RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Announcements and News > Community Announcements and News

Community Announcements and News Announcements and News of interest to the RadioReference.com Community. All new threads posted here will be moderated by the administrators. Members are encouraged to post news and information here for the community.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #161 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2009, 5:16 PM
shelleys1's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2014
Posts: 173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SquierStrat View Post
what about the RadioReference Database CD-ROM sold at scannemaster.com, is all of this on that CD, and if so, is scannermaster gonna stop selling it immediately?
No, of course not. There's nothing wrong with including a system on the CD which is listed publically in the FCC database! (I have no doubt any lawyer, with any sense, will back that up 100%.)

If this company would quit making threats against Lindsay and do what they're suppposed to do to protect the privacy of their clients, they would encrypt or scramble transmissions. Then again, that would cost them more money and perhaps they would rather threaten Lindsay than spend the money! Hmmm

But again, there's legally nothing wrong with MONITORING frequencies published publically by the FCC, in your home. (Though I do want to make note there are some states which have laws that have certain restrictions against using scanners in vehicles.)

Shell
Sponsored links
  #162 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2009, 6:38 PM
Member
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shelleys1 View Post
No, of course not. There's nothing wrong with including a system on the CD which is listed publically in the FCC database! (I have no doubt any lawyer, with any sense, will back that up 100%.)

Shell
Shelleys,

The issue has never been about the information that is in the FCC database. The first letter from the lawyer made it perfectly clear that the information being disputed is the talkgroup ids and their associated business names. This information (to my knowledge) is not part of any government database, thus giving them the idea that it is private data (whether it truly is private or not is the heart of this debate, although it appears the courts have traditionally sided with those who say it is not private). Comparing RR to FCC database is truly not an apples to apples comparison. A better (although not perfect) comparison would be to compare the RR database to a database of unlisted phone numbers.

Going back to the original question, I would say there is still some uncertainty to the legality of the CD because RR is profiting off of the publishing of information heard from the scanner. If the courts were to try to find RR guilty based on that, a good counterargument would be that RR is not the one publishing the information, but instead it is the individual users who contribute the information and since none of us directly profit from our contributions, we are also not guilty of profiting off of the publishing of information from the scanner. (The preceding paragraph has been simplified somewhat based on my knowledge of the laws at work and I do not make any claims that they are 100% accurate given the complexities of the law)
__________________
PRO-2052
PRO 97
St. Charles, MO
  #163 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2009, 9:15 PM
milf's Avatar
Careful, I CAN hear you!
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 8,119
Default

My last comment on this:

Since this site grew from trunkedradio.net, we implemented the policy of only removing sensitive public safety, and federal information upon official request from the agency. This makes sense to me especially in the case of federal agencies since ALL federal radio information is technically "protected and restricted" and is NOT public domain. As for businesses, the way I see it is unless they are contracted by federal government for sensitive issues, they do NOT fall in this area. The only real "sensitive National Security" type businesses that may even fall NEAR this definition would be any of the nuclear power stations, and any of the energy distribution systems that have operations stations for the National Power Grid. And then ONLY the actual data referring to THOSE operations! This can make for a "sticky" legal area, since that can mean ANY and ALL of the power distribution corporations with wide area networks falls into this area. But then again, untill the corporations send an OFFICIAL request with proper reasons for removal, they should and will remain available for view. As far as I know the "Bush Era" Patriot Act laws never touched any of the FCC laws, rules, and or regulations with changes. Add to that the "Obama Era" promises of more translucency, things may swing in "our" favor. But only time, lawyers, and money will tell. End of commentary. Scan on!
__________________
Admin for AR, IN, LA, MS, and TN
Mod for AR, LA, MS and TN
Scanology, its the path to monitoring happiness!
Support your local Scanologists!
  #164 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2009, 11:42 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Orleans, LA
Posts: 41
Default

Lawyers looking to write new case law. That's all.
__________________
Grecom PSR-500, Grecom PSR-600, PSR-800, ARC500PRO
Uniden 996XT, Uniden 396XT, ARCXTPRO
Byonics GPS2
  #165 (permalink)  
Old 08-08-2009, 3:09 PM
shelleys1's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ballwin, MO - We are moving to Austin, TX 1 Mar. 2014
Posts: 173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nascarfan999 View Post
Shelleys,

The issue has never been about the information that is in the FCC database. The first letter from the lawyer made it perfectly clear that the information being disputed is the talkgroup ids and their associated business names. This information (to my knowledge) is not part of any government database, thus giving them the idea that it is private data (whether it truly is private or not is the heart of this debate, although it appears the courts have traditionally sided with those who say it is not private). Comparing RR to FCC database is truly not an apples to apples comparison. A better (although not perfect) comparison would be to compare the RR database to a database of unlisted phone numbers.

Going back to the original question, I would say there is still some uncertainty to the legality of the CD because RR is profiting off of the publishing of information heard from the scanner. If the courts were to try to find RR guilty based on that, a good counterargument would be that RR is not the one publishing the information, but instead it is the individual users who contribute the information and since none of us directly profit from our contributions, we are also not guilty of profiting off of the publishing of information from the scanner. (The preceding paragraph has been simplified somewhat based on my knowledge of the laws at work and I do not make any claims that they are 100% accurate given the complexities of the law)
The comparison of the RR database to a database of unlisted phone numbers is quite invalid. One is public, the other is private.

