More proof that the FCC should be abolished.
The FCC lost a case that set precedence back in 1981. i think it still haunts them today . the link says facebook , but it is to the actual PDF of the FCC case . It a interesting read .
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.www.facebook.com
More proof that the FCC should be abolished.
Listened to a round table last night, where everyone was cordial to one another, but f-bombs among other vulgarities were dropped with impunity.
You could always hope when the new VMs are unleashed they will put a kabash to it it all!!
B) This is the tip of the iceberg. This problem will only get MUCH worst. Think of that nasty repeater in California.
A "licensed ham" is a holder of a government-issued amateur radio license.A) Those are not licensed hams acting that way. They're CCRs
Neither of the above links work...
What would you propose replace it?
Profanity is legal on amateur radio. Obscene and indecent language is not, but the Supreme Court has narrowly defined the constraints of what constitutes "obscene" and "indecent" language. I listen to that Miami repeater frequently, and most of what is said over it is merely profanity.
While this document pertains to commercial broadcasting, it defines the relevant terms.
Since the Richard Burton case out in California several years ago, the FCC has been very leery of even issuing warnings about language content on amateur radio. Listen to some of the shenanigans on a couple of 40m and 75m phone frequencies and you'll hear some very obscene things by very well known operators who actually identify themselves. Been going on for years by the same perpetrators and the FCC never does anything. And of course, there's the notorious 147.435. The good news is that this sort of activity constitutes a very tiny part of amateur radio, and the easy way to avoid it is to spin the proverbial dial.
Such as doing what?
Actually, that's not true.The control operator is responsible for every single transmission on that system.
§97.205 Repeater station.
(g) The control operator of a repeater that retransmits inadvertently communications that violate the rules in this part is not accountable for the violative communications.
Must have changed the rules then. Back in the AX25 packet days a station forwarded a message that was full of profanity. The FCC issued a blanket warning letter to every op that forwarded it. About 1991.Actually, that's not true.
My concern is the young Miami area kid with his newly minted Tec license that stumbles upon this repeater. Not to mention it does not project a good image of ham radio in general when malfeasance of this kind is heard by the general public, considering both the LA and Miami repeaters are being streamed...
Neither of the above links work...
If anyone is interested, the referenced document for the case of Hildebrand vs FCC can be found on the Wayback Machine: Hildebrand vs FCC
I understand, but I have to chuckle a little. Young Miami kids are going to hear stuff that is just as bad, if not worse, at school all day long every day. (Unless perhaps s/he is homeschooled.) It's a different world up on Walton's Mountain now. Moreover, I'm of the opinion that having a "rogue" repeater in every area actually helps the rest of the repeaters stay "pure." As for the general public hearing any amateur radio at all: ham radio is a very obscure subculture these days, with not much of a place in the "public mind", especially the young.
I have gathered you may be a long time OM
...with that said, would rogue repeaters like these have been tolerated back when you started out in the hobby? Would the FCC have intervened back in the day? I know these are different times now...but I am just curious non the less.
On a side note, it’s just a matter of time before someone starts streaming 7.2, 14.313, etc..
I see your point here and kind of agree. And like KE0GXN said, it's a shame it's come to that. But I have to wonder why Broadcastify would even allow these two repeaters to be placed on the Live Audio stream.... I'm of the opinion that having a "rogue" repeater in every area actually helps the rest of the repeaters stay "pure." ...
But I have to wonder why Broadcastify would even allow these two repeaters to be placed on the Live Audio stream.