Dantian
Member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2010
- Messages
- 141
Removal of address information for amateur radio licences
- Thread starter Dantian
- Start date
- Status
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
Thanks for sharing. I can see some good and bad for this. Certainly it will put an end to a lot of spam and mailings from the ARRL, but the downside is that the amateur radio service is based on self-regulation.
One of the biggest areas we pride ourselves on is taking care of our problems without FCC intervention through the use of Elmers, Official Observers, and just plain regular old folks who provide feedback to their fellow operators.
The mailing address doesn't have to be one's home address, and the rules allow for this, I don't know if hiding the license data on the ULS is a totally good idea on that basis alone. If one is concerned about their privacy, rent a PO Box!
This still allows for correspondence relative to the licensee from OOs, and concerned fellow area amateurs.
Thoughts?
One of the biggest areas we pride ourselves on is taking care of our problems without FCC intervention through the use of Elmers, Official Observers, and just plain regular old folks who provide feedback to their fellow operators.
The mailing address doesn't have to be one's home address, and the rules allow for this, I don't know if hiding the license data on the ULS is a totally good idea on that basis alone. If one is concerned about their privacy, rent a PO Box!
This still allows for correspondence relative to the licensee from OOs, and concerned fellow area amateurs.
Thoughts?
mikepdx
Member
The solution (if there is a problem) could have been boiled down
to this one sentence, but easy solutions do not insure lucrative Federal jobs.
Interesting....
radioman2001
Member
The FCC might be trying to get out of the information providing game. I really would like to know who proposed this, was it an individual (most likely) or and organization. I don't consider mailing from the ARRL spam as such since they are the main organization that represents us with the FCC. When I relicensed my ham license after 20 year lapse I didn't get that much what you call spam just the ARRL and a nice letter from the local club.
I do know that Homeland Security is now no longer accepting Social Security numbers for tracking courses taken with them that change happened April1. As has been said this is good news bad news, and I think an opt in clause on any form you make out for information that is kept by any Government would be a plus, but not likely to happen. Governments love information and they love to sell it too.
Quote"easy solutions do not insure lucrative Federal jobs. Quote
Meaning what?? Everything is computerized and you the client fills out all the forms nowadays online.
I do know that Homeland Security is now no longer accepting Social Security numbers for tracking courses taken with them that change happened April1. As has been said this is good news bad news, and I think an opt in clause on any form you make out for information that is kept by any Government would be a plus, but not likely to happen. Governments love information and they love to sell it too.
Quote"easy solutions do not insure lucrative Federal jobs. Quote
Meaning what?? Everything is computerized and you the client fills out all the forms nowadays online.
Up here in Canada, hams have the choice of having their information publicly displayed or not. If you choose to not have your address displayed, all that shows in the online database is your name and province.
I've personally had my information shown on the database ever since I got my license back in 2011. I haven't encountered a single problem/spam/junkmail because of it even though it shows up there, on QRZ.com, other various amateur radio related websites and I even have call sign license plates on my cars but have not encountered any problems or issues with that either.
I do hear some hams in my area complaining about amateurs that hide their addresses, though, as they think it's not right and should be public information - especially if they have a repeater.
Matt, VE3MAT
I've personally had my information shown on the database ever since I got my license back in 2011. I haven't encountered a single problem/spam/junkmail because of it even though it shows up there, on QRZ.com, other various amateur radio related websites and I even have call sign license plates on my cars but have not encountered any problems or issues with that either.
I do hear some hams in my area complaining about amateurs that hide their addresses, though, as they think it's not right and should be public information - especially if they have a repeater.
Matt, VE3MAT
Last edited:
Just one tiny thing missing. . .
All good comments, but missing one important point. . . this proposal only applies to historical license data, not current license data.
Presently, if you change your license address to a PO box, your previous license with home address intact is still accessible in the database; this merely proposes to hide those previous licenses, but leave current mailing address visible.
