[1827163]

I don't think such a huge fine is justified, how about confiscating his equipment, and banning him from using radio equipment capable of transmitting on amateur frequencies for a period of time?

It didn't cause any harm to emergency services, or disrupt anything other than a hobby. Fining him such a large amount for disrupting a hobby is ridiculous. And it makes me want nothing to do with amateur radio, and stick to unlicensed bands only.

The guy fined likely has children, a family to raise, which are all much more important than someone's hobby. You cannot impose such financial hardship for essentially what is trolling someone, on the radio. It's ridiculous.

Draconian penalties may only encourage miscreants to disrespect amateur radio, in an act of rebellion? And those miscreants might be able to get away with jamming it legally, by using powerline Ethernet adaptors, which will typically cause interference for the whole neighborhood. There's no law saying you can't have a really long piece of electrical wiring in your home, with absolutely nothing connected to it at the end? http://gm4fvm.blogspot.com/2018/06/power-line-adapter-noise-...

Maybe we non-amateurs should lobby the government to open up the VHF/UHF amateur bands for unlicensed operation at low power, just like 2.4GHz, and consign this hobby to the dustbin of history? How about getting industry involved in the lobbying as well? Can we find any good commercial use cases for those bands? In Europe we can already use a large part of the 70cm band (433MHz) at low power levels.

The radio spectrum is supposed to belong to all of us? Not just a privileged few who possess a license, and are so willing to punish others so excessively for relatively minor infractions?

[teeray]

How would you feel about a group preventing the public from entering Yellowstone so that they could do whatever they wanted with the park? Should they be fined for that or should we just take away the trucks they blocked the roads with?

Amateur spectrum is public property, just like a national park. The rules are in place so that it remains available for the public’s enjoyment.

> lobby the government… open up the bands… commercial use cases

This same sentiment would lend support to the building of a Walmart and condos around Old Faithful.

> The radio spectrum is supposed to belong to all of us? Not just a privileged few who possess a license.

It’s like $50 (and I’m pretty sure there’s financial hardship waivers) to get your tech license and it’s easy material. There’s a wealth of free resources to learn it. The roads all belong to us too, but we make people get drivers licenses so we can ensure they know how to properly use that public resource.

[1827163]

Yes, and those drivers licenses are obviously because cars are dangerous machines that can cause severe harm to someone if they are driven improperly. And the legal system surrounding it has penalties which are usually proportionate to the harm caused.

While low power transmitters, 100mW or so, are generally not dangerous, and thus should be deregulated in the VHF/UHF ham bands, so that the general public can use spectrum it legitimately owns. The "listen before talk" principle should be required by the regulations, and thus implemented in firmware. And even if misused and hacked to transmit on emergency frequencies, the harm a low power transmitter can cause is still limited.

In the end it comes down to if the industry and general public is a more powerful lobbyist than the amateur radio community, which is tiny by comparison. Who has more political power. And I think the general public might be the one with more political power here, and rightfully get to make the decision?

The radio spectrum is a shared space. In a democratic country, a small minority should not be dictating the rules for the majority here?

[teeray]

> because cars are dangerous machines that can cause severe harm to someone if they are driven improperly

Okay, pick another example of licensure to protect natural resources, since we probably won’t be able to get away from the “cars are dangerous” distraction.

Take fishing licenses, for example. Catching undersized lobster can net someone thousands in fines and possible jail time. Is this okay? If we seize their boat and traps, is that enough to guarantee they won’t do it again and discourage copycats?

> so that the general public can use spectrum it legitimately owns

One of the things covered in the license material you seem to feel is unnecessary is that amateur operators are secondary users on many bands and do not have an exclusive right to use those frequencies. Both the 33cm ISM band (900 MHz) and the 13cm band (2.4 GHz) are shared with unlicensed applications in a similar way to what you describe. If you want to use VHF, grab a MURS radio. UHF? Pick up an FRS radio. While those services do not overlap with amateur frequencies, it’s the same experience. What exactly are unlicensed users missing out on?

