Warning to freebanders

[cyclops1970]

"[Hams] have no more rights in the free bands than anyone else."

True, but there is two big differences:

A) Transmitting on the freebands is illegal. Listening and reporting what you hear is not.

B) I would suspect that if a ham knew freebanding was going on, knew who was doing it, and didn't say anything and then later the freebander got busted and said "Joe Ham knew it was going on" Joe Ham's license would be gone.

If not for "aiding and abetting" then for "character qualifications". The FCC seems to be on a kick with that second one here lately....

 

[N8YX]

I would suspect that if a ham knew freebanding was going on, knew who was doing it, and didn't say anything and then later the freebander got busted and said "Joe Ham knew it was going on" Joe Ham's license would be gone.

'Knowing who is doing it' doesn't fall under the same legal definition as aiding and abetting.

Especially if the perpetrator(s) have no knowledge whatsoever that they're being monitored. A workable analogy would be that you knew Joe Blow was stealing cars; you heard it through the grapevine. You're not under any legal obligation to turn Joe in, though one could argue that doing so is the correct thing to do.

If you were to act as Joe's lookout on one of his 'Midnight Auto Parts' resupply runs, you would definitely be viewed as an accomplice to the act.

Likewise, if you were participating in a freeband net - were selling non-type-accepted radios for the furtherance of such activities - or were using your position in the enforcement community to draw away heat from an ongoing investigation, you would be viewed as - and could be charged as - an accessory to the fact.

Merely listening to a given transmission or transmissions does not infer collusion on one's part. Indeed, there are statutes on the federal books that specifically prohibit divulging the contents of certain types of intercepted transmissions. You do not want to find yourself dragged into a courtroom in defense of your actions unless those are well-documented and legally airtight. Defamation of character and slander are but a couple of civil actions that can leave you penniless...

 

[cyclops1970]

'Knowing who is doing it' doesn't fall under the same legal definition as aiding and abetting.

Let's not forget that the FCC operates outside the normal legal system, so normal legal definitions don't apply.

Especially if the perpetrator(s) have no knowledge whatsoever that they're being monitored.

In the hypothetical above, how would the freebander know to implicate Joe Ham unless the freebander knew he was being listened to in first place?

Merely listening to a given transmission or transmissions does not infer collusion on one's part. Indeed, there are statutes on the federal books that specifically prohibit divulging the contents of certain types of intercepted transmissions. You do not want to find yourself dragged into a courtroom in defense of your actions unless those are well-documented and legally airtight. Defamation of character and slander are but a couple of civil actions that can leave you penniless...

True, but I believe transmissions containing information relating to illegal activites are exempt. And the FCC has said on numerous occasions that so called pirate or freeband stations have no legal rights whatsoever to occupy a frequency. So I would think that the exemption would apply there as well. It would be interesting to see what Riley would say on that...

 

[N8YX]

[quote="cyclops1970]Let's not forget that the FCC operates outside the normal legal system, so normal legal definitions don't apply.[/quote]

Those laws and the definitions therein most certainly do apply - including rights of the accused to access court dockets, be present or respresented at evidentiary hearings, the right to a fair trial, appeals before an administrative law judge and so forth. You might be thinking of the NTIA, whose authority lies outside of that granted to the FCC...and does tend to operate differently.

In the hypothetical above, how would the freebander know to implicate Joe Ham unless the freebander knew he was being listened to in first place?

He wouldn't, unless the ham first acknowledged the fact. As far as I know - and I will attempt to verify this - licensees in the amateur radio service are under no obligation whatsoever to report infractions that occur in other radio services.

True, but I believe transmissions containing information relating to illegal activites are exempt.

Again...I will verify this, either via consultation with an attorney who specializes in telecommunications law -or- with a little online law-library research.

And the FCC has said on numerous occasions that so called pirate or freeband stations have no legal rights whatsoever to occupy a frequency. So I would think that the exemption would apply there as well.

True - when dealing with an incursion into the amateur bands - but AFAIK not true when non-amateur allocations are concerned.

