Talk:Emergency Alert System

message: The article gives no explanation from the EAS why no alert was given on 9/11. It seems odd that after decades of testing a network for the event of a national attack, that it would fail when the attack came.  The FCC should have a lot of explaining to do. 65.6.13.200 19:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  EAS and 9/11 

message: The actual final EAS protocol adopted by the FCC, did not, in fact, come directly from the NWS SAME system. The protocol that was adopted was based mostly on an alert system that was patented by Quad Dimension Inc.(QDI) (Patent # 5,121,430) in 1992. This system was built and prior to receiving a patent was shown to various organizations and people, including staff members from Senator Bob Dole's office as well as an official at the local Kansas City FEMA organization. The first ever test of a geographical (location) specific emergency alert system using Audio Frequency Shift Keying (AFSK) modulation was conducted over public airwaves via a commercial broadcasting station in 1991 in the Kansas City area at KCTV television station during after hour blanking activities. The test was successfully carried out using a transmitter unit built by QDI and a remotely positioned, geographic location selectable (in a home residence) hand held receiver capable of analyzing TV audio signals also built by QDI. This over-the-air test was simultaneously recorded in one of the inventors's home on a VHS tape recorder. QDI was in talks with a prominent weather mapping company (who supplied daily maps to the "US Today" newspaper) about a cooperative business proposal when the owner of the company notified QDI that the FCC was about to begin the process of requesting emergency alert ideas for possible use as a replacement to the existing Emergency Broadcast System. It was during this FCC's request for input to gather ideas on a next generation alert system, that a copy of the VHS tape was sent to the FCC along with a copy of the patent and a letter describing how the system worked and how such a system could be tested and used. {One listening to the playback of this VHS tape would immediately recognize it as it is an almost exact replica, down to the three repeating AFSK bursts}. After the deadline for the request for input had passed, and all parties, including the NOAA/NWS proposed systems, had been studied, Quad Dimension received a letter in return from the FCC stating that the system was excellent and what they were looking for, especially since the over-the-airwaves test had proven extremely reliable. The letter also stated that Quad Dimension would be most happy when the mandated standard was released. When the EAS standard came out and QDI saw that, in fact, it was utilizing the protocol that they had developed and tested, they sent letters to every AM/FM radio and television station asking for an annual royalty for the use of their patented system. The FCC was then contacted by a large group of station owners and asked for clarification. The FCC's response was that they only release standards and it was the Department of Commerce's (DOC) responsibility to deal with patent or business issues. The various makers of the equipment that every radio station must buy also ignored the patent. It was at this point, with pressure from the National Weather Service, that the DOC submitted to the Patent Trademark Office (PTO) other prior art that the NWS had given them, so that the PTO would be required to re-examine QDI's patent, even though QDI had carried out extensive searches both locally as well as at the PTO using an independent patent search company and had included prior art from every known person, company, or agency, including the NWS/NOAA. QDI was forced to fight the patent re-examination with their own limited resources but prevailed with the PTO finding that Quad Dimension was indeed, the inventor of the emergency alert system in question, just as the PTO had determined in granting the patent the first time. A year later, QDI was informed that the patent was being re-examined yet another time, again upon request from the DOC (the DOC houses both the NWS and the PTO). This re-examination was very unique in that it is only one of a handful of times in the history of the PTO that the PTO commissioner himself was listed as the requester. QDI was once again forced to fight the validity of it's patent using limited resources. The final patent claims, after all re-examinations, remained unmodified except the idea of general public airwaves was reduced in scope so as to not include the frequencies used by traditional NOAA radios. It is a fact that the EAS data protocols that one hears on standard public radio and television are covered by the Quad Dimension patent. At the end of the 1990's, one of the larger equipment manufacturers that QDI was seeking royalties from was then acquired by the Harris Corporation (www.harris.com) and during the deposition stage in Washinton, DC, Harris agreed to a monetary settlement with QDI, despite a non-unanimous vote from QDI's main shareholders. The settlement was used in it's entirety to pay for an entire decade's worth of legal bills. Under monetary strain, QDI closed it's operation shortly after the settlement. No individual or party related to QDI made a penny. QDI's main goal was to help provide an improved way of being warned during an emergency.  
---------------
'To whomever at Wikipedia: The above events occured. There are hundreds of documents that can be scanned and submitted, all with dates and signatures, including letters from patent and buisness attorneys as well as from multiple senators and representatives from multiple states asking for the DOC to stop harassing QDI with continued re-examinations. Ten years have passed since the settlement. The patent has long expired. No party from the defunct QDI is seeking any type of monetary reward or gain. For the inventors (and mainly inventor's children's sake), the proper and factual history that is reported when it comes to the national mandated standard and the decade-long efforts QDI put forth to give the nation a better alert system is the only goal. Many articles in various newspapers covered a majority of events surrounding the QDI system and subsequent re-examination proceedings. The Kansas City Star newspaper wrote an lengthy article in it's business section about the inventor's system and future plans for the system (the article included pictures of the inventors and the transmitting and handheld home receiver hardware). The broadcast industry's Radio World magazine throughout the 1990's covered this ongoing battle with QDI's patent, and almost always front page news. Of course, Radio World's advertisers were equipment manufactures so QDI was never given equal press time to prove that the system was tested at a television station and that the meteorologist of the station signed a non-disclosure (can submit upon request). Or that the chief engineer at the same television station who allowed us access to the transmitter tower in the hours right after midnight sent QDI a letter stating that he couldn't sign a non-disclosure but that he wouldn't intentionally give away the idea. Or that a week after QDI received the chief engineer's letter that a retired National Weather Service contacted one the QDI inventors at his house and asked exactly what kind of test was being performed at the television station and asked if QDI had intentions of applying for a patent. Or that the high ranking attorney from a very large firm that was representing QDI was absent the day the chief scientific spokesman for the DOC and the chief engineer for the NWS from Kansas City all met in Kansas City at the attorney's law building - QDI was informed by other legal council that since the attorney wasn't present that QDI should not say anything or try in anyway to describe in any detail to the DOC staff member why it was that the functionality of the NWS SAME system at that time would NOT have been able to do what QDI alert system could do, let alone meet the requirements of the FCC standard. The NWS chief engineer's own words when he was describing his own system were that eventually more NOAA radio transmitter towers would be built, with additional funds, which would eventually cover all of the nation's areas. All the while, the QDI system was already designed and had been tested to utilize existing transmitter towers (with automatic switchover to another station in case of signal loss) from large numbers of commercial broadcast stations (which the FCC realized would not only save a ton of money but would cover almost the entire nation without waiting on large numbers of tower build projects). Everything written here is factual. These things all happened, have been documented, which can be sent to you with names and dates of any and every person at every firm, agency, or company and/or event throughout the entire decade of the 1990s. If some type of addition to include Quad Dimension's contribution to the EAS standard isn't included by Wikipedia, the historical information regarding how the EAS came to be a national standard will not, in any way, be factual. Just to get started, a quick simple search of Quad Dimension and EAS using back cache should bring up some internet links. The absolute best thing would be if Radio World could somehow put the front page articles from every week/month during from 1992 thru 2001 on their website. I do have every one those magazines that could be scanned if need be (sort of a pain because the magazine at that time {maybe still is} is a large format sized magazine and doesn't easily fit in a normal office scanner without splitting up the article into pieces). Thank you for your consideration of this matter. DGL Historydgl (talk) 06:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  EAS update regarding Quad Dimension Inc patent# 5,121,430 

message: Dec 23 2600:6C46:4F7F:D59E:952B:7F59:72AE:BBB2 (talk) 13:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  In 2014 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
* Same.wav
You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
*  ()
* Same.wav (discussion)
Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion 

message: can you delete all of the eas sounds and replace it with placeholder ones 72.94.190.201 (talk) 13:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  edit request