The (very) vast majority of posters on this board are NOT lawyers but you can be pretty much guaranteed that Lindsay isn't going to be selling his CD and Radio Shack, etc. wasn't going to be selling Radio Call for MANY , MANY years if it were illegal. (They have high-priced lawyers making sure of that!) I also know quite well from what I do on a day to day basis that *anyone* can access via the web, the FCC database and find the frequencies, there for EVERYONE to see, copy and put on their own website for anyone/everyone to see, copy, whatever, issued to businesses, school districts, public service agencies, etc. They can even send it out in newsletters if they wish because it is public knowledge. It's published openly and thus is not considered private.

Yes, RR and, in previous years other publications, were paid for their listings but they were paid for their service and reference - that being the compilation of all the frequencies. Putting them together agency by agency, state by state. The purchaser or individual was not buying or seeking a reference to just the frequency, which they could find for themself on the internet, but frequencies organized by state>county>city>municipality, or whatever/however else they wanted it. Again, it was a service and a reference, always designated as such.

As to your point about the talkgroups... That's still not a valid, legal complaint. There is absolutely nothing illegal about monitoring the frequencies and subsequently publishing the talkgroups overheard while monitoring the trunked system. If the vendor had/gave expectations of privacy for their client then they should have secured or encrypted the system. (Talkgroups are the means of communication on a trunked system!) If they failed to do so then they failed to do their job. Any good vendor, consultant, etc. would know that only a secured/encrypted trunked system gives their client privacy. (And the talkgroups would then, as you know, be secured/encrypted.)

Shelleys1
K0SHL

P.S. No, I don't work in radios, no I don't work in radio repair. Yes, I do know a lot about radios and use a lot of them. And yes, I believe I'm correct about this.
Sponsored links
  #166 (permalink)  
Old 01-12-2010, 2:09 PM
radioprescott's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: North Central Arizona
Posts: 350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blantonl View Post
Folks,

A quick update on this issue.

1) I sent the attorney an email with RadioReference's position and excerpts of 47 U.S.C. 605 that shows that we have a good position and legal right to post the data. Attached is MRAs response to that position.

PDF: http://wiki.radioreference.com/image...072009-002.pdf

2) We have retained legal counsel and have a team of folks working on a response to this letter and to firm up RadioReference's position that we have a legal right to post the data on the site.

More to follow as we work on this issue.

In the meantime, until we're able to finalize our position, the data will continue to be restricted from view on the site.

Warm regards,

Lindsay

Hi Lindsay,

Any progress on this issue?
__________________
John
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you've got an electrical problem.
  #167 (permalink)  
Old 01-12-2010, 2:17 PM
burner50's Avatar
The Third Variable
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ft. Worth, TX
Posts: 2,368
Default

Please dont drag up topics that are LOOOONG dead


People see the topic and dont look at the dates, then they assume its current and get into an uproar...
__________________
RadioReference.com Forums Moderator

Last edited by burner50; 01-12-2010 at 2:25 PM..
  #168 (permalink)  
Old 01-12-2010, 2:42 PM
brandon's Avatar
Member
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,418
Default

Basically they will leave the frequencies just not post LCN or talkgroups for MRA. I believe it was not worth the price to litigate, unless it became a widespread issue. If *really* needed, one can still find MRA stuff on various sources such as OrangeCountyScan, socalscan, Google cache, etc.
  #169 (permalink)  
Old 01-12-2010, 3:27 PM
W9GC's Avatar
Database Administrator
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Gulf Shores, AL
Posts: 437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by burner50 View Post
Please dont drag up topics that are LOOOONG dead

People see the topic and dont look at the dates, then they assume its current and get into an uproar...
He had a valid question regarding the status of any progress made on the issue. Old thread or not, nowhere in the TOS or rules are users prohibited from posting or asking questions about topics in "old" or "dead" threads. If the RR administration did not want members posting in old threads I'm sure the threads would be locked or deleted after a specified period of inactivity.
__________________
Sponsored links
  #170 (permalink)  
Old 01-12-2010, 5:26 PM
radioprescott's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: North Central Arizona
Posts: 350
Default

As gc505 mentions, since the thread wasn't closed and there was no closing comment from Lindsay, I just wanted to see if there was a resolution. Where else would I ask but on the topic thread?

brandon: Thank you! That was the answer I was looking for.

And while the topic of this particular thread may be "LOOOONG dead" the topic of removing listings under threat of legal action is very much alive. So the outcome of this particular topic was of interest to me.

Since a resolution has been reached, maybe it is time to lock the thread.
__________________
John
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you've got an electrical problem.

Last edited by radioprescott; 01-12-2010 at 6:48 PM.. Reason: After second thought, removed a comment
  #171 (permalink)  
Old 06-08-2010, 3:19 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: bham, Bama
Posts: 2,078
Default

Whatever happened with this???
  #172 (permalink)  
Old 06-08-2010, 3:47 PM
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
  Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 11,438
Default

Please read Brandon's reply above.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2011 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions