Well stated Kelly. Remote Ham Radio and station rentals are also
apparently legal.
One question is who would sponsor the prize money? Many big contests do
not even have plaque sponsors for some popular categories.
Prize money for winning a contest is a bad idea.
John KK9A
To: Zack Widup
From: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 13:57:54 -0800
That's a common misreading of Part 97.
Part 97 doesn't prohibit winning prizes. Part 97 does prohibit being paid to
operate: IOW: you can't be paid by the New York Times to use ham radio to
provide material for a news report, say during an event like the Haiti
earthquake. HRO can't pay you to operate to demo a new radio, for
instance. You
can't take money in exchange for passing traffic.
Winning a prize is not being paid to operate, since you are, at most, only
earning a chance to win, the payment is not guaranteed. Such a rule would
also
prohibit CQP from giving wine to the winner. If it actually existed.
Where Part 97 would come into play is if, for example, Kenwood paid an
operator
to use a TS-990 for a contest as marketing for the radio or brand.
Did the FCC prohibit the Navassa Island operation from taking sponsorship
money? Not that I'd want it to, but it seems to me that comes much, much
closer
to violating Part 97 than the long-shot odds of maybe winning a prize. A
DX-pedition taking sponsorship money is being paid to operate.
Not that I think such operations should be illegal.
All this being said, Barry is right: there's enough cheating and enough
acrimony as it is. Never mind how bad it would be if money were involved.
73, Kelly
ve4xt
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|