All Activity

He is probably referring to ANI, group-ID's and other self-identifying features that a lot of radios have.

I have to wonder if there is a bean counter somewhere who has decided that it doesn't make fiscal sense for them to pursue suits. It would probably cost the FCC more than $20,000 to win a case against someone with a judgement of that same amount.

No. This has never (at least in the last 15+ years) happened. and I am not a lawyer, but I question Mr. @SteveShannon's interpretation of how it works.

If by "ID-related fields" you mean the column that says "Name." all that does is affect what is displayed on the radio when you are on any given channel. None of that information is broadcast.

And that's where I have questions. I would guess that the FCC would turn the "case" over to local law enforcement? They, as a body, are certainly not able to pursue charges on that level.

Correct - you cannot criminally charge someone unless they break a law - and the FCC does not make, nor enforce laws.

So it would be an entirely civil matter at that point. A law suit. As opposed to any kind of criminal charges. Seems a bit of a paper tiger.

Okay, thanks. So all those ID-related fields I'm seeing in Chirp are voluntary. Got it.

I'm thinking about getting a Radioddity DB25-G GMRS Mobile Radio. Just asking if anyone has any experience with this radio before I take the plunge? Thanks WSBX980 Pikeville TN

Maybe.. But even if there is, its not transmitted. TL;dr: NO

So there is no hardware serial number, ala cell phones?

The only way that would work is if everyone agreed to enter their assigned ID number/code into their radios and IF (big IF) the repeater had the ability to do that (many/most do not). TL;dr: NO

I love this bar.

Then you'll definitely want to get your H.A.M.s radios license.

Pardon my noobie ignorance, but all my GMRS radios have some sort of "PTT ID" field (or similar). Question: Can users be individually identified and disallowed?

I have been following this topic due to my interest in inexpensive DMR Ham radios. I have no interest in encoding, do not have a Part 90 license and am the opinion that encryption is antithetical to most of the Ham radio values that make the hobby as robust as it has been over the years.

Ah, the so-called “Pixar Luxo Jr” iMac G4: I have one coming soon that I will restore!

Another good reason to get a HAM license. We're covered up in 2M and 70cm repeaters in my area and there's quite a few 1.25M repeaters as well.

It was the half ball 15" running OS X. A lightning strike came through the DSL(I had the computer on a surge protector but not the DSL line)and fried it. After that I had a Win8 laptop for a week until my wife picked up a virus on it so we returned it and I bought a couple used laptops and installed Ubuntu 12.04 on it and I've been using Linux of one flavor or another ever since.

Who are we kidding here - IMHO, the whole darn GMRS thing is on the honor system. Unlicensed FRS shares channels with GMRS and just by listening nobody knows what type of radio you are using, if it is FCC type certified, or if you should be ID'ing with a GMRS license call sign, how high your antenna is, etc. etc. The lack of FCC rule enforcement sort of suggests that they think it's the honor system too! As for the OP question - It would be ethically courteous and respectful if you asked for permission, but permission being needed or required seems legally ambiguous on public airwaves, owned by none, available to all licensed GMRS users, and only regulated by FCC rules which (unlike Amateur Radio) fail to expressly address this issue. As for the comparison to trespass on real property, use of a radio repeater without permission could be categorized as Constructive Tresspass at best, and articulating harm is tricky unless the trespasser were monopolizing the repeater use or engaged in some other flagrant FCC rule violation. For all practical purposes, like it or not, if you put your repeater on a public GMRS channel/frequency, you should probably expect that the public is going to use it. You can make it inconvenient by not publishing the input tones or that the repeater even exists at all, but that is about as good as it will get. * It is like putting up your own private volleyball net on a public beach and expecting that when you are not using it, the public won't use it or that someone else's ball won't intentionally or unintentionally go over your net. Don't like it - take your net down! The FCC says that the repeater owner “may disallow the use of its GMRS repeater by specific persons as may be necessary” but the only remedy that the owner really has is to turn the repeater off as needed to restrict its use. Constantly changing tones and codes is a PITA and may be a futile game of cat and mouse. Another way to look at that specific FCC language might be for the purpose of clarifying that the repeater owner has no duty to provide that repeater to the public and that if/when the repeater owner changes the tones or turns the repeater off, for any reason, the owner is not violating anyone else's right of public use. IOW, don't file a complaint with the FCC because someone else turned their repeater off, because we don't care! I think it is to a large extent a delusional exercise in mental masturbation for a repeater owner to assert private use of their equipment when they have configured that equipment to operate on frequencies licensed for public GMRS use. CTCSS and DCS tones and codes create operational isolation between radios in close proximity, but the use of such tones or codes does not constitute any form of exclusivity. If you really need or want some form of radio privacy, get a Business or LMR license and put your repeater on those restricted license frequencies where you have a reasonable expectation of the private use of your equipment... I offer my opinion free of charge, and it is worth every penny!

I think some members here did not read your recent post where you indicated you have autism. I recognized your "style" of response immediately and was not offended by it, considering your history...

That’s interesting. I always run Windows in Parallels on my Mac(s), Bootcamp before that and SoftWindows when it was PPC before Intel. I did not mean to mislead you by recommending the DM-1701, but I have no experience with Linux What was your last iMac OS X; Snow Leopard?

At this time, it is unknown if the Repeat function is disabled or if there was an input tone change. We just need to exercise patience to see what the repeater owner is going to do.

I'm sexually attracted to dinosaurs.

This is just an "I think"... but I am pretty sure property rights can't possibly apply in this situation. Someone is not taking physical possession or control of the radio. The owner of the radio is in possession of the radio and the radio is doing exactly what the owner of the radio programmed the radio to do. A person nor business does not have the right to not receive open-air radio transmissions on their receiver. Its just not possible. The airways are open to the public. Saying "you can't transmit transmit in 467.700 with a tone of 146.2 because I don't want to hear you on my receiver" is the equivalent of calling iHeartMedia and telling them the need to stop broadcasting because you don't want to hear them on your AM/FM radio. They will just laugh at you and hangup. And that is if they are nice about it. Now, if iHeartMedia has a transmitter that is malfunctioning and causing harmful interference to a device you own, now you have some grounds to at least start having a conversation.