Ambassador of Recreational Radio, owner operator of KDX Worldround Radio, webmaster for kdxradio.com, host of The Blare Blog.
Reader Interactions
Comments
Ken Norrissays
Bad law Yes, I’d have to agree with the author in this case. The main flaw appears to be that it puts authority for arrest into the hands of those with no technical know-how to determine whether or not a broadcast is legal or not. E.g., a Part 15 station, though perfectly legal with no need for paperwork issued by the FCC, could be shut down and the operator arrested and jailed for a felony by any cop-on-the-beat.
Seems a bit extreme, and sloppily written with no consideration at all for technical or even federal determination of legality of a broadcast. Since it also takes such determination away from FCC which has authority, they ought to raise a stink with the NY State legislature.
I’m not in favor of piracy, but from what I see so far, it’s a bad law. I hope it gets soundly defeated.
kk7cwsays
New York radio law… According to the U.S. Constitution, states have the right to regulate intrastate commerce for the public good and welfare of each state. So, licensed radio stations that are physically in the state of New York (considered intrastate commerce) that are interfered with by unlicensed stations, can make a legal complaint in the state courts for prosecution. Historically, these laws have not gotten very far before they are challenged and struck down on a constitutional basis (the Supremacy Clause). The basis of the new law however, recognizes the authority of the FCC to regulate and license commercial and public service radio signals. The state law, as it is written, does not dilute the authority of the FCC. It only tacks on additional penalties to the penalties already imposed by the federal government. States already have the right and authority to do just that (States Rights clause). This law would, for New York businesses (licensed radio stations), supply legal relief for damages caused by interfering signals.
New laws are not usually required to lay out the proof needed or the process to prove that a violation of the law has occurred or the amount of damages. That would be the job of the Grand Jury and the courts, not law makers or agency representatives..
Also, this does not (on it’s face) constitute double jeopardy, which the Constitution forbids. An example might be, an individual pollutes a local stream. He is taken to court by local or state authorities, loses in court and is ordered to pay a fine. Then the federal EPA also prosecutes the case and make their own case in federal court, and the court orders another fine. Although I can’t think of the specific case, It has happened. (Maybe the “Love Canal” housing project case?)
And finally, this is only a proposal for new lawmaking in the New York Assembly. It still has to pass both houses and be signed by the Governor. And, you can bet it will be tied up in appeals court after that. Ahhhh, the smell of tax payers money being burned by attorneys. I am not an attorney or legal authority. I’m just sayin’.
Carl Blaresays
Adding a Note or Two Agreeing entirely with Marshall, I would add that one of our problems in general in the way law is structured, is that there are all these layers, only two of which were mentioned, those being state and federal. We also have localities and counties and sometimes even neighborhood associations. We are over-governed, at times.
But getting to the specific, even if the proposed NY law DID contradict FCC law, the FCC wouldn’t simply make a phone call and set them straight. No. Now to paragraph three, which explains what DOES happen in matters of law.
Money. Lawyers. That’s the bottom line and Marshall is on point.
We lay people always say, “I’m not a lawyer, but…” But being a lawyer is a complex life of never ending research and study, and can be steered this way or that way depending on whose side the lawyer serves.
We must be prepared to die for part 15 liberty.
Ermi Roossays
The FCC remains in charge The FCC is still in charge of investigations and raids in the states that have similar laws. About the only practical effect of the laws that I see is that the FCC has ready access to help from local law enforcement for raids.
radio8zsays
A Felony! A problem I have with this proposed legislation is that it provides felony punishment. This is extreme since a convicted felon loses rights and will have a permanent disability when seeking credit or a job. The punishment doesn’t fit the crime.
Would this mean that a person who receives a NOUO would go to trial as an accused felon?
The phrase “WITHOUT FIRST HAVING OBTAINED A LICENSE OR AN EXEMPTION ” could be problematic since it implies the exemption would have to be on an individual basis such as is the case for a license. That may not be the intent but it could be interpreted this way.
It would be good to know what prompted this. I don’t recall reading an inordinate number of NOUOs from NY. It appears that NY is more interested in collection than compliance.
One way to achieve a totalitarian state is to make everything illegal. We are well on our way.
