Found This Interesting - GMRS Users Are Forbidden To Talk To Amateur Stations

[marcspaz]

1 hour ago, SteveShannon said:

Having a conversation with a GMRS station consists of two one way transmissions, not two way communications. 

 

So, I assume it's not one-way transmission  because I am expecting and receiving a response on another frequency. As you are aware, that is the whole concept of a repeater, but also, on HF, we do split operations.

 

I have spoken with many Hams in other countries who are not allowed to transmit in the space that US general class can operate. They transmit on a frequency they legally can and listen on a frequency we can legally transmit on. Sometimes, depending on conditions and the time of day, we won't even be transmitting and receiving on the same band. I've done 40m/20m splitting before myself. Those types of communicating are not considered two different one-way transmissions and those are not even both managed by the FCC.

 

Again, just my interpretation. You could very well be correct. 

[SteveShannon]

30 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

 

So, I assume it's not one-way transmission  because I am expecting and receiving a response on another frequency. As you are aware, that is the whole concept of a repeater, but also, on HF, we do split operations.

 

I have spoken with many Hams in other countries who are not allowed to transmit in the space that US general class can operate. They transmit on a frequency they legally can and listen on a frequency we can legally transmit on. Sometimes, depending on conditions and the time of day, we won't even be transmitting and receiving on the same band. I've done 40m/20m splitting before myself. Those types of communicating are not considered two different one-way transmissions and those are not even both managed by the FCC.

 

Again, just my interpretation. You could very well be correct. 

But with GMRS you’re going out of service. 
Operating split with hams who have different allocations is within the same service. 

[WRXB215]

3 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

But with GMRS you’re going out of service. 
Operating split with hams who have different allocations is within the same service. 

That ^^^^

Since the purpose and intent of ham and GMRS are drastically different, it makes sense that the privileges are also drastically different and shouldn't be mixed. Listening is one thing, broadcasting is another, and two-way communications is yet another.

[SteveShannon]

If it helps, here is the definition of one-way communications within the personal services (Part 95)

One-way communications. Communications where information always flows in one pre-arranged direction through a communications channel.
and here’s the definition for two-way communications:

Two-way communications. Communications where information flows in both directions through a communications channel, either simultaneously (duplex operation) or alternately (simplex operation).

[Hans]

7 hours ago, BoxCar said:

The regulation means the two services are not allowed to connect to each other using their assigned frequencies. A GMRS station is not allowed to use a cross-band repeater to retransmit traffic from any other service and the amateur service is not to use cross-band repeaters to carry traffic from any other service. This particular regulation just spells out specific services.

Yes and cross-band repeating is but one method by which messages could be carried between the two services and between a licensed GMRS station and an unlicensed or otherwise unauthorized GMRS or FRS station; which is prohibited.
 
The exact language used is, "GMRS stations must not communicate:". If I receive a message from an amateur/unlicensed/unauthorized station and I transmit that message, automatically or manually, to a GMRS station then I have communicated a message.

Edited November 26 by Hans
Typos

[marcspaz]

Okay @SteveShannon ... I'm tracking. That makes sense.

[Hans]

6 hours ago, SteveShannon said:

Prohibited: 

1733 (b) GMRS stations must not be used for one-way communications other than those listed in § 95.1731(b). Initial transmissions to establish two-way communications and data transmissions listed in § 95.1731(d) are not considered to be one-way communications for the purposes of this section.

and 1731(b) says this:

 

(b) One-way communications. The operator of a GMRS station may use that station to transmit one-way communications:

(1) To call for help or transmit other emergency communications;

(2) To provide warnings of hazardous road conditions to travelers; or,

(3) To make brief test transmissions.

 

But no rules prohibit relaying messages received on one service by using another service. So you and I could have a conversation on GMRS and I could then have a conversation on 2 meters with Gil @WRUU653 operating as KO6BIK and I could relay the message to him.  

I get that and, for me, that was the simplest and easiest interpretation. However, the plain language of the regulation states, "GMRS stations must not communicate..." I guess we would have to really dig into the defined meaning of "communicate" in the regulations and not just one-way (broadcast) vs two-way communication. If the regulation was only meant to stop cross-band and broadcast, it would've specified it and not use communicate.
 
When I receive a message from an amateur station and I transmit that message to a GMRS station, I have communicated that message; a prohibited act.

Looking at 95.1731 (a), the language used is communicate between a GMRS station and a GMRS station (or FRS units). Communication is passing your own or others' messages (traffic) to and/or from your station. In GMRS only messages to and/or from GMRS stations or FRS units is permissible; with the emergency exception not being relevant.

Quote

§ 95.1731 Permissible GMRS uses.

The operator of a GMRS station may use that station for two-way plain language voice communications with other GMRS stations and with FRS units concerning personal or business activities.

(a) Emergency communications.  Any GMRS channel may be used for emergency communications or for traveler assistance. Operators of GMRS stations must, at all times and on all channels, give priority to emergency communications.
...

Perhaps there is a clear definition of communicate in there somewhere in a relevant regulation that I have always missed or am not recalling. Until it is revealed to me somewhere, one definition according to Webster is, "to convey knowledge of or information about."

Edited November 26 by Hans
clarification and formatting

[Hans]

5 hours ago, SteveShannon said:

But no rules prohibit relaying messages received on one service by using another service. So you and I could have a conversation on GMRS and I could then have a conversation on 2 meters with Gil @WRUU653 operating as KO6BIK and I could relay the message to him.  

I submit that verbally relaying a message manually is communicating a message. GMRS stations are expressly prohibited from communicating a message to or from an amateur/unlicensed/unauthorized station by the plain language or 95.1733 "Prohibited GMRS uses."
 

Quote

§ 95.1733 Prohibited GMRS uses.

(a) In addition to the prohibited uses outlined in § 95.333 of this chapter, GMRS stations must not communicate:

...

(9) Messages (except emergency messages) to any station in the Amateur Radio Service, to any unauthorized station, or to any foreign station;

 

 

[WRUU653]

You can communicate whatever info you received as an amateur station on GMRS because the second you key up on GMRS you have become a GMRS station communicating with another GMRS station. The meer act of using GMRS makes you a GMRS station communicating with another GMRS station, you are no longer an amateur station.

This works the opposite direction as well. There’s also the first amendment which I’m sure takes precedence.

Edited November 26 by WRUU653
Spelling, additional comments

[Hans]

5 hours ago, Lscott said:

These are the Part 97 rules that apply.

97.111 Authorized transmissions.

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-97/subpart-B/section-97.111

97.113 - Prohibited transmissions.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.113

97.115 - Third party communications.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.115

However, part 97 permissions, prohibitions, and definitions are not part 95 permissions, prohibitions, and definitions. One part might permit something that another part prohibits. Likewise, a definition might be made in one part that is made differently in another. Ideally, the definitions between sections and subsections of law, regulation, or policy ought to match but it doesn't always. In this situation, we are parsing part 95 language.
 
Is there a relevant definition of "communicate" somewhere in the regulations we could use and that would apply to part 95?

[Hans]

11 minutes ago, WRUU653 said:

You can communicate whatever info you received as an amateur station on GMRS because the second you key up on GMRS you have become a GMRS station communicating with another GMRS station. The mear act of using GMRS makes you a GMRS station communicating with another GMRS station, you are no longer an amateur station.

True in a sense but then what about a manually operated store and forward? I haven't looked it up recently but are we permitted to store a message from the amateur service and re transmit that message to another GMRS station? The amateur side of the operation can listen without a license. The GMRS side would be transmitting to another GMRS station.
 
I know it sounds pedantic, but, absent a relevant regulation definition of the verb "communicate", the plain language appears to encompass manually transmitting a message that originated in one service from being transmitted in another (not counting emergency traffic).
 
If an amateur station asks me to pass a message to a GMRS station, I am communicating from the amateur service to GMRS as plainly defined thus far.
 
BTW: I find the language ridiculous so I would pass a message from an amateur station to a GMRS station or FRS unit and vice-versa. However, because of the plain language prohibition, I am not comfortable doing so in a larger way. For instance, I am not comfortable relaying a bunch of check-ins or messages from one service to the other during a net. For example, I am comfortable communicating something like, "Aunt Sally says Hi and will see you at home in about an hour." across the two services even though I believe it to violate the plain language.

[Hans]

Quote

 § 95.1733 Prohibited GMRS uses.

(a) In addition to the prohibited uses outlined in § 95.333 of this chapter, GMRS stations must not communicate:

...

(9) Messages (except emergency messages) to any station in the Amateur Radio Service, to any unauthorized station, or to any foreign station;

Okay, I believe we most all agree that a GMRS station is prohibited from cross-band repeating between GMRS and amateur. Likewise with one-way communication. And, lastly, I believe we most all agree on the emergency communication exception(s).
 
Now let's focus for a moment on, "GMRS stations must not communicate... messages to any... unauthorized station." If the prohibition was only intended to stop cross-band repeating and one-way communications, does that mean a GMRS station communicating with an unauthorized station directly in two-way communications is NOT prohibited? Of course not.
 

[WRUU653]

12 minutes ago, Hans said:

For example, I am comfortable communicating something like, "Aunt Sally says Hi and will see you at home in about an hour." across the two services even though I believe it to violate the plain language.

Well sure, you do what you have to. I mean you don’t mess with aunt Sally. FCC be damned. 

[Hans]

Just now, WRUU653 said:

Well sure, you do what you have to. I mean you don’t mess with aunt Sally. FCC be damned. 

[Hans]

"GMRS stations must not communicate... messages to any... unauthorized station."
 
Put another way, we have hashed out what defines a GMRS station and an amateur station. I think we can agree on what roughly defines an unauthorized station. What defines messages and what defines communicate?

Edited November 26 by Hans
clean up on aisle 9

[WRYZ926]

I will give two examples. One is legal and the other is not. Remember I am licensed for amateur and GMRS.

First example - legal

Three way conversation between myself, an amateur station (station A) and a GMRS station (Station B). I am talking to station A on 2m and am asked to relay a message to station B on GMRS. Or visa versa. This is 100% legal for me to do since I am having two way communication between myself and Station A. I then pass the message to Station B on my GMRS radio, again two communication.

This is 100% legal between Station A and myself since we are both licensed for amateur bands. Again 100% legal between Station B and myself since we are both licensed for GMRS.

Second example - illegal

Two way conversation between Station A with only an amateur license and Station B with only a GMRS license. Neither one can transmit on the other band since they do not hold the correct license. Both would be having a one way conversation as far as the bands they are authorized to use. This is one type of broadcasting.

And we all know that cross band repeating from one service to another service is illegal no matter if you hold a license for both. And yes it can be done with an unlocked radio for emergency situations ONLY.

[Hans]

7 minutes ago, WRYZ926 said:

I will give two examples. One is legal and the other is not. Remember I am licensed for amateur and GMRS.

First example - legal

Three way conversation between myself, an amateur station (station A) and a GMRS station (Station B). I am talking to station A on 2m and am asked to relay a message to station B on GMRS. Or visa versa. This is 100% legal for me to do since I am having two way communication between myself and Station A. I then pass the message to Station B on my GMRS radio, again two communication.

This is 100% legal between Station A and myself since we are both licensed for amateur bands. Again 100% legal between Station B and myself since we are both licensed for GMRS.

Second example - illegal

Two way conversation between Station A with only an amateur license and Station B with only a GMRS license. Neither one can transmit on the other band since they do not hold the correct license. Both would be having a one way conversation as far as the bands they are authorized to use. This is one type of broadcasting.

And we all know that cross band repeating from one service to another service is illegal no matter if you hold a license for both. And yes it can be done with an unlocked radio for emergency situations ONLY.

I get what you are explaining and did before. However, what are respective definitions of "message" and "communicate" in the regulations that would be directly bearing on part95 (a) and (e)?
 
Words have meaning and we cannot come to a consensus on understanding the whole if we cannot adequately and reliably define the main parts.