It would be interesting to see what Riley would say on that...

Depending on my schedule tomorrow I may make a call...but I'm guessing that the conversation will go as follows:

Unless a given procedure, law or regulation is explicitly spelled out in Part 97; CFR 47, a U.S.-licensed amateur radio operator is under no obligation to follow such...nor does he or she have legal responsibility or authority to act as an agent for a licensee or licensees of another radio service when it comes to interference resolution. That is, unless said interference extends to a frequency which is part of a service in which the individual holds a license...

 

[N8YX]

Just thought of a new angle on all this, Cyclops:

If you're correct, and an amateur radio operator is required to notify the FCC of illicit activity if he or she is aware of it taking place...we can kiss this site (and a number of others) goodbye.

For aiding and abetting, as it were:

Facilitation of type-acceptance voiding, coordination of illegal operating activites...construction of illegal power amplifiers...distribution of non-type-accepted equipment...the list could go on and on.

As I understand it, there are several hams who are actively involved in the administration of this forum, and that makes them culpable under the various statutes we've been discussing...IF there's any merit to them.

Food for thought.

 

[todt061458]

That would be a very bitter pill for a lot of folks at a lot of sites.
I have been a ham for many years and have never read in any rules book where we as hams have to do the FCC's job for them and monitor other services and the activity on any other bands.
I would like to know what statute and what rulemaking session that concept came from? I am not a paid employee of the FCC so I ask why should I or any other ham even bother to monitor other freq's not associated with the amateur radio services?
I think some of us are rather board and must live a very board life. with threads like this it's no wonder that the ham bands are shrinking. We should teach others to be good operators not berate them just because they are cbers, Remember 11 meters used to be a ham band way back when. or as was said to me tonight in a PM do you all are just hate cbers. could it really be that simple? I sure hope not. 73's

 

[airplane1]

So as long as a freebander dont bleed in on or interfear with ham band, hams should just let freebanders be and not worry so much about it because it is not there responsibility. Then why do the hams worry so much? are the freebanders having more fun?

If they moniter the freeband and report freebanders they are braking an FCC rule and that makes them just as bad, right?

OR What?

AP

 

[N8YX]

So as long as a freebander dont bleed in on or interfear with ham band, hams should just let freebanders be and not worry so much about it because it is not there responsibility. Then why do the hams worry so much? are the freebanders having more fun?

Some apparently take it upon themselves to police the world's airwaves...and their motivations may or may not make sense to the rest of us.

If they moniter the freeband and report freebanders they are braking an FCC rule and that makes them just as bad, right?

Currently, there's no law against monitoring the RF spectrum...with the exception of cellular and certain cordless-telephone frequencies.

Another thread on this site suggests that a licensed amateur operator may be in fact be obligated to report illegal activity if he or she hears it, regardless of where said activity occurs. I disagree with that statement, and am planning to contact Riley H. himself for clarification on the matter...

 

[RT675]

That would be a very bitter pill for a lot of folks at a lot of sites.
I have been a ham for many years and have never read in any rules book where we as hams have to do the FCC's job for them and monitor other services and the activity on any other bands.
I would like to know what statute and what rulemaking session that concept came from? I am not a paid employee of the FCC so I ask why should I or any other ham even bother to monitor other freq's not associated with the amateur radio services?
I think some of us are rather board and must live a very board life. with threads like this it's no wonder that the ham bands are shrinking. We should teach others to be good operators not berate them just because they are cbers, Remember 11 meters used to be a ham band way back when. or as was said to me tonight in a PM do you all are just hate cbers. could it really be that simple? I sure hope not. 73's

If their causing interference to the Amateur frequency's then it is our business. I don't personally run around the free band looking for people to bust, I am usually on the free band trying to enjoy the peace and quiet. I am both Ham and a CB'er and if I ever cause interference to the 10 meter or 6 meter band I know it will be my ass. AS been stated the FCC cant do it all and we have been told to help police our bands so thats what most of us are doing. CB used to be a ham band until all the truck drivers got a hold of Cb's and the FCC couldn't keep up. Now with that said do you want 10 meters to go the way of the CB? Threads like this does not keep people from becoming hams, technology is our biggest threat,computers and cell phones. My mother in law asked me one time " why don't you just get a cell phone what you doing is ridiculous" These are the reasons that Amateur radio is dying out a long with a few other points that I wont make on here.

 

[yama junk owna]

Mr. radio cop let me lay this on you, if you report someone regardless if you have a license or not, the FCC has to make available to the person who his accuser is. This all falls under the freedom of information act, and unless you have a video of the person doing the act along with a real good set of documents, the only thing you have done is open yourself to one hugemongious lawsuit!!!! Policing one's band's in the case of being an amateur is quite a bit different than ratting out your neighbor when what he is doing is none of your business!!!

 

[N8YX]

Mr. radio cop let me lay this on you, if you report someone regardless if you have a license or not, the FCC has to make available to the person who his accuser is. This all falls under the freedom of information act, and unless you have a video of the person doing the act along with a real good set of documents, the only thing you have done is open yourself to one hugemongious lawsuit!!!!

Exactly what I have been getting at - 'hearsay' is NOT going to convict, and one may well find themeselves a target of a libel suit.

A video of the action isn't necessary, but properly documented evidence - such as electronically captured spectrum analyzer traces - are vital to a successful prosecution.

At one time this was done with a rackful of Watkins-Johnson multichannel receivers, sweep analyzers and so forth...alll of which had the capability of storing the data they captured. The equipment's calibration standards were traceable to the NIST and measurements taken with the gear were for the most part considered irrefutable.

Policing one's band's in the case of being an amateur is quite a bit different than ratting out your neighbor when what he is doing is none of your business!!!

Ah...yep. As long as said neighbor isn't causing you a problem, you should have no quarrel with him or her. Too many people take it upon themselves to do otherwise and actually create more problems than they solve...

 

[RT675]

Mr. radio cop let me lay this on you, if you report someone regardless if you have a license or not, the FCC has to make available to the person who his accuser is. This all falls under the freedom of information act, and unless you have a video of the person doing the act along with a real good set of documents, the only thing you have done is open yourself to one hugemongious lawsuit!!!! Policing one's band's in the case of being an amateur is quite a bit different than ratting out your neighbor when what he is doing is none of your business!!!

Sounds to me like your a little bitter. The Freedom of Info act is a bunch of shit!!!!! How do I know ?Well let me see .....if a person calls Social Services on a person he/she thinks is doing something wrong they cannot and I repeat "CANNOT" disclose who made the report and how do I know? Well lets just say that I have a close family member that works as a Social Worker and have they or the reporting party ever been sued? Hell NO. There are a few others including Doctors,Lawyers and so on. Further more I am not a radio cop nor do I ever intend to be just stating the facts, actually I am a pretty loose guy. There are a few on here that know me from the other forum that I belong to. I just hate all the Innuendo's and accusations that are made by people that don't have enough info to back up what there saying. And If I'm wrong, then I am man enough to admit it. The FCC will disclose @ there own discretion the reporting party if they want to, if theres no reason to then well they don't, and if you know who the guilty party is then yes you need to ask him to chill and please try to be more mindful of your neighbors.

 

[yama junk owna]

I'm not bitter just fed up with this ( Duh I'm goin turn you in to the teacher crap ) . As far as the FIA is concerned child abuse and radio enforcement are way different things with different rules.

 

[N8YX]

I'm not bitter just fed up with this ( Duh I'm goin turn you in to the teacher crap )

...understatement of the century there, dude...

 

[airplane1]

More hams should be like that not to care about other operaters unless they interfear with your legal operation.
we all could get along better.

I agree with you guys and thats cool. If I was causing problems to the ham band I would expect to get told about it and if I keep it up then reported to the FCC.

But I am very careful not to, my neighbor is a ham no more than 150ft away and I never interfear with him and he knows I freeband and dont care one way or another.

We talk alot about radios and related stuff.

AP