Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 01:58:56PM -, Craig wrote: > FCC regulation 97.115(b) says that non hams may use ham radio > frequencies. True, Craig, but only under the control of a licensed ham. Allowing non-hams with DV Dongles to talk on D-Star removes that control. -- Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!) Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
so anyone can use ham radio without a license --- On Mon, 12/29/08, Craig wrote: From: Craig Subject: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 8:58 AM FCC regulation 97.115(b) says that non hams may use ham radio frequencies. http://www.arrl. org/FandES/ field/regulation s/news/part97/ bruce mallon wrote: > > So does this meen that if your digital you can allow non hams use of ham frequencies. .. > > From: k7ve > > I don't know / have not heard about the FCC > > specifically allowing ordering a pizza over > > an auto patch or similar activities. > > > > It was big news when the change in the regulations were made, this was > probably over 10-20 years ago. They of course, don't codify the words > "you can order pizza" in the regs, but I believe it revolves around > 97.113a3 -- you cannot operate such that it is a financial gain > (pecuniary interest) to yourself or your employer. So the reasoning > goes, if you don't own or work for the pizza shop, you can order a > pizza over an autopatch. > > This is mentioned in the ARRL article at > http://www.arrl. org/FandES/ field/regulation s/phone-patch. html (item 2) > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
97.115c No station may transmit third party communications while being automatically controlled except a station transmitting a RTTY or data emission. If i go digital then i can use a ham radio for what ever i want ? what are you saying that no licenses are needed If so then why even test ?? Lets get rid of licenses . Now I'm realy lost . --- On Mon, 12/29/08, Craig wrote: From: Craig Subject: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 8:58 AM FCC regulation 97.115(b) says that non hams may use ham radio frequencies. http://www.arrl. org/FandES/ field/regulation s/news/part97/ bruce mallon wrote: > > So does this meen that if your digital you can allow non hams use of ham frequencies. .. > > From: k7ve > > I don't know / have not heard about the FCC > > specifically allowing ordering a pizza over > > an auto patch or similar activities. > > > > It was big news when the change in the regulations were made, this was > probably over 10-20 years ago. They of course, don't codify the words > "you can order pizza" in the regs, but I believe it revolves around > 97.113a3 -- you cannot operate such that it is a financial gain > (pecuniary interest) to yourself or your employer. So the reasoning > goes, if you don't own or work for the pizza shop, you can order a > pizza over an autopatch. > > This is mentioned in the ARRL article at > http://www.arrl. org/FandES/ field/regulation s/phone-patch. html (item 2) > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
This is getting real interesting, general quires expanded to fit ones illusions of total license operation No.? Referenced 97.115 (b) concerns 3rd party traffic I believe under supervision and Control of a control Op. Sounds like one of those test questions on the Extra test. it goes back to the question is the originator or the relaying station license holder held responsible? And what of the recipient station? ( if said station passes on traffic) When in doubt. diplomatically decline such traffic. A whole can of worms in the broad sense. Common Sense should prevail. To err in the conservative is better than to err with penalties or license loss. 73, Tom -Original Message- From: bruce mallon To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 9:52 am Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations so anyone can use ham radio without a license --- On Mon, 12/29/08, Craig wrote: From: Craig Subject: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 8:58 AM FCC regulation 97.115(b) says that non hams may use ham radio frequencies. http://www.arrl. org/FandES/ field/regulation s/news/part97/ bruce mallon wrote: > > So does this meen that if your digital you can allow non hams use?of ham frequencies. .. > > From: k7ve > > I don't know / have not heard about the FCC > > specifically allowing ordering a pizza over > > an auto patch or similar activities. > > > > It was big news when the change in the regulations were made, this was > probably over 10-20 years ago. They of course, don't codify the words > "you can order pizza" in the regs, but I believe it revolves around > 97.113a3 -- you cannot operate such that it is a financial gain > (pecuniary interest) to yourself or your employer. So the reasoning > goes, if you don't own or work for the pizza shop, you can order a > pizza over an autopatch. > > This is mentioned in the ARRL article at > http://www.arrl. org/FandES/ field/regulation s/phone-patch. html (item 2) > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Please TRIM your replies or set your email program not to include the original message in reply unless needed for clarity. ThanksYahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
SOMEONE made the statement that the rules allow unlicensed people to use ham bands ... Sorry if my comment was attached to your reply. I'm not attacking anyone just trying to understand where and when we would need a license under the " REVISED " rules. The problem here seems that some are looking to change rules they seem outdated to what ever agenda they have... and allow non hams to use ham radio to forward messages and conduct business. That's all I'm asking . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
OK - I was confused because it was attached to my posting - we're cool. On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:06 AM, bruce mallon wrote: > SOMEONE made the statement that the rules allow unlicensed people to use ham > bands ... > Sorry if my comment was attached to your reply. I'm not attacking anyone > just trying to understand where and when we would need a license under the " > REVISED " rules. > > The problem here seems that some are looking to change rules they seem > outdated to what ever agenda they have... and allow non hams to use ham > radio to forward messages and conduct business. > > That's all I'm asking . > 73 de K7VE
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
The problem with common sense is that it's not so common - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 11:53 AM Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations [snip] When in doubt. diplomatically decline such traffic. A whole can of worms in the broad sense. Common Sense should prevail. To err in the conservative is better than to err with penalties or license loss.
Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Follow-Up on U.S. Regulations
bruce mallon wrote: > 97.115c No station may transmit third party communications while being > automatically controlled except a station transmitting a RTTY or data > emission. > > > If i go digital then i can use a ham radio for what ever i want ? what > are you saying that no licenses are needed If so then why even test > ?? > > Lets get rid of licenses . > > Now I'm realy lost . Bruce, Time to wake up pal. No one here is or has advocated that licenses are not needed. Unlicensed people can talk on amateur radios under the guidance of a licensed amateur only. Try to stay on topic and not stray. Nick WB4SQI
