[CQ-Contest] Remote contest operation

[Pete Smith N4ZR]

Well, I've apparent stirred up quite a fuss.

First, I was aware of the Remotehamradio exercise, and hope it fails 
miserably.  I just couldn't recall a url or the other specifics. As to 
the legality - the original intent of the "pecuniary interest" language 
was to prevent competition with the commercial communications services.  
This is why the United States had to negotiate third-party agreements 
with foreign countries.  To my mind, renting a ham station by the minute 
is simply requiring people to pay to achieve "amateur" communications.  
What you exchange on the air, be it a contest exchange, a phone patch, 
or chit chat about the weather, should not be purchasable.

Several people have written me off the reflector asking what the 
difference is between this and renting a QTH that includes an operating 
ham station.  There are several, to my mind.  First, the visiting op 
must comply with whatever local licensing requirements there are.  
Second, he/she must function as the control operator.   Who would do 
that in a rent-a-QSO situation?  And finally, is there a single person 
renting out a ham QTH who recoups from the rental the amount he has 
spent on the station?

Ultimately, the lawyers may say that none of this matters, but I think 
it should.  And "should" is, of course, a matter of opinion.

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.

On 4/15/2013 12:20 PM, iain macdonnell - N6ML wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Pete Smith N4ZR<n4zr at contesting.com>  wrote:
>> I *would* be opposed if, as someone has suggested, entrepreneurs set up
>> excellent stations and collected "rent" for allowing them to be used for
>> contesting.  As I think I've said before, I don't even believe that would be
>> legal in the US.  I hope not.
> Don't know about contesting, but this is being done already;
> http://www.remotehamradio.com/inquire/
>
> Merits of that particular implementation aside; I believe that the
> intent of the FCC rules is to prevent use of amateur communications to
> do business - e.g. you can't promote/sell/buy goods or services over
> the air (there's an explicit exception for trading equipment normally
> used in an amateur station). You could argue semantics and claim that
> renting use of a station constitutes a "pecuniary interest", but then
> wouldn't that make NP2N's rental station on St Croix illegal too?
>
> 73,
>
>      ~iain / N6ML
>