- February 25, 2019 at 11:06 pm #109814
If everyone doesn’t start to become an activist right now we all could be treading some Dangerous Waters.
The following text just came in today from Rec Net. We must stop the arguing and fighting and the Great Divide among the people in this community or we are going to lose it all.
Today, the house passed HR-583, The PIRATE Act. This bill increases the forfeitures for unauthorized operation in the broadcast bands. Intended to have pirate radio taken more seriously by the Department of Justice in their enforcement and collections processes. REC agrees with most of the language of the PIRATE Act with the exception of the removing the FCC’s authority to preclude state and local laws relating to “pirate” radio operation. While this bill addresses the “user”, it does not address the other two prongs of pirate radio:
– The retailers that market uncertified equipment
– The reasons why people resort to pirate broadcasting
Note that there is specific language that this law does not apply to operations that are compliant with Part 15 of the rules. This now goes to the Senate.
- February 26, 2019 at 6:38 am #109816
The sky is not falling. Actions by law enforcement at least in Florida (an active Pirate State) have always included FCC agents who know the difference between Part 15 Rules and Pirate Broadcasting.
The 2018 Florida Statutes
View Entire Chapter
877.27 Unauthorized transmissions to, or interference with, a public or commercial radio station licensed by the Federal Communications Commission prohibited; penalties.—
(1) A person may not:
(a) Make, or cause to be made, a radio transmission in this state unless the person obtains a license or an exemption from licensure from the Federal Communications Commission under 47 U.S.C. s. 301, or other applicable federal law or regulation; or
(b) Do any act, whether direct or indirect, to cause an unlicensed radio transmission to, or interference with, a public or commercial radio station licensed by the Federal Communications Commission or to enable the radio transmission or interference to occur.
(2) A person who violates this section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
- February 26, 2019 at 7:48 am #109818
Of course Part 15 is in itself an exemption to any licensure requirement, but the above law states “obtains a license or an exemption from licensure“.
So, can the Part 15 rules be considered obtained?
If they are not obtained you might be detained.
- February 26, 2019 at 8:05 am #109822
I would keep a copy of FCC Rules for unlicensed broadcasting within handy reach. This way, your obtained copy will mitigate you being detained.
As a side note: I have a ham radio friend ( ironically – N1FM) from Delray Beach who is now a retired cop. He and other cops raided a pirate after being tipped by the FCC. The raid was not executed because of the pirate operation but because they were operating the station without a business license and subsequently selling advertising to local businesses. The PD confiscated the transmitter ONLY and placed it the Delray Beach PD’s storage. The PD then notified the FCC to come and get it. Well after a period of time if the FCC does not claim it, it can actually be returned to the original owner as long as they pay a fine for operating without a business license. Guess what? Back on the air with no on-air advertising.
- February 26, 2019 at 8:11 am #109824
Total posts : 471
From what I’ve read, the bill does differentiate between illegal unlicensed broadcasting (i.e., pirates) and legal unlicensed broadcasting (such as Part 15).
I would think that this bill would only be of real concern to pirates. Yes, it’s possible that someone operating a conforming Part 15 station could be wrongly accused of being a pirate. But it’s also possible that you can be wrongly accused of many things, including drunk driving, libel, assault, etc. By doing anything, there’s always the risk of being perceived as running afoul of the law, or offending someone and having them make an unwarranted complaint to the authorities.
The alternative is staying at home, on your couch, curled into a ball and doing nothing.
I suspect the intent of this law is to give the authorities the legal clout to do something about real pirates who are blatantly interfering with licensed services. I doubt that they’re going to worry too much about 100mw (to the final) intentional radiators.
- This reply was modified 4 months, 3 weeks ago by ArtisanRadio.
- February 26, 2019 at 9:53 am #109832
A cop won’t be able to tell the difference from 100 mW or 1,000 Watt transmitter.
This is where we need to Unite. Get involved and let congress and the FCC know that the bill’s current language could cause harm to legally unlicensed part 15 AM stations in which many serve the public in rural areas. Its time to show the government that hobby broadcasters can provide the public interest, convenience and necessity and therefore there needs to be clear language in any bill to protect innocent people. Remember court cases can be very expensive.