[WRQC527]

Does this thread remind anyone else of the final scene of Burn After Reading? 

[SteveShannon]

1 hour ago, Hans said:

I submit that verbally relaying a message manually is communicating a message. GMRS stations are expressly prohibited from communicating a message to or from an amateur/unlicensed/unauthorized station by the plain language or 95.1733 "Prohibited GMRS uses."

The operative word there is Stations .

People are not stations. If I receive a message on my GMRS station, that’s the end of the communication as far as the FCC is concerned. 
If I then transmit a message on my amateur radio station to another amateur radio station that’s a new message. The FCC has almost no interest in the actual message; they only regulate the airwaves (there are some kinds of messages that they prohibit but they’re prohibited from being transmitted via radio stations in the first place.)

It’s absurd to think that I cannot relate information that I heard on one service (whilst following the rules) using another service for which I am licensed. 
But this would certainly be an easy question to ask of the FCC:

“If I hear something during a GMRS communication, may I repeat it on a different service for which I am also licensed as long as the content of the message is not prohibited?”

[Hans]

7 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

The operative word there is Stations .

People are not stations. If I receive a message on my GMRS station, that’s the end of the communication as far as the FCC is concerned. 
If I then transmit a message on my amateur radio station to another amateur radio station that’s a new message. The FCC has almost no interest in the actual message; they only regulate the airwaves (there are some kinds of messages that they prohibit but they’re prohibited from being transmitted via radio stations in the first place.)

It’s absurd to think that I cannot relate information that I heard on one service (whilst following the rules) using another service for which I am licensed. 
But this would certainly be an easy question to ask of the FCC:

“If I hear something during a GMRS communication, may I repeat it on a different service for which I am also licensed as long as the content of the message is not prohibited?”

Now, THAT is the best explanation against this particular interpretation of mine. I will digest it and post back. Thanks!
 
 

Quote

It’s absurd to think that I cannot relate information that I heard on one service (whilst following the rules) using another service for which I am licensed.

I agree that is is absurd. However, it would not be alone as an absurd plain language prohibition in federal regulations.
 
 

Quote

But this would certainly be an easy question to ask of the FCC:

No, that would just be another opinion. As we have seen recently, Chevron Deference has been severely weakened in recent years. Also, we have seen time and time again where the courts have ruled that an agency or commission's opinion, even written, is not necessarily binding.
 
I ALWAYS prefer to understand a law, regulation, or policy for myself using the plain language, precedent, etc.

Edited November 26 by Hans
Expansion and clarification

[Davichko5650]

38 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

The operative word there is Stations .

 

This. 

As defined in 95.303

Maybe the dead horse flogging will now cease?

[AdmiralCochrane]

This mule ain't even tired yet, but I believe the issue is resolved.

[marcspaz]

I'll tell you want i think. In the end, no one gives a damn what the rules say, they do what they want or think they can get away with. Even the people who don't publicly admit it due to work, or position in the community, etc., fall into this category. I think the entire conversation is theater, boredom or both.

 

Carry on.

[Davichko5650]

7 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

I'll tell you want i think. In the end, no one gives a damn what the rules say, they do what they want or think they can get away with. Even the people who don't publicly admit it due to work, or position in the community, etc., fall into this category. I think the entire conversation is theater, boredom or both.

 

Carry on.

Made for some good reading over a break at work, so had some redeeming qualities!

[Hans]

44 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

The operative word there is Stations .

People are not stations. If I receive a message on my GMRS station, that’s the end of the communication as far as the FCC is concerned. 
If I then transmit a message on my amateur radio station to another amateur radio station that’s a new message. The FCC has almost no interest in the actual message; they only regulate the airwaves (there are some kinds of messages that they prohibit but they’re prohibited from being transmitted via radio stations in the first place.)

It’s absurd to think that I cannot relate information that I heard on one service (whilst following the rules) using another service for which I am licensed. 
But this would certainly be an easy question to ask of the FCC:

“If I hear something during a GMRS communication, may I repeat it