Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+HAM\s+GATHERING\s+SIGNATURES\s+ON\s+PETITION\s+TO\s+VOID\s+ANTENNA\s+PROHIBITIONS\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Allen Brier N5XZ <n5xz@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:50:14 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
PLEASE CROSS-POST THIS TO AS MANY REFLECTORS; SEND TO AS MANY HAMS AND NON-HAMS AND PRINT IN AS MANY NEWSLETTERS AS POSSIBLE!! FROM QRZ.COM: RADIO LAW: HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID AN
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00483.html (8,425 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:57:43 -0400
Someone needs to tell N4UM that the FCC has no statutory power to rewrite contract law or unilaterally void lawful existing contracts. Nice sentiment, but unfortunately a waste of time. Al AB2ZY ____
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00486.html (10,711 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@arrl.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:03:38 -0400
Somebody should tell the FCC that. They did exactly that by voiding prohibitions on TV antennas and DBS satellite dishes. Paul N8HM _______________________________________________ ___________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00487.html (11,957 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Richard Solomon <dickw1ksz@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:04:23 -0700
It was done in the case of satellite TV antennas, not the puny ones we have today, but the honkin' big C-Band ground mounted dishes. But, in that case the satellite TV cartel was also pushing it. 73,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00488.html (12,064 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Al Kozakiewicz <akozak@hourglass.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:30:19 -0400
I think you'll find that applies to public ordinances (e.g. zoning laws) , not deed covenants. Al AB2ZY ________________________________ From: prstoetzer@gmail.com [prstoetzer@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00491.html (12,699 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:50:23 -0400
No, you will find the FCC's ruling on OTARD (over the air receiving device - e.g. satellite and TV antennas) applies to private contracts including HOAs, rental contracts, and builder imposed deed li
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00492.html (9,520 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Charles Mills <w3yni1@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:55:46 -0400
It has been done before by the FCC and other regulatory agencies. OTARD comes to mind. _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk mailin
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00493.html (11,766 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Art Trampler <atrampler@att.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:06:14 -0700 (PDT)
And the same "authority" that undergirds any administration or congress regulating nearly any sphere of life. Heck, the FCC could cite promoting the "general welfare."   I hate HOA covenants (and eve
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00494.html (10,918 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Alan NV8A <nv8a@charter.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:10:27 -0400
It is my understanding that -- at least in many cases -- the "no antennas" clauses in CC&Rs and HOA rules were put there to satisfy the cable companies, which said, "If you outlaw antennas, we'll cab
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00495.html (13,998 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Jim Lux <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:10:36 -0700
It wasn't the FCC, Congress did that. First line on the FCC OTARD page: "As directed by Congress in Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996..." 47 CFR Section 1.4000 to be specific.. FCC ju
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00496.html (9,661 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:09:48 -0400
I've always thought that restrictive covenants were protected by the "inviolability of contracts" principle established by the Supreme Court, but my brief research on the matter confirms what Joe say
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00499.html (13,876 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Drax Felton <draxfelton@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:18:25 -0400
Yes but Congress can grant it and has told the FCC to study it already. Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ TowerTalk m
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00500.html (12,487 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Drax Felton <draxfelton@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:22:46 -0400
If that were still true then there are deed restrictions prohibiting non whites from living in some neighborhoods. Obviously the government can vacate private contracts. For that matter study the ele
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00501.html (15,308 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Frank <frankkamp@att.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 16:11:36 -0500
Sounds like what is really needed is a petition to outlaw HOAs. Or, better yet don't locate in an area that has an HOA and rn off anyone that tries to start one. _____________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00505.html (15,749 bytes)

15. Re: [TowerTalk] HAM GATHERING SIGNATURES ON PETITION TO VOID ANTENNA PROHIBITIONS (score: 1)
Author: Alan Swinger <awswinger@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:59:09 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
No lawsuit, then no action! ARRL is not suing, so all the chatter matters not! Surely we have some attys that can handle this and force the FCC's hand?>! Alan - K9MBQ --Original Message-- ___________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2012-04/msg00515.html (12,747 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu