Topband: Fwd: ARRL Board meets next week - I'm looking for input

[Larry Burke]

This issue is actually bigger than the farce it is making of the ARRL awards
programs. 

 

When you write your Division Director you might also ask him "at what point
will the League consider 'for rent' commercial remotes -- which are already
in operation today -- an affront to the amateur spectrum?" At what point
will these stations be indistinguishable from common carrier networks, which
are highly regulated in the US? If Verizon Wireless wakes up one day and
realizes they have much of the infrastructure in place (towers, internet
connections, backup generators, billing systems) would the League be
receptive to them dotting both coasts with remotes? At what point will the
amateur community finally object? The barriers to entry into this game are
really not that high for the right player. The more "commercial" the Amateur
Service becomes, the more vulnerable it becomes at spectrum allocation time.

 

You might also ask your Director how the League's support of commercial
remotes is consistent with their very prominent push of HR 1301 and S 1685
(The Amateur Radio Parity Act of 2015). Why would lawmakers want to provide
relief from antenna restrictions if all a ham has to do is sign up for
RemoteHamRadio.com or similar to get on the air? Years of ARRL efforts in
this arena can disappear pretty quickly, and it wouldn't take a very bright
lobbyist for an association of HOAs to figure this out. All they'd have to
do is point to the RemoteHamRadio.com ad on the page facing the April 2015
editorial in QST.... the editorial that announces the January Board decision
and arguably supports commercial remotes.  

 

 

Larry K5RK