Now THIS is scary!!!

[boswell]

Hi there

I'm a videographer at a TV station in Ontario. A few months I went to the manager and told him the adoption of the Fleetnet system meant we needed to go with digital scanners.

I got him some prices and he said he would submit them to the financial people.

I'll be honest, I thought it was a lost cause.

Today, I find out the purchase was approved.

Well, doesn't that jar your preserves!

So now I get to program a half a dozen digital scanners!

I can hardly wait

B

 

[scnnr]

So now I get to program a half a dozen digital scanners!

I can hardly wait

B

Well nothing to it with the Win96 program and the programming cable.

Enjoy your new chore.

 

[jellotor]

Wow. That is good news.
At our shop, we still don't have a scanner that will track the EDACS system in one of the 3 municipalities that makes up our core audience. A suggestion was made that one could be purchased for very little...and we wait still.

Nice of management to give you the tools to actually do your job, eh? (This is assuming you're not shooting on SVHS!)

 

[mrcpu]

Hi there

I'm a videographer at a TV station in Ontario. A few months I went to the manager and told him the adoption of the Fleetnet system meant we needed to go with digital scanners.

I'm not trying to start a flame war here... just curious. Isn't it illegal to use information from a scanner for profit? Wouldn't getting the scoop on a good story through the scanner lead a TV station to make a profit through increased ratings?

Secondly, which of the 4 or 5 clauses qualifies a radiostation to own a digital scanner? Preservation of life perhaps?!?!

Anyways, I realize EVERYONE on the planet in the media has a scanner so it seems kind of stupid to point all of this out!

Cheers,

Rob

 

[Jay911]

Isn't it illegal to use information from a scanner for profit?

My brother in law used to work for a large newspaper chain in Canada. They use scanners, and they also use police issued radios with the transmit capability "revoked electronically" (i.e. disabled). With the scanners, I think it's akin to pulling someone over for doing 103 in a 100. Everyone does it, but no one gets hit for it. As for the radios, they have the main dispatch channels for Fire, Police, and EMS, but none of the tactical channels or such. The media outlets are operating on the understanding that if they do something stupid (publish a name they heard, etc), their radio will get real quiet real fast. (System-generated ROS_IDLE command, anyone? )

I know there are media folks on here - perhaps they can clarify the above better than I can.

Secondly, which of the 4 or 5 clauses qualifies a radiostation to own a digital scanner?

Not to sound like a smart- :shock: , Rob, but the part that says, on page 2,

As well, these circulars have no status in law.

As I have said again and again, the Internal Procedures Circular from Industry Canada is just an internal memo suggesting what they might do if they were to license digital scanners. I have yet to see proof that any of these licenses exist. Someone send me a jpeg of a license and I'll gladly change my tune, but until then, I contest there is no such thing as a law requiring digital scanners to be licensed in Canada.

 

[boswell]

I'm not trying to start a flame war here... just curious. Isn't it illegal to use information from a scanner for profit? Wouldn't getting the scoop on a good story through the scanner lead a TV station to make a profit through increased ratings?

The relationship between Emergency Services and the media is a long and complex one. On one hand, some in ES would like to see no scanners in anyone's hands. However, most realize we in the media have a job to do and provided we don't get in the way or jeopardize criminal investigations, it's live and let live. Besides, everyone likes good press and if the taxpayers see the police, firefighters and paramedics hard at work on the 6 oclock news, they think perhaps they're getting their money's worth.

Secondly, which of the 4 or 5 clauses qualifies a radiostation to own a digital scanner? Preservation of life perhaps?!?!

Hand in hand with good press, the emergency services need us when they have to get the word out about a situation that should be heard (or seen) by all residents. Again, provided play along and don't 'foul the nest' , there should be no conflict. Besides, we had analogue scanners for years that allowed us to listen to all the ER services, it's going to take a court case to ban digital scanners completely.

Anyways, I realize EVERYONE on the planet in the media has a scanner so it seems kind of stupid to point all of this out!

Media outlets are forbidden to relate what they hear on a scanner directly to the audience. If I hear about a structure fire downtown, I will either call dispatch to confirm or go have a look myself.
Most do this, some do not.
But yes, we all have scanners.

B.

Cheers,

Rob[/quote]

 

[mrcpu]

It's great to hear directly from the media on this! I'm glad no one took my comments in a negative way but rather in the "just curious" way!