Neil
kk7cwsays
Egalitarian State The reason for laws is to point to cultural mores and wrong-doing, not that which is right about society. As our society has changed and gone through many iterations over the decades, lawmakers have tried to satisfy the loudest and most influential voices of that time. Our national history is replete with example after example of good and poor based on public influence and legislative decision. The fundamental decision for societies historically is: bullets or ballots.
Law requires a philosophical anchor. Our is anchored in the Magna Carta and, ultimately, the US Constitution. It is well to note that those people who choose to ignore history are destined to repeat it. If the best of our people fail to speak up, the best ideas will never be decided. We are not born with the skills to influence. We must learn them along life’s highway. We, believe it or not, have been presented many opportunities to do so. Many of us shy from the challenge and, instead, choose to be the voice of complaint without a solution. Complaints are usually ignored and fall short of their intended mark.
I encourage those who read this to read our foundational documents; our anchors. They are: The US Constitution and its incumbent amendments, The Communications Act of 1934 and subsequent Communications Acts, the FCC Rules and Regulations, your State Constitution and any local ordinances involving your interests in radio. Then, find like minded people who will help you spread the word; not to complain, but rather to spread the ideas of positive change. With the help of the internet, these ideas can go viral in just hours. An example of just such influence is the current situation in Egypt.
You don’t like a proposed law, fight it before it becomes law. Letting a sleeping dog lie, doesn’t preclude him from eating your lunch.
Carl Blaresays
Maybe Oxymoron While agreeing with Marshall Johnson Sr. just now, I also see the title “Egalitarian State” as a possible oxymoron, but I’m speaking from blind intuition until I give it more thought.
More important, I want to come out in favor of complaining. But here’s where we come back into agreement: one must not stop short at complaining. That’s too much like a dog barking at a fence (huh? More blind intuition?). Here’s my central point, using the word “anchor” in a different way than Marshall used it.
I think a complaint is the anchor point of a movement toward change. The complaint defines what is wrong AND what might be done to fix it. But the complaint is only a starting point.
Just don’t complain about me.
rock95sevensays
Part 15, you have a Call on Line 1
If we all lived in New York and remained withing part 15 limits causing no interference and our operations were publicly known, our stations should remain intact until the day we decide that part 15 is no longer worth our time and effort….. that aint happening any time soon. Not for me anyway.
Line .1 of this bill states:
1. KNOWINGLY MAKES OR CAUSES TO BE MADE A RADIO TRANSMISSION IN THIS
STATE WITHOUT FIRST HAVING OBTAINED A LICENSE OR AN EXEMPTION FROM
LICENSURE FROM THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE
FEDERAL LAW OR REGULATION; OR
See how they worded this?? I am no lawyer but I am intelligent enough to know that the FCC has given us License to operate as we see fit as long we stick to the rules. While i used the term License loosely we really don’t need one, rather we were given Authorization to operate in all of the Part 15 sections of the RF Spectrum, as soon as we overstep those limitations set fourth by the FCC we forfeit the Authorization to use those frequencies and the devices needed for our operations.
But as they say, I’m just preaching to the choir now.
Now to a layman, that is someone without any knowledge of how part 15 works may look at this bill and scratch their heads or perhaps go ape s*** and try to cause trouble for legitimate part 15ers who are in it just for the love of the hobby or radio. Lets hope it doesn’t come down to that.
If they want to really make a mess of this then no one in NY would be allowed to use cordless phones, baby monitors etc etc.
RFBurnssays
Control-A-Con It has everything to do with controlling media. And yes the bill is ridiculous as is the penalty.
And Rock95seven is correct, Part 15’ers and their certified equipment have the exemption already in place which basically makes this bill nothing more than a political football to bandy back and forth for political gains.
The state cannot charge you for a crime that did not take place. Even with the way the bill is currently worded, the exemption/authorization is and has been in place from the federal level (FCC) to which the bill anchors its position on that very federal level that grants the authorizations and exemptions.
I suppose they (the state of NY), will have to order up a bunch more hand-cuffs and build a heck of a lot more jails with all the wi-fi and cell phone/i-mobile devices scattered all over the state. OR did they not THINK about that stuff?!!
