[CQ-Contest] Station-Specific Incentives

[Kelly Taylor]

OH stations aren't bound by FCC rules, nor am I.

However, I think you may be overinterpreting the framer's meaning of the
term pecuniary interest.

If you were to use 144 FM to dispatch cement trucks, that would be illegal.

If you were to broadcast advertisements for TR on 14.200, that would be
illegal.

I certainly don't see how receiving one crummy (no offence OH*W) videotape
counts as pecuniary interest. At least no more so than the free trip to
Bermuda from years past, or the bottle of California wine from CQP, or an
orange from FQP. Particularly since nobody is being charged any money for
the videotape, so the videotape is at best a zero-sum game for the OH
stations.

Time to find a real problem to discuss, I'd say.

73, kelly
ve4xt


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jack Brindle" <jackbrindle at earthlink.net>
To: "Bill Tippett" <btippett at alum.mit.edu>
Cc: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Station-Specific Incentives


> I've wondered about this. It doesn't fall under the FCC's "pecuniary
> interest" rules? I would think that such things as bottles of wine
> for finishing at a certain level would even be covered under those
> rules, at least in the US...
>
> On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:33 AM, Bill Tippett wrote:
>
> > VE4XT wrote:
> >
> >> I think it's time we lightened up and looked for real violations
> >> of the
> >>
> > rules instead of trying to fabricate them where none exists. At a
> > time when
> > we should be doing all we can to encourage the use of our
> > frequencies by
> > amateurs, that this kind of activity is shat upon is hard to fathom.
> >
> >          Kelly, the key issue is not Packet, it's station-
> > specific incentives (free videos or whatever).  It's
> > interesting that there are no contest rules prohibiting
> > this and nothing would prevent the following:
> >
> > *********************NEWS FLASH*********************
> >
> >                  W1BUX CQWW Multiplier Incentive:
> >
> > 1.  Any fixed station working me and only me in the CQWW
> > for a unique multiplier will receive $XXX via PayPal.
> >
> > 2.  Any expedition station working me and only me in
> > the CQWW will receive $XXX to cover their trip expenses.
> >
> > *****************************************************
> >
> > Granted these are extreme hypothetical examples, but once
> > we start offering incentives to work specific stations,
> > we are on a very slippery slope that has no boundaries.
> > The concept of a level playing field, which is behind the
> > spirit and intent of all contest rules, will very quickly
> > vanish down that slippery slope.  BTW, this is the same
> > reason WRTC goes to some lengths to prevent publicizing
> > the identity of contestants' calls...i.e. to prevent
> > "patriotic patronizing" by home country cheerleaders.
> >
> >          As I said before, I'm sure the Finns did not dream
> > this up to try to win the IARU low power category,  but
> > I wonder what comes next when others see what they did?
> > Where does it end???
> >
> >                                          73,  Bill  W4ZV
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
> - Jack Brindle, W6FB
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> ---------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest