WCIT-12

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Telecommunication_Union#World_Conference_on_International_Telecommunications_2012_.28WCIT-12.29

The ITU will facilitate the The World Congress on International Telecommunications or WCIT, a treaty-level conference that addresses the international rules for telecommunications, including international tariffs.^[11] The previous conference to update the International Telecommunication Regulations (ITRs) was held in Melbourne in 1988.^[12] The next conference is taking place in Dubai in December 2012.

[...]

In August 2012, ITU called for a public consultation on a draft document ahead of the conference.^[13] It is claimed the proposal would allow government restriction or blocking of information disseminated via the internet and create a global regime of monitoring internet communications – including the demand that those who send and receive information identify themselves. It would also allow governments to shut down the internet if there is the belief that it may interfere in the internal affairs of other states or that information of a sensitive nature might be shared.^[14]

[...]

Proposals currently under consideration would establish regulatory oversight by the U.N. over security, fraud, traffic accounting as well as traffic flow, management of Internet Domain Names and IP addresses, and other aspects of the Internet that are currently governed either by community-based approaches such as Regional Internet Registries, ICANN, or largely national regulatory frameworks.^[17] The move by the ITU and some countries has alarmed many within the United States and within the Internet community.^[18][19] Indeed some European telecommunication services have proposed a so-called "sender pays" model which would requires sources of Internet traffic to pay destinations, similar to the way funds are transferred between countries using the telephone.^[20][21]

The WCIT-12 activity has been attacked by Google, who has characterized it as a threat to the "free and open internet".^[22]

You also require licenses for the frequencies that you use.
directional antenna + spread spectrum + minimum required power to make contact
Anyone who doesn't know exactly where to look and exactly what to look for will probably never detect your transmissions if you do it right. They can't enforce licensing for signals they can't detect.

HAM radio operators can't encrypt anything
http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/hsmm.html
Encryption on ham radio

While IEEE 802.11b allows WEP, an encryption algorithm, Amateur Radio transmissions are characterized as being an open media. That is, amateur radio operators expect and assume that their transmissions are being listened to around the world with no presumption of privacy. And, the FCC even mandates that hams will not encode/encrypt to obscure meaning.

Encryption is a subject for debate but the League feels that encryption is ok as long as the purpose is NOT TO HIDE the message content is within Part 97.  Again, the encryption's purpose is not to "obscure" but to provide security and authentication.  To further this, an amendment made to Article 25.2A (1A) at the 2003 World radio Conference no longer specifically prohibits the use of encryption and other strong security measures on transmissions between Amateur Radio stations within the same jurisdiction.

The FCC, under non-emergency situations does NOT want stations of one service routinely communicating with stations of another service  So many saw encryption as required to be used, and the ARRL attorney (Chris Imlay, W3KD) asked the FCC if that was acceptable and they said "yes". The FCC's reasoning was that it was NOT our INTENT (an important legal concept) to obscure the communications.

Some agree, some don't.  As far as I know the FCC is aware or should be as the HSMM and ARRL have made no secret that hams are using 802.11x with WEP for the  purpose of control of the access to Part 97 operations and thus far have not issued any citations.  It is my understanding that some hams have sent letters to the FCC telling them that they are running WEP and 802.11x on a certain 2.4 GHz frequency and at what location and times and the individual(s) have not received a citation.

This probably isn't much of an issue for a private network, but I can see it being an issue when porting traffic over the internet. Keep in mind how the FCC rules are stated: "An amateur station shall not intentionally obscure the meaning ..." Encrypting just login & password strings doesn't obscure the meaning does it? Also using encryption can be classified as an "unspecified" digital code, which is permitted as long as you provide public documentation for it.   Which can be fulfilled much the way the ARRL HSMM created a standardized WEP key that they posted on their webpage.

The use of encryption has actually been legal all along.  For the communications purposes of; network security and access control, emergency communications, and practice for same—our purposes in using encryption are the security of the network and the privacy of third-party information. In either case, the purpose is not to obscure meaning.

It should also be clarified that whatever encryption methods you use —WEP, WPA, WPA2, or whatever—it must be publicly documented. Please note that this specifically means the encryption algorithm, not the encryption key.