DUH!
RFB
kc8gpdsays
jersey passed this law after jersey passed this law after florida did so ny had too look for pa to eventually pass this too. those three states like to play copy cat.
Bad law
Yes, I’d have to agree with the author in this case. The main flaw appears to be that it puts authority for arrest into the hands of those with no technical know-how to determine whether or not a broadcast is legal or not. E.g., a Part 15 station, though perfectly legal with no need for paperwork issued by the FCC, could be shut down and the operator arrested and jailed for a felony by any cop-on-the-beat.
Seems a bit extreme, and sloppily written with no consideration at all for technical or even federal determination of legality of a broadcast. Since it also takes such determination away from FCC which has authority, they ought to raise a stink with the NY State legislature.
I’m not in favor of piracy, but from what I see so far, it’s a bad law. I hope it gets soundly defeated.
New York radio law…
According to the U.S. Constitution, states have the right to regulate intrastate commerce for the public good and welfare of each state. So, licensed radio stations that are physically in the state of New York (considered intrastate commerce) that are interfered with by unlicensed stations, can make a legal complaint in the state courts for prosecution. Historically, these laws have not gotten very far before they are challenged and struck down on a constitutional basis (the Supremacy Clause). The basis of the new law however, recognizes the authority of the FCC to regulate and license commercial and public service radio signals. The state law, as it is written, does not dilute the authority of the FCC. It only tacks on additional penalties to the penalties already imposed by the federal government. States already have the right and authority to do just that (States Rights clause). This law would, for New York businesses (licensed radio stations), supply legal relief for damages caused by interfering signals.
New laws are not usually required to lay out the proof needed or the process to prove that a violation of the law has occurred or the amount of damages. That would be the job of the Grand Jury and the courts, not law makers or agency representatives..
Also, this does not (on it’s face) constitute double jeopardy, which the Constitution forbids. An example might be, an individual pollutes a local stream. He is taken to court by local or state authorities, loses in court and is ordered to pay a fine. Then the federal EPA also prosecutes the case and make their own case in federal court, and the court orders another fine. Although I can’t think of the specific case, It has happened. (Maybe the “Love Canal” housing project case?)
And finally, this is only a proposal for new lawmaking in the New York Assembly. It still has to pass both houses and be signed by the Governor. And, you can bet it will be tied up in appeals court after that. Ahhhh, the smell of tax payers money being burned by attorneys. I am not an attorney or legal authority. I’m just sayin’.
Adding a Note or Two
Agreeing entirely with Marshall, I would add that one of our problems in general in the way law is structured, is that there are all these layers, only two of which were mentioned, those being state and federal. We also have localities and counties and sometimes even neighborhood associations. We are over-governed, at times.
But getting to the specific, even if the proposed NY law DID contradict FCC law, the FCC wouldn’t simply make a phone call and set them straight. No. Now to paragraph three, which explains what DOES happen in matters of law.
Money. Lawyers. That’s the bottom line and Marshall is on point.
We lay people always say, “I’m not a lawyer, but…” But being a lawyer is a complex life of never ending research and study, and can be steered this way or that way depending on whose side the lawyer serves.
We must be prepared to die for part 15 liberty.
The FCC remains in charge
The FCC is still in charge of investigations and raids in the states that have similar laws. About the only practical effect of the laws that I see is that the FCC has ready access to help from local law enforcement for raids.
A Felony!
A problem I have with this proposed legislation is that it provides felony punishment. This is extreme since a convicted felon loses rights and will have a permanent disability when seeking credit or a job. The punishment doesn’t fit the crime.
Would this mean that a person who receives a NOUO would go to trial as an accused felon?
The phrase “WITHOUT FIRST HAVING OBTAINED A LICENSE OR AN EXEMPTION ” could be problematic since it implies the exemption would have to be on an individual basis such as is the case for a license. That may not be the intent but it could be interpreted this way.
It would be good to know what prompted this. I don’t recall reading an inordinate number of NOUOs from NY. It appears that NY is more interested in collection than compliance.
One way to achieve a totalitarian state is to make everything illegal. We are well on our way.
Neil
Egalitarian State
The reason for laws is to point to cultural mores and wrong-doing, not that which is right about society. As our society has changed and gone through many iterations over the decades, lawmakers have tried to satisfy the loudest and most influential voices of that time. Our national history is replete with example after example of good and poor based on public influence and legislative decision. The fundamental decision for societies historically is: bullets or ballots.
Law requires a philosophical anchor. Our is anchored in the Magna Carta and, ultimately, the US Constitution. It is well to note that those people who choose to ignore history are destined to repeat it. If the best of our people fail to speak up, the best ideas will never be decided. We are not born with the skills to influence. We must learn them along life’s highway. We, believe it or not, have been presented many opportunities to do so. Many of us shy from the challenge and, instead, choose to be the voice of complaint without a solution. Complaints are usually ignored and fall short of their intended mark.
I encourage those who read this to read our foundational documents; our anchors. They are: The US Constitution and its incumbent amendments, The Communications Act of 1934 and subsequent Communications Acts, the FCC Rules and Regulations, your State Constitution and any local ordinances involving your interests in radio. Then, find like minded people who will help you spread the word; not to complain, but rather to spread the ideas of positive change. With the help of the internet, these ideas can go viral in just hours. An example of just such influence is the current situation in Egypt.
You don’t like a proposed law, fight it before it becomes law. Letting a sleeping dog lie, doesn’t preclude him from eating your lunch.
Maybe Oxymoron
While agreeing with Marshall Johnson Sr. just now, I also see the title “Egalitarian State” as a possible oxymoron, but I’m speaking from blind intuition until I give it more thought.
More important, I want to come out in favor of complaining. But here’s where we come back into agreement: one must not stop short at complaining. That’s too much like a dog barking at a fence (huh? More blind intuition?). Here’s my central point, using the word “anchor” in a different way than Marshall used it.
I think a complaint is the anchor point of a movement toward change. The complaint defines what is wrong AND what might be done to fix it. But the complaint is only a starting point.
Just don’t complain about me.
Part 15, you have a Call on Line 1
If we all lived in New York and remained withing part 15 limits causing no interference and our operations were publicly known, our stations should remain intact until the day we decide that part 15 is no longer worth our time and effort….. that aint happening any time soon. Not for me anyway.
Line .1 of this bill states:
1. KNOWINGLY MAKES OR CAUSES TO BE MADE A RADIO TRANSMISSION IN THIS
STATE WITHOUT FIRST HAVING OBTAINED A LICENSE OR AN EXEMPTION FROM
LICENSURE FROM THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE
FEDERAL LAW OR REGULATION; OR
See how they worded this?? I am no lawyer but I am intelligent enough to know that the FCC has given us License to operate as we see fit as long we stick to the rules. While i used the term License loosely we really don’t need one, rather we were given Authorization to operate in all of the Part 15 sections of the RF Spectrum, as soon as we overstep those limitations set fourth by the FCC we forfeit the Authorization to use those frequencies and the devices needed for our operations.
But as they say, I’m just preaching to the choir now.
Now to a layman, that is someone without any knowledge of how part 15 works may look at this bill and scratch their heads or perhaps go ape s*** and try to cause trouble for legitimate part 15ers who are in it just for the love of the hobby or radio. Lets hope it doesn’t come down to that.
If they want to really make a mess of this then no one in NY would be allowed to use cordless phones, baby monitors etc etc.
Control-A-Con
It has everything to do with controlling media. And yes the bill is ridiculous as is the penalty.
And Rock95seven is correct, Part 15’ers and their certified equipment have the exemption already in place which basically makes this bill nothing more than a political football to bandy back and forth for political gains.
The state cannot charge you for a crime that did not take place. Even with the way the bill is currently worded, the exemption/authorization is and has been in place from the federal level (FCC) to which the bill anchors its position on that very federal level that grants the authorizations and exemptions.
I suppose they (the state of NY), will have to order up a bunch more hand-cuffs and build a heck of a lot more jails with all the wi-fi and cell phone/i-mobile devices scattered all over the state. OR did they not THINK about that stuff?!!
DUH!
RFB
jersey passed this law after
jersey passed this law after florida did so ny had too look for pa to eventually pass this too. those three states like to play copy cat.