1 STOP CB Shop Fined $7,000

[C2]

I think it was written in the rules that, if you owned contraban, that you were presumed to have used it illegally.

 

[mackmobile43]

I think it was written in the rules that, if you owned contraban, that you were presumed to have used it illegally.

Yup, just like if the cops show up and you're sitting beside a dead body then you're quilty untill proven innocent.

 

[Shioda]

I think it was written in the rules that, if you owned contraban, that you were presumed to have used it illegally.

Nope. First, the FCC's position is that only the person offering to sell 10 meter transceivers is violating the regulations. It is not a violation to own one. The same is true of any Amateur transceiver. In fact, the FCC has sent letters to various Amateur sites warning against allowing the advertisement for sale of any opened Amateur transceivers, including ICOM, Yaesu and Kenwood. Once the equipment is modified, the FCC's position is that it cannot be sold without being certified. By the way, I know of at least one FCC agent who has a modified ICOM he uses to "listen" to CB. He says there is nothing wrong with his actions, as long as he doesn't sell the radio.

You are probably thinking of the rule with regard to 11 meter Amplifiers. That is the case where the FCC will presume possession equals operation.

 

[Sonwatcher]

You would not be cited just for listening. Guaranteed. You have the right to possess any Amateur radio on the market or to even build your own transceiver and there is nothing the FCC can do about it.

We are not discussing "any" amateur radio. These are illegal radios. Granted there is no law against ownership but if I have it hooked up to my station without a valid license it will be construed that I have operated them . Case in point-

On June 4, 2007, in response to complaints of interference, agents
from the Commission's Tampa Office of the Enforcement Bureau ("Tampa
Office") inspected the Citzens Band ("CB") station located at Mr.
Ross' residence. During testing of Mr. Ross' equipment, the agents
determined that two of his CB radio transmitters were non-certificated
transceivers, capable of transmitting on unauthorized frequencies. The
agents also measured the output power for his transmitters and found
them to be operating with seven and eight watts, respectively, output
powers greater than authorized in the Commission's Rules ("Rules").
The agents orally warned Mr. Ross that use of non-certificated or
modified equipment capable of transmitting on unauthorized frequencies
and with greater power than authorized is strictly prohibited by the
Rules and voided his authority to operate the CB station. Mr. Ross
voluntarily surrendered both devices to the agents.

It is worded in such a way as to imply there were other radios but 2 were illegal. They specifically implied their use because they were part of his equipment at his CB station.

On another note they placed him on limited hours of operation because of causing interference during certain parts of the day. During these off hours they listened to him operating. During his inspection they looked at his log book and found he had made several "long distance" contacts during the hours they they were listening. It is interesting they warned him for breaking his hours allowed and ignored warning him of his "long distance" infraction .

November 20, 2007, the agents observed an open notebook. The
notebook showed log entries that indicated that Mr. Ross made several
long distance calls using his CB radio during that morning. The
entries coincided with the times the agents, using direction finding
techniques, traced transmissions originating from Mr. Ross' residence.
The agents orally warned Mr. Ross that the use and possession of the
linear amplifier and operating out of the authorized hours prescribed
on the official letter issued on July 10, 2007 violated the Rules and
voided his authority to operate the CB station.

Theoretically you may say they have to catch you using the specific radio but I think they mostly assume you have because it is there . In several other NAL's it is stated that the individual admitted verbally to the use of the radio. This one shows no verbal admission. He did willfully allow them to take them .

 

[Sonwatcher]

Back in the early 90's several HAM shops were fined for selling the Kenwood TS-50 because it was too easy to modify to work out of band. The FCC eventually dropped the cases because they could not prove a violation of the regulations.

That is interesting. I found a rule statement of the FCC as follows-

Furthermore, we have
previously stated that ARS equipment that can be easily modified
to extend the operating frequency range into CB frequency bands
are CB transmitters subject to equipment authorization
procedures.

My FT-757gx without modification only allows transmit on Amateur bands. The ability the exclude one portion over another is technically working. But with the flick of a factory installed switch the whole radio is wide open for transmit including 11 meters. Why, if this is such a problem for ARS radios and rules, isn't the same technology that was used to exclude certain portions of the spectrum from transmitting be activated for 11m when the switch is pushed ? By flipping that switch I easily activated my radio
to extend the operating frequency range into CB frequency bands?

Galaxy models DX33HML and DX99V. As
noted above, OET had already tested these specific models and
determined them both to be dual use Amateur Radio and CB transmitters.
Each of the models could be modified to allow transmit capabilities on
CB frequencies.

They were considered dual use because-
Each of the models could be modified to allow transmit capabilities on
CB frequencies. Where do you separate the definition of an easily modified ARS radio that allows transmit capabilities on CB frequencies ?

 

[Shioda]

What the FCC says and what they can prove in court are often two different things. That is because the people at lower levels who go to homes and business have no idea what the law is or what the regulations say. They are just following orders.

The 10 meter radios are not illegal. As evidence, the FCC lost the action to collect the fine. The illegality only comes into being when people without a license use them on frequencies for which a license is required, or modify the radios to use in the "freeband" or on frequencies for which certified equipment is required. If you modify any transceiver, whether Ranger, ICOM, Kenwood, etc. and start broadcasting in the "freeband" you may be violating the regulations and could be fined. If you don't modify any of those transceivers, but broadcast on the 10 meter band without a license, same result. Only the FCC can fine you without giving a citation first.

Be careful not to accept as gospel whatever the FCC publishes on its website, especially about enforcement. It may not be accurate as to what the law and regulations actually state.

That is interesting. I found a rule statement of the FCC as follows-

My FT-757gx without modification only allows transmit on Amateur bands. The ability the exclude one portion over another is technically working. But with the flick of a factory installed switch the whole radio is wide open for transmit including 11 meters. Why, if this is such a problem for ARS radios and rules, isn't the same technology that was used to exclude certain portions of the spectrum from transmitting be activated for 11m when the switch is pushed ? By flipping that switch I easily activated my radio
to extend the operating frequency range into CB frequency bands?


They were considered dual use because-
Each of the models could be modified to allow transmit capabilities on
CB frequencies. Where do you separate the definition of an easily modified ARS radio that allows transmit capabilities on CB frequencies ?

 

[bigred222]

In my conversation with the FCC all export 10m radios are legal for Amateur use .

You talked to them....?!?!?!?!?!?

 

[Sonwatcher]

You talked to them....?!?!?!?!?!?

Yepper. It was an attempt to quell all the disagreement over the issue here in a discussion. I didn't think the exports were legal for Amateur use and didn't want to go by hearsay that they were. I was wrong. Getting over the fear of the initial call to Gettysburg actually turned out an easy deal. I just asked the lady the question and she said she would get back to me after speaking with someone in charge with that area. She called back I believe the very next day with the answer .

 

[Sonwatcher]

One thing I do find interesting is when you take the rules governing dual-use radios such as the exports but allowing the same thing to be legal with FRS/GMRS . FRS is not a licensed service and is low power. GMRS is a licensed service which allows more power . Both allowed in the same radio. There may be reasons for the legality but at first glance it seems that they should follow the same restrictions of a dual-use radio .

 

[mackmobile43]

I still love the title of this thread which only proves CW MORSES hate for the average cber by starting a false rumor of an apparent fine levied against 1 stop before the case ever went to court which would be a violation of the constitution of the United States of America.

The stigma is that the fcc is all powerful and thy will shall be done is a misnomer and that they have no more power or authority than most other enforcement agencies in America, but I'm sure if given the chance they would become so but the American people have not allowed this to happen so far.

I would caution CW MORSE to post the final standings of court cases in the future and stay away from the enforcement pages which are only that, they're act of doing what we have commisioned them to do and nothing more which is to bring to the courts attention that the will of the fcc has been breached and that is as far as they're act of enforcement goes.

 

[C2]

but that wouldn't make CW feel good!

 

[mackmobile43]

but that wouldn't make CW feel good!

did'nt think he would take my advice anyhow/

 

[Shioda]

FCC about to lose another one. FCC expert admits that Galaxy 99 is "legal out of the box."

 

[Sonwatcher]

A CB Shop used an email from a Commission staffer stating his personal thoughts on the legality of the DX-99v for their defense. Here was the FCC's response-

First, the Commission has
consistently held that regulatees are responsible for compliance with the Commission’s Rules and that
they should not rely on informal opinions from Commission staff. 27
Additionally, “[w]hen the staff
advice is contrary to the Commission’s rules, the Commission may still enforce its rules despite any
reliance by the public.”

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-597A1.pdf

 

[Shioda]

Difference this time is that the witness was designated by the FCC to testify as an official representative in court, so the statement is binding.