Thelegacy: Please, once and for all, will you put your delusions of Part 15 grandeur aside and stop falsely accusing the NAB of trying to stomp on legal hobby broadcasters? They have done no such thing. Ever. Show me when and where they have. Or knock it off.
The NAB has been a thorn in the side of LPFM though.
To be fair, the NAB hasn't been mentioned once in this thread.
The NAB was mentioned in Reply #7.
And what did John say? And he even helped put a LPFM station on air. So if they are giving LPFM issues don't you think they are not happy about bedroom DJ's?
I had this guy Hohn Peterz who not only at myself has displayed his disapproval of Bedroom dj's who don't spend the same amount of money on Audio Processing and has got banned from AM & FM Hobby Broadcasting. Now look up John Peterz and you'll see who and where he works for. I think enough has been said about that one.
The NAB was also mentioned in post #2.
The literal definition of a radio pirate is (we all know) an unlicensed radio stations operating outside the rules (too much power).
But there have been some gimmiical uses of the expression "pirate".
The shortwave station WBCQ calls itself "the world's only licensed pirate" because its owner, Alan Weiner, once operated the pirate radio ship "Radio New York International" anchored off-shore from New York City.
Many licensed FM stations have publicized themselves as "pirates" for the carefree dashing bold image that goes with it in the minds of listeners.
It would be funny (sort of) if a legal part 15 station called itself a pirate just for the sensation of it.
I think it's funny how the article omits the fact that in times of emergency and disaster you're allowed to use whatever radio methods are at your disposal, including using the broadcast bands to communicate vital information to people in your area. I'm a little out of the loop, but that's still allowed, right?
Brett, the "you're allowed to" clause is quite specific. For example, a licensed Amateur operator can use whatever radio means are necessary when a genuine emergency exists. But then the debate shifts to what a genuine emergency consists of: does a downed wire over on Elm Lane sparking in the street qualify? Probably not, but a swollen river rapidly flooding a neighborhood would.
At the same time, "Whatever radio methods are at your disposal" is similarly murky. Does that allow us to throw a brick through a front window of an unattended townie AM and take over their programming when a gas truck explodes under the only bridge out of town? I doubt it.
If you want to legitimize your presence prior to the next local emergency, I suggest you let the local Amateur community know that you and your rig are both available during emergencies and disasters as a cooperative and mutual service. You utilize their resources to gather the "vital information" you need, they utilize yours to get the word out to the general public.
I cannot speak for the lawmakers, but I get the feeling that, if, following a disaster, your little low-power affair helped coordinate and distribute evacuation instructions that spared every life in town, you *might* be forgiven a temporary punch up to 1 watt (just don't do it again).
I'll have to look into that further, as I am a licensed amateur, I'm just really out of practice.
Keep in mind that bill is sponsored by the New York State Broadcasters Association... and guess which association unlicensed stations *aren't* paying to be a member of? Exactly -- it's all about money. Every minute spent by someone listening to an unlicensed radio station instead of a commercial radio station is lost revenue for this association, its member stations, and their advertisers.
And the complaint about unlicensed stations not carrying EAS warnings is laughable. EAS has to be one of the least effective and most archaic emergency warning systems in use today. EAS tests are so frequent that when an actual warning does come along, most people think it's just a test and ignore it. And usually the audio quality is so poor that even if you are paying attention and trying to hear what the warning is about, you can't understand it! I think even the radio transmissions NASA received from astronauts on the moon 49 years ago had better audio quality than EAS warnings today!
I certainly don't condone radio pirates.
But I have to wonder if the licensed stations actually question *why* people are listening to the pirates, as opposed to their station. It's that the pirates are giving people the entertainment that they want.
Do the licensed stations really believe that if a pirate is removed, their listeners will all of a sudden migrate to their station? Of course they won't. They'll just find some other way to listen to what they truly want to hear.
These days, there are so many entertainment options. Radio stations have to compete. They can do that by getting out into the community, finding out, and then providing, what their potential audiences want.
Out-pirate the pirates (legally, of course).
The FCC can help by making it easier for community oriented stations to get started and then survive, rather than propping up the conglomerates. That way they would be doing their job as well, which is providing the best radio to the public.
It's really the FCC that has created the current situation. One could make a case that the FCC (mis)management of radio licenses has generated the radio pirate crisis.
Radio Impacto, NYC Pirate, 91.9:
and yes, they ran EAS in 2014 (Was stunned to hear it, and the DJ made it a point to re-read it in Spanish)
WBAI, NYC non-comm station, 99.5: http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-new-wbai-studio.html (likely the best case for license revocation in the US)
Both extreme cases at opposite ends of the legal spectrum. The issue here is there is no way to go on the air legally in most major markets without dropping millions to acquire a station from an existing licensee.
The lack of spectrum that is not going to interfere with another broadcaster, and the zillion FM translators for the non-viable AM stations is only making the situation worse.
SP
Question: is it still legal in Canada to use up to 1 watt without a license? I think the caveat was you have to live in a rural area.
It never was legal to use a watt in Canada without a license.
You must be thinking of RSS-123 where it's a LICENSED service for special events. Yes up to 1 watt can be used but your field strength must be no more than a certain amount at the perimeter of your target area.
In Canada no rural or urban differences exist.