[CQ-Contest] Is 4UITU and other calls with 4U1 prefix illegal?

[John Geiger]

Technically all of the Z6 calls would be illegal since Kosovo has not been
issued that ITU block of prefixes.  Even if CQ does recognize them as a
separate country, following the rules brought up by 4U1WB I don't think
they qualify.

73 John AF5CC

On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Ria Jairam <rjairam at gmail.com> wrote:

> 4UA to 4UZ is a prefix block issued to the UN by the ITU which is part
> of the UN. It is not like SMOM which just asssigns 1A to itself.
>
> 4U1WB has paperwork from the UN documenting the license.
>
> 73
> Ria, N2RJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Hank Greeb <n8xx at arrl.org> wrote:
> > Who "sanctions" 4U1ITU and 4U1UN for examples.  4U1ITU has been in many
> > contests, not sure of in CW WW contests, but I'm >99.44%  sure that it is
> > one of the "HQ" stations for the IARU World Championship contest held
> every
> > year.   Maybe, if IARU and the Untied Nations is disqualified, perhaps
> the
> > every four year World Championship contest needs to be disqualified.
> >
> > Or, maybe, just maybe,  someone in charge of the  CQ Contests should
> consult
> > with reps of the Contest Community, like Oh Fishy Alls of the  RAC, WIA,
> > LABRE, ARRL, the RSGB, the DARC, the Russian Amateur Radio Union (sorry
> > folks, I don't have a Cyilic Alphabet Handy, and don't remember much of
> my
> > college Russian anyway, JARL, et. cetera, and get a mutual opinion rather
> > than an arbitrary (and in my estimation, capricious) judgement on the
> > subject of 4U1 prefix calls.
> >
> > I personally don't know if ITU, IARU, or the Untied Nations issues these
> > calls, but they been in use since before I was licensed (shortly after
> sp*rk
> > was banned), so i'd think that at least one or two of the ham radio
> > fraternity must believe they are legitimate calls.
> >
> > Lettuce be reasonable.  Lettuce knot pic nits.    If the holder of 4U1WB
> is
> > NOT operating from the UN HQ, or a building leased by the Untied Nations,
> > there may be a very fine point.  I don't know these details.
> >
> > Or, maybe we'll "strip" all he contacts which have been made with these
> > calls from all records.  And, declare that the World Championship is a
> sham
> > because IARU claims to sponsor it, and the IARU is NOT a National
> > organization?
> >
> > However, whatever the decision, it will be a consensus decision, rather
> than
> > that of one person.
> >
> > 72/73 de n8xx Hg
> > QRP >99.44% of the time
> >
> > CQ contests needs to consult with representativesOn 10/27/2017 5:52 PM,
> > cq-contest-request at contesting.com wrote:
> >
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Message: 1
> >> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 14:51:12 -0500
> >> From: Zack Widup<w9sz.zack at gmail.com>
> >> To: CQ Contest<cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX
> >>         Contest?
> >> Message-ID:
> >>
> >> <CANJxhWj3y4tyKHcg+vJVCkcb1JgJVrzpNgxwc9YMSq3_pb57iw at mail.gmail.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >>
> >> How do they happen to be operating with that callsign, then? Is it
> illegal
> >> for them to use that callsign?
> >>
> >> Inquiring minds want to know.
> >>
> >> 73, Zack W9SZ
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Terry Zivney<n4tz at arrl.net>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   Why was 4U1WB Disqualified in the CQ WPX Contest?
> >>>
> >>> As Masa, AJ3M, noted in his posting about the
> >>> disqualification of 4U1WB in the 2017 CQ WPX SSB
> >>> contest, I informed him that:
> >>>
> >>> "4U1WB violated rule V.C.2:
> >>>
> >>> 2. Special event, commemorative, and other unique prefix stations are
> >>> encouraged to participate. Prefixes must be assigned by the licensing
> >>> authority of the country of operation.
> >>>
> >>> 4U1 is not assigned by the FCC, the licensing authority of the USA,
> which
> >>> is what the log of 4U1WB showed as the country of operation."
> >>>
> >>> *********
> >>>
> >>> The WPX contest rule cited clearly states that the callsign must be
> >>> assigned by the licensing authority. The FCC did not assign the
> callsign,
> >>> and has no authority to issue 4U1WB callsigns. Thus, the station did
> not
> >>> operate in compliance with the existing contest rules.
> >>>
> >>> Since 4U1 prefixes can be in multiple countries, rule V.C.1 would also
> >>> apply. The DXCC list includes 4U1UN and 4U1ITU as separate entities.
> So, the
> >>> 4U1 prefix does not denote the country of operation. This rule states:
> >>>
> >>> "A station operating from a DXCC entity different from that indicated
> by
> >>> its call sign is required to sign portable." Because the 4U1WB
> callsign does
> >>> not reflect the DXCC entity of USA, it is required to sign portable.
> >>>
> >>> I did not write these rules, but was charged with interpreting and
> >>> enforcing them.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > http://www.avg.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>