I only hope Michelle Bradley will do the work for this hobby as many are just not getting it. Why I don’t know.
- February 26, 2019 at 11:43 am #109835
Again as Artisan just pointed out, the Pirate Act guide which enforcement will be based upon clearly states the law doesn’t apply to part 15 broadcasters.
The only concern we have is that we are complying with that rule.
As an alternative we can imagine “they” are actually under cloak trying to take away our rights, and unite and fight for our liberties!! CHARGE!..
Hey, if nothing else it at least gives us something to talk about.
- February 26, 2019 at 11:45 am #109836
I don’t live in the States but as I see it the FCC rules and exemptions are a federal jurisdiction and a state can’t make their own laws as to what’s legal or illegal with licensed or unlicensed broadcasting. They are just saying that if you interfere with a licensed station, which is already not allowed, they are, in addition to the FCC rule, are making it a felony similar to marijuana possession.
But the bad thing is you could have a criminal record for this. That is in my mind going way overboard as it’s a federal thing and a law already exists for this. Punishment isn’t fitting the crime.
But they are going after the users, not the sellers of all the transmitters.
- February 26, 2019 at 11:56 am #109837
The Legacy Writes On the Wall
“This is where we need to Unite. Get involved and let congress and the FCC know.”
We all agree and have united together, and we all appoint you, TheLegacy, to contact Congress and the FCC on behalf of all of us!
- February 26, 2019 at 2:12 pm #109838
- February 26, 2019 at 5:54 pm #109843
Total posts : 56
Looks like I might as well go back to the days of my Lafayette AM broadcaster, you had to wrap the antenna wire from the broadcaster around the radio in order to get the signal. That should be safe to use that… Too bad the goofs who come out of Cuba or the islands some place who move to Florida think they can just go on the air to get their message out. They are messing this up for all of us and we, the innocent pay the price. On the other hand how come we get squeezed by the government and the people in the government can lie all they want and be traitors to our country, and get away with major crimes and not be punished or held responsible? Why should we worry about a signal that can’t be heard outside of our house for the most part anyway? What the government should do with unlicensed flee power transmitter operators is do like they did for liquor or tobacco or man a wanna… Make it legal, they do that for everything else they can’t stop, so make it legal. You have speed limits but the cop doesn’t stop anyone, the people who obey the speed limit like me are nothing but suckers for obeying the law. For myself I’m going to bring out my Lafayette broadcaster… I doubt nobody wants to hear my tunes anyway If I use my TH. If I can listen to my stuff on my own radio and that’s it, ill use my imagination for the rest.
That’s all I got
- February 26, 2019 at 7:00 pm #109844
Your making to much out of it Radio Joe. Don’t listen to the cries. This HR583 doc means almost nothing to worry about for the common part 15 broadcaster. There is nothing to be concerned about as long as your range is less than a 2 mile radius (since that’s about the best a legal part 15 AM could do). I think it’s prudent at a mile max, per the norm.
Edit: I should clarify..
As long as your part 15 install is reasonably compliant then you have practically nothing at all to worry about.
Real world test (as well as calculations) have shown that a 100% compliant install has a plausibility of achieving a 2 mile radius – that’s what I meant when I was referring to a max range above.
- This reply was modified 4 months, 3 weeks ago by RichPowers.
- February 26, 2019 at 10:07 pm #109846
Some of you guys really need to go to the Facebook form called part 15 am and FM hobby Broadcasting. Michelle Bradley runs that form and she runs REC Net. I popped the question about kits in the 08 E63 Bulletin. She says nowhere has it been said that kids are 100% legal. The reason I brought this whole thing up was because of my C-Quam AM transmitter.
I even told Michelle that I tried to get procaster to make a C-Quam AM stereo certified transmitter to no avail.
I’m trying to look out for us C-Quam AM Stereo users that transmit music that requires this type of transmission.
At least I’m fighting for everybody by keeping close dialogue with REC Net apparently the only people that seem to be taking me seriously at this point.