This is akin to all the times I hear about jumpers on the transit system but never hear about them in the news. I am proud of our media here in Canada and the over all responsible attitude in the media when reporting events. There are some great comments about this in "Bowling for Columbine" if I recall correctly.

Cheers!

 

[jellotor]

I've mentioned this before on another board but it's worth repeating again: restricting the use of scanners to "qualified" people (and let's assume that by simply working in the media you are not considered qualified) can be a way of causing problems in oversight as far as emergency services are concerned.

This can be a problem in places such as Niagara where the RPS are completely unmonitorable and events are spoon-fed to the media by way of an alpha-numeric pager. So, who's making the call on what's newsworthy in that situation?

Anyway, I'll leave it at that...the media & scanner regulations plus emergency services is a huge, multi-faceted issue that seems to pop up every so often!

 

[_jabber_]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the use of digital scanners while in a moving vehicle illegal? I thought i heard that somewhere

 

[Jay911]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the use of digital scanners while in a moving vehicle illegal? I thought i heard that somewhere

Never heard that one.

As far as I know, there are no laws specifically relating to digital scanners on the books in Canada. I will remain unconvinced until hard proof is shown to me on these forums or in person.

I do believe some provinces restrict scanner usage overall, but nothing has been enacted targeting digital scanners/receivers directly.

 

[mrcpu]

Never heard that one.

As far as I know, there are no laws specifically relating to digital scanners on the books in Canada. I will remain unconvinced until hard proof is shown to me on these forums or in person.

I do believe some provinces restrict scanner usage overall, but nothing has been enacted targeting digital scanners/receivers directly.

<Flame Proof Suit>
I don't want to preach to the "unconvertable", but if you go to the Industry Canada site and do some research and/or contact them, you will find out that you do need a license for a scanner with is digital (or user modifiable, ie add in card like BC250D). Nothing about driving around with it or anything like that though. I don't want to sound rude but ignorance of the law has never been a defence.</Flame Proof Suit>

Anyways, now that I'm a licensed HAM (Passed exam a couple of weeks back) I qualify under IC requlations. Now I'm out to buy me a nice portable transciever. The ones I'm looking at are wide band recievers and will pick up more on the low end then my scanner will, although none of them trunk so I won't be getting rid of my scanner.

It will be nice to be able to monitor TPS and at the same time monitor TTC without having to suffer the latency when it switches banks.

I know it is illegal to have a sanner in your car in some places, I think Manitoba is one but don't quote me on that and the Digital licensing requirement is Canada Wide.

 

[scnnr]

I don't want to preach to the "unconvertable", but if you go to the Industry Canada site and do some research and/or contact them, you will find out that you do need a license for a scanner with is digital (or user modifiable, ie add in card like BC250D). Nothing about driving around with it or anything like that though. I don't want to sound rude but ignorance of the law has never been a defence.

There is no digital scanner license. The IPC was for INTERNAL USE ONLY.

The guy who wrote the IPC is no longer with Industry Canada.


I and most others here in the hobby up here in Canada believe that is the true status of the so called license requirement.

As far as this licensed Ham crap thing goes , give that a break already. I have been scanning for over 20 yrs. and I am tired of you guys thinking that you all are some kind of privileged people.

Randy

 

[peteman]

Yes in Mnitoba it is illegal to have an operating scanner in your vehicle, not a cc offense as far as I know, HTA thing I believe.

 

[Jay911]

if you go to the Industry Canada site and do some research and/or contact them, you will find out that you do need a license for a scanner with is digital (or user modifiable, ie add in card like BC250D).

Can you do me a favor and provide me with the direct link to the actual law that states such a thing, please? I'm not trying to be snotty or anything, I'm just asking you to direct me to where you saw it, so I don't go somewhere else and base judgement on something that may not be what you saw.

If you're basing your statements on the contents of IPC 2-1-04, I will remind you of what I said up earlier in this thread: IC itself has admitted that IPC2104 is an internal document (i.e., not for public consultation), and states very clearly within its text "These circulars have no status in law". That means that IPC2104 cannot be used to enforce or argue anything. It has as much legal standing as me writing on a piece of paper "It is illegal to sell oranges on Yonge Street on Wednesday".

