Topband: Foreign stns using NA remotes for K1N

[Paul Christensen]

Quoting myself:

> 'Rather than embracing this commercial abuse of free spectrum, the League
should be scrambling to draft a Petition for Rulemaking to prohibit this
form of paid spectrum access - and that should include all "for profit" and
"not-for-profit" entities.  What other countries do is their prerogative'

Taking a detailed look at Part 97, specifically,

97.113(a)(2):

"(a) No amateur station shall transmit: (2) Communications for hire or for 
material compensation, direct or indirect, paid or promised, except as 
otherwise provided in these rules;"

I see no exemption "as otherwise provided" for RHR's toll-based, income 
model.   Note that the rule is specific to the amateur station as defined 
under 97.3(a)(5).

97.113(a)(3)

"(a) No amateur station shall transmit: (3) Communications in which the 
station licensee or control operator has a pecuniary interest, including 
communications on behalf of an employer, with the following exceptions:"

I still don't see an exemption here for RHR's toll-based business.  Here, 
the entities affected by this subpart are the amateur station, station 
licensee, and/or control operator.

That leaves open the possibility that RHR obtained a Declaratory Ruling 
under 47 CFR 1.2(a).  I have to believe that before they commenced with 
accepting fees in exchange for spectrum access that they conducted some 
due-diligence, if even a legal memorandum from a telecom attorney.   If they 
did obtain a DR, I would like to see the ruling and exactly how the FCC 
reached its conclusion.  Without the DR, I'm at a loss to see how the 
stations, licensees and control operators are compliant.  I've seen many 
oddities in the interpretation of the Commission's rules in other services. 
I'm not saying there's a clear violation; I just want to know why it's not a 
violation *as a matter of law.*

There's a bit of history here that goes back a long time: namely, closed 
repeaters/closed auto-patch.  Many repeaters are owned by clubs.  Those 
clubs often have dues-paying members.  For decades, many clubs have limited 
access to paying club members, especially with respect to autopatch access. 
The fact that the clubs limit access is not the issue.  In fact, 97.205(e) 
specifically states that repeater access can be limited and therefore 
"closed."  But the very act of compelling its membership to pay for spectrum 
access does not comply with the provisions under 97.113.  OTOH, if dues are 
optional for access, then I see no clear issue although that still remains a 
gray area with respect to 97.113.

Just from where I'm sitting, RHR and its member stations would be compliant 
if the service they offered was without "material compensation, direct or 
indirect, paid or promised."

Paul, W9AC