- February 27, 2019 at 4:15 am #109849
Total posts : 218
I think some of us need to calm down.
It remains business as usual around here.
- February 27, 2019 at 5:14 am #109850
R R R radio8, 73, me
- February 27, 2019 at 6:26 am #109853
Fanning the Flames of an Unstarted Fire
The opening post by TheLegacy contains confusion and contradiction which risks fire in an uncrowded theater.
We are talking about two different documents neither of which is linked until now, when I’ll give you Michelle Bradley speaking for REC Network:
It is important to understand that Ms. Bradley’s Statement is NOT HR-583, which thus far has not been linked in this thread.
- February 27, 2019 at 8:27 am #109858
Ms. Bradley should be running things!
Thelegacy and her would make a great team.
“We all agree and have united together, and we all appoint you, TheLegacy, to contact Congress and the FCC on behalf of all of us!”
- March 21, 2019 at 8:44 am #110527
Darn right Mark me and Michelle could make things work but as I have stated before because of what OET (Office Of Engineering And Technology for those who don’t know what OET means as when Station 8 mentioned he has talked with the Office of Engineering And Technology at an ALPB meeting no one knew what he was talking about). Anyways back to something I’m bringing up as I am a C-Quam AM Stereo user and advocate as a member of the C-Quam AM Stereo forum in which myself along side with some Album Rockers (WION in Ionia, Michigan) are working HARD to FORCE the reserrection of C-Quam AM Stereo as AM’s last and final march before the green mile of Death.
Because in the OET bulletin which clearly says Home Brew and nowhere does it say a kit. Michelle’s take was that unless that kit was certified technically its illegal but too due to AM’s dying status she thinks the FCC won’t go after me for my C-Quam AM Stereo transmitter and guess what… They came to my house for a second time in 2019 with my C-Quam AM Stereo running, my promotion for C-Quam AM Stereo running every so often and they didn’t even knock on the door to talk with me. They walked RIGHT up to the antenna then my wife said she saw them get out something she doesn’t know what a field intensity meter looks like but from what she describedd that was what it was. They took the box with them and followed a straight line to the left of the antenna and stopped and then took off down the road and they never came back. So obviously Michelle was right. So its C-Quam all day long but why her stance that we can’t no longer talk about the ASMAX2 transmitter is beyond me. I didn’t get in trouble so why the ban on it? Why the concern? Well we’ll just see at the C-Quam forum what Greg Bushwald an advocate for C-Quam’s return thinks of this because if the FCC can come to my house and see I’m using a C-Quam transmitter and to the best of my knowledge unless Procaster or Rangemaster has prototypes of C-Quam transmitters it sold to only a few vast members that should have cleared that all up.
- March 21, 2019 at 10:27 am #110536
ANSWER TO THELAGACY ABOUT MICHELLE: She doesn’t want talk about those things because of the nature of the business she is in. She has a very good reputation in front of the FCC and does not want that reputation sullied unnecessary chat about uncertified devices. Why invite the referee into the game?
- This reply was modified 4 months ago by AMRadiolegend.
- March 21, 2019 at 9:19 am #110530
She said that you can’t discuss the ASMAX on the forum because it’s not certified and I think she has a rule that an uncertified transmitter can’t be discussed or offered for sale.
Can’t that transmitter also exceed 100mW?
But you can see from the visit that the FCC cares most about interference and field strength, even more than a ground lead length.
- March 21, 2019 at 10:25 am #110535
How very true. Because I can already tell you well I probably won’t go into it. The point is that you’re right about the ground lead rule.
I’m not about running gobs of power versus a good antenna that is sufficient. That’s another reason I’m thinking about putting my antenna and transmitter on a boat because you’re making it more efficient and us getting the range without trying to overload someone’s radio.
To answer your question I did find out that if you run about 24 volts instead of 12 as a power supply because the European model is the same exact transmitter then yes you could potentially run over a hundred milliwatts. But to make things equal you can make any transmitter go over the limit by doing the same thing. But you would risk burning out your transmitter if the parts are not meant for that kind of power do you see what I mean? All things equal.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.