Having said that, though,

Anyways, now that I'm a licensed HAM (Passed exam a couple of weeks back) I qualify under IC requlations.

First of all, congratulations.

Second of all, I 'qualify' too. I'm a member of an emergency service.

However, here's some food for thought. What of the people who are actually licensed or expected to use that system in the course of their job? There's no exemption for them in the IPC document. The digital system here is used by not only the emergency services, but a public utility, and the airport staff.

Are they allowed to get a scanner to listen to the system? If not, why not? The "license" application form I've seen people tossing about (associating with digital scanner "laws") is the same license form one would use to be allowed to operate on the system in a transmit mode, i.e. the airport authorities and utility companies. Does that license not allow them to run digital scanners as well?

And one last time,

the Digital licensing requirement is Canada Wide.

I don't mean to sound mean, or to be directing this solely at you, but my response to the above quote is:

Prove it.

 

[scnnr]

And one last time,

mrcpu wrote:
the Digital licensing requirement is Canada Wide.


I don't mean to sound mean, or to be directing this solely at you, but my response to the above quote is:

Prove it.

I agree with Jay 100% on his comments. I apologize if I come off a little strong on some of my comments , but it does get tiring hearing people telling me how they are qualified to have a digital scanner & the rest of us are not.

Thats enough venting for me. :wink:

Randy

 

[Jammin_Jay]

Why is it that industry Canada is so concerned in liscencing these digital scanners. I assume that there thinking that the digital scanners will cause some type of interference with the Digital Signal in these Fleetnet and trunking systems which is a load of BS. But they claim they donot know the complete impact it will have so they want to control who has one by issuing liscences or a quailified ham operators permit, or liscenced techincian who won't cause interference. Basically it boils down to I.C. is using this as a tactic to control the amount of digtal scanners to whom legallly by trying to registered with a liscence. The interference thing is just a way of saying we are full of BS.

 

[Jay911]

Jammin_Jay, no offense, but...

ARGH!!!

I give up. Everybody can think what they want, I don't care any more. Just remember, I wouldn't mind seeing a license if/when someone gets one. Even just the license number so it can be looked up on the TAFL / Strategis site.

But I'm tired of arguing about it, giving proof, and having people totally ignore me.

 

[scnnr]

ARGH!!!

But I'm tired of arguing about it, giving proof, and having people totally ignore me.

:wink: I believe you Jay, I agree it is getting tiring hearing about this license thing when no one is offering a jpeg of their personal license or even so called letters giving them permission to monitor digital comms.



ARGH!!!

Is right.

Randy

 

[DaveH]

Jay,

Your argument is well-reasoned and I believe it. The problem is you
are not hearing so much from the others who also agree.

I earlier thought that IC didn't have their act together but could hang
this "licensing" thing over our heads i.e. those who behave won't be
bothered, but become a nuisance and the "law" could be exercised. Since
there is no "law", that's not it. I think they are just doing what governments
do best, taking the path of least resistance.

You would think that at least one person, perhaps a super-law abiding
type, would have secured a licence by now, and proudly announcing
the fact. It would be hard to keep such a secret.

Anyway, it doesn't affect me currently. Paying $1000 mostly to listen
to OPP is out, even though I could afford it. No misunderstanding, I
like the OPP, having monitored them since the days of 42MHz, but
I will make do with SIM11, VR2, and Beat repeaters for now.

Dave

 

[mrcpu]

There is no digital scanner license. The IPC was for INTERNAL USE ONLY.

The guy who wrote the IPC is no longer with Industry Canada.


I and most others here in the hobby up here in Canada believe that is the true status of the so called license requirement.

As far as this licensed Ham crap thing goes , give that a break already. I have been scanning for over 20 yrs. and I am tired of you guys thinking that you all are some kind of privileged people.

Randy

Really, eh? Hmmm.... because when I contacted IC they provided me information stating that a license was required and a form to fill out! Not to mention the fact that there is a sticker inside the BC250D's battery compartment that states you need a license in Canada!

As for your HAM comments, Yes, we ARE privileged. WE have written exams and qualified under International agreements in order to operate radio equipment which YOU are not allowed to even look at. Attitudes like your own stem from an "I'm better then everyone else" self image in which you think you are somehow outside the laws and customs of the land.

Feel free to reply but your not worth any more of my keystrokes.

P.S. I think the digital scanner law is completely stupid.