[1827163]

Lobster fishing is usually a large scale operation run by a business. Yes the fines are appropriate for a business, they wouldn't be for an individual though.

If an individual was to be fined excessively over a handful of lobsters, then again it's another example of overcriminalization and it's likely environmental pressure groups behind these laws, and it's completely wrong.

Yes, I agree with you about the secondary users of the ham band, though. I forgot about that one.

In fact in that post, I was actually advocating for the hobby to be phased out, and replaced with some other unlicensed system, given that so much of it's community is in support of such draconian measures and punishments for those who trivially violate the rules.

As I said, it should be consigned to the "dustbin of history" because of the draconian laws surrounding it. The laws have to be changed, or it's got to go.

[MandieD]

“Should be enforced in firmware” - part of the point of the amateur radio rules is allowing for people to experiment with with homemade equipment.

[MandieD]

Amateur radio, for better and worse, is self-policing, and passing the license exams is, among other things, declaring to your country’s communications regulator that you fully understand their rules for the use of certain parts of the spectrum, and in exchange, are allowed to use a lot more power than it would otherwise be a good idea to let non-EEs mess with. In the US, the entry-level exam can be passed by either remembering some of high school physics and carefully reading Section 97 of the FCC rules, or cramming a few hundred questions - hardly elite-level. Germany’s exams are harder and more of a logistical hassle, with the UK’s somewhere in between - I’ve not had any reason to see what the situation is like for anywhere else.

If the current amateur radio rules were done away with, I’m pretty sure whatever replaced them would be far more restrictive. The licensing rules have been changed a lot in most countries over the past 20 years - you no longer have to learn Morse Code.

Perhaps campaign for further revisions to your country’s licensing scheme if you find the current requirements to be irrelevant to safe, cooperative use of a limited bit of spectrum. Personally, I think it’s stupid that the most popular amateur frequencies are off-limits to German intermediate license holders, rather than just restricting their power levels (a valid safety concern). The UK gets this about right, from what I’ve seen.

Part of why amateur operators react so strongly when they hear, “I’m fixing to do something ill-advised with RF” is that we’re afraid of more legal restrictions being placed on us (and anyone else who bothers to pass an easy physics and rules test). Another part is that a lot of us don’t want you to get in trouble for something you might not have known was wrong (it’s a hobby that has long attracted introverted nerds, so the delivery sometimes leaves something to be desired). Your colleague freaked out at you, but he didn’t call the FCC-equivalent down on you.

[kordlessagain]

He's older and was charged in 2016 for something similar: https://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-340363A1...

[1827163]

For playing music 5 years ago, that is still disproportionate, no emergency frequencies were disrupted, in any of his activities.

Did he cause any quantifiable harm here? Did the harm he cause ever justify that degree of punishment? My stance is no in both cases.

What is concerning to me is that some ham had to make the complaint there, maybe fully knowing the FCC would hand out a very large fine, causing him severe disruption to his family and childrens' lives, that far exceeds the nuisance caused by playing music on the radio.

Thus the ham that made the complaint is perhaps morally culpable in the excessive punishment. He acted, in conjunction with the state, to ruin this guy's (and his family's) life there. It doesn't matter if it's legal to do so, it is still morally wrong.

Fining the guy obviously causes him extreme stress, which he might end up taking out on his spouse or children afterwards, which far, far exceeds the harm from playing music on amateur radio bands. So the disproportionate punishment has knock on effects in society.

And these draconian measure are what so many hams find acceptable? I'm sure the general public doesn't though.

[ricktdotorg]

> He acted, in conjunction with the state, to ruin this guy's (and his family's) life there.

and yet, all Mr. Beaudet had to do to stop his life being ruined is to stop keying his mic/follow the rules. but he did not. in fact, given that this appears to be his 3rd FCC enforcement action, it appears he has been doing this for many years.

do you consider Mr. Beaudet's actions to be "morally wrong"?

