say 'the program - without source -' this is the current
situation.
<snip>
>>>Does anyone have a view on whether supplying a open source program that
>>>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits)
>>>and then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>>>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>>>but it would not come by default in that state.
>>>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits)
>>>and then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>>>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>>>but it would not come by default in that state.
>
> It's not necessarily as simple as that. The correlator
> hardware and loop filters could, in principle, also
> limit you. Of course, it won't be an exact 1000kt/60000ft
> limit.
> It's not necessarily as simple as that. The correlator
> hardware and loop filters could, in principle, also
> limit you. Of course, it won't be an exact 1000kt/60000ft
> limit.
Practically they can't.
The correlators have to track +-2Km/s or so, which is the peak of an
approaching or retreating satellite. They may fail slightly over this.
This will at the very least leave the satellites that are not heading
straight for you working at 1000Kt.
>
>>I'm interested in a project to make an open source phone - specifically,
>>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
>>This has GPS hardware, which is currently using a program - without
>>source - supplied by the vendor.
>>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
>>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
>>This has GPS hardware, which is currently using a program - without
>>source - supplied by the vendor.
>>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
<snip>
>>Does anyone have a view on whether supplying a open source program that
>>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits) and
>>then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>>but it would not come by default in that state.
>>took the output from a correlator chip, computed a position (with limits) and
>>then output it, would make the device infringe ITAR?
>>It could be relatively easily changed to not limit the position output -
>>but it would not come by default in that state.
>
> Well, this is USENET, where views are free, and worth every penny!
>
> If developed in the USA, you're walking on eggshells. You might get done for
> conspiracy even if you produce nothing illegal. Would a -DNO_LIMITS C
> preprocessor macro count as conspiracy? I have no idea.
>
I was more thinking that the code must somewhere have if(speed>limit) in
it. Rather than an explicit way to turn the limits off.
> Well, this is USENET, where views are free, and worth every penny!
>
> If developed in the USA, you're walking on eggshells. You might get done for
> conspiracy even if you produce nothing illegal. Would a -DNO_LIMITS C
> preprocessor macro count as conspiracy? I have no idea.
>
I was more thinking that the code must somewhere have if(speed>limit) in
> If developed outside of the USA, you're still not safe, as Jon "DVD Jon"
> Johansen found out when the grubby hands of US lawyers reached across the pond
> to Norway to make his life hell.
>
> End use counts as well. If the product is designed or modified for use by the
<snip>
In this case it's a phone.
> Johansen found out when the grubby hands of US lawyers reached across the pond
> to Norway to make his life hell.
>
> End use counts as well. If the product is designed or modified for use by the
<snip>
> FWIW, GPS Creations http://www.gpscreations.com/ sell receiver boards running
> OpenSource GPS software which incorporate the ITAR limits. They recommend
> against removing these limits (but then they would, wouldn't they?) and claim
to
> OpenSource GPS software which incorporate the ITAR limits. They recommend
> against removing these limits (but then they would, wouldn't they?) and claim
> have a PDF document which covers this. Ask them for a copy.
Interesting, thanks!
- GPS, GLONASS and GALILEO ?
- Satellite Navigation
- 2005-09-08
- Opinion about buying a Gps
- Garmin GPS
- 2009-12-15
- Bluetooth GPS
- Satellite Navigation
- 2005-08-29








>the neo1973, running OpenMoko - which is a sort of linux.
>This has GPS hardware, which is currently using a program - without
>source - supplied by the vendor.
>Presumably this implements the 1000kt/60000ft limits.
>My question is severalfold.
>I assume the ITAR regulations are still in place.