Personally, I don't hold with the idea of hiding the current address, for the reasons mentioned by MTS2000des, that the Amateur Radio Service is self-policing. If the mailing address were to be hidden, the ability to contact someone in violation to give a friendly reminder would be gone, thus throwing that burden back on the FCC. . . and we all know how rapidly they respond to such issues in the Amateur Radio Service.
So, this is a good compromise between privacy and "reachability." If this is adopted as proposed and one is concerned about privacy, get a PO box as someone mentioned and change your license. The old one with your real address will be hidden, but you still have an address where people can reach you.
All good comments, but missing one important point. . . this proposal only applies to historical license data, not current license data.
Presently, if you change your license address to a PO box, your previous license with home address intact is still accessible in the database; this merely proposes to hide those previous licenses, but leave current mailing address visible.
Personally, I don't hold with the idea of hiding the current address, for the reasons mentioned by MTS2000des, that the Amateur Radio Service is self-policing. If the mailing address were to be hidden, the ability to contact someone in violation to give a friendly reminder would be gone, thus throwing that burden back on the FCC. . . and we all know how rapidly they respond to such issues in the Amateur Radio Service.
So, this is a good compromise between privacy and "reachability." If this is adopted as proposed and one is concerned about privacy, get a PO box as someone mentioned and change your license. The old one with your real address will be hidden, but you still have an address where people can reach you.
radioman2001
Member
I understand the problem of reachablity when a problem occurs with a ham transmitter, but wouldn't the ARRL our voice be the one that should be able to get and keep the information then relay it to the party requesting it. The FCC could do a dump of data to ARRL and allow other hams who would have to sign in access it, and hopefully keep the info out of the hands of solicitors. I don't think it's going to be that large of file.
Generally removing this historical data should be done just like any other legal information after a set number of years, 7 I think is the norm. Purging it all now may not be the right thing to do other than giving the FCC more database room.
Generally removing this historical data should be done just like any other legal information after a set number of years, 7 I think is the norm. Purging it all now may not be the right thing to do other than giving the FCC more database room.
902
Member
An association wouldn't do something like that for free. Somewhere along the line, either the membership will have to pay for the employees to do that for members and non-members, or members-only. Who knows? And the membership of an organization like the ARRL is fluid. Someone can be a member three years ago, take a couple of years off, then re-join (I've been known to do that). An association is there to serve its members first, secondarily to serve the service, but sometimes the decision-makers are focused on making ways of getting revenue. As a realist, I know you need capital to keep operating, but where would the balance point be if the League were tasked to do something like this for amateur radio? And who would do that service for GMRS?
Thread moved to Amateur Radio General Discussion since the proposal is for amateur radio licences.
What the FCC is proposing will have no impact on your current mailing address as it appears in FCC records. The proposal would require the FCC to remove historical address information, not current address information. If the ARRL or anybody else wants your current mailing address, they will still be able to find it in the publicly-available FCC license database.
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
good point W9BU, I overlooked that important point. If this is the case, I have no problem with removal of historical data.
N0IU
Member
Well then you should remove your callsign from your RR bio before everyone finds out that you live at XXXXXX.
Last edited by a moderator:
WQPW689
Member
That was way out of line.
Just because something is technically feasible, doesn't mean it's morally permissible.
Grow up, you'll probably enjoy life more.
like that
I liked the last quote very much, what we need. people who will just do the right thing!
I liked the last quote very much, what we need. people who will just do the right thing!
Folks, take it down a notch.
N0IU posted publicly available information. There are ways of dealing with this problem both at the FCC and within RadioReference. Complaining about it within the thread using language which violates RR's forum rules is not the way to deal with it.
And, once again, the FCC action being discussed has to do with historical address information, not the current information in the FCC's database.
N0IU posted publicly available information. There are ways of dealing with this problem both at the FCC and within RadioReference. Complaining about it within the thread using language which violates RR's forum rules is not the way to deal with it.
And, once again, the FCC action being discussed has to do with historical address information, not the current information in the FCC's database.
k6cpo
Member
The FCC may also want to reduce the size of the database.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Sticky