KW6RMT

[1827163]

Of course they are, but fining someone $24,000 for behaving rudely, even repeatedly, on the radio is far far worse. And so many amateur radio enthusiasts support these absolutely draconian punishments, which is damaging the reputation of the hobby.

Some more information on this particular case on Reddit, there is a backstory to it as well: https://old.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/13w384h/fcc_f...

[Eisenstein]

I think we should fine people $24,000 for playing music out loud on bus, never mind broadcasting it on public frequencies intending to jam them.

[rocket_surgeron]

> which is damaging the reputation of the hobby.

Literally, actually, irrefutably, and unquestionably, it is impossible to attract an enforcement action accidentally. The FCC bends over backwards to accommodate mistakes, if they even deign to notice them.

This was his third strike.

Your comment is inverted.

It isn't fines that are damaging the reputation of the hobby, it is the almost rampant abuse of the rules by actors like Beaudet.

Literally, actually, irrefutably, and unquestionably, a grand total of zero people have ever thought "oh man I want to get into amateur radio but I'm not going to because the jack booted thugs at the FCC will fine me if I play music over nets in order to piss people off."

The vast, overwhelming, majority of people don't even think like that.

For the remaining microscopically-miniscule minority, the thought excites them.

[1827163]

Well, yes because I don't want to be involved in things that are so authoritarian in nature, with draconian punishments enforced by the government for what amounts to being stupid.

I want to be involved with hobbies where you can be more playful and carefree, where the threat of such punishment is not present. Where there's freedom for exploration and experimentation, like the ISM bands, which are what I use instead. Without authorities dictating to you every minor detail of what you're permitted to do or not, under threat of force by the state. And requiring you do identify yourself at all times, or be ratted out by a fellow ham and prosecuted. No thanks.

Also I've been personally threatened by a ham radio operator (in the UK), over me constructing a perfectly legal, non-interfering high voltage power supply. And hearing other people having the same experiences as well, as if hams consider parts of the radio spectrum their "territory". I know myself, and many other people do as well, that the amateur radio community has this authoritarian streak, which is so eager to call out those breaking minor rules. And back that up with threats of prosecution.

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj/hamvcb.htm

Yes, from personal experience, so many in the ham community are very rule oriented, which is counter to my personality and philosophy. That's another reason I want nothing to do with it as a hobby.

And no wonder there's a lack of innovation in the field, it's all tied up with rules and the personalities that thrive in such environments.

https://wizehire.com/disc/high-c-personality

Also about overcriminalization in America: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/era-...

[ianburrell]

The radio spectrum is for everyone but needs to be regulated to minimize interference. Some talk about spread spectrum allowing everyone to share, but that requires regulations about the spread spectrum protocol and not jamming frequency with music.

The government divides up the spectrum for government, commercial, amateur, and public use. Amateur is not public use since it limits what can be done with it, like not playing music. It is more like public university. Ham radio has stagnated because it mostly uses analog or old digital modes for chatting and making contacts.

The VHF/UHF amateur bands wouldn't be that useful. They are too small for mobile data or Wifi. For unlicensed use, the power would have to low to prevent interference because they go to the horizon. It could be used the same as 433MHz and 900MHz but I don't think that those are overloaded like 2.4GHz. For commercial use, they could be turned into business walkie-talkies; I don't know if there is demand for those but would be pretty low value usage.

The one thing that they might be useful for is digital FRS, there is need for more public walkie-talkie frequencies. But that would have to be highly regulated in terms of protocol. And could turn into CB radio, making it useless for regular communication unless there are rules about jamming with music.

[ianburrell]

It isn't a huge fine for a one time thing but for doing it for years after being told to stop.

Parks are public property but there are lots of rules about what can be done to keep it available for all. What do you think about a guy standing in park yelling obscenities while kids soccer game is going on? Who keeps doing it after police tell him to stop and give him fine, and the fines eventually total some huge amount and he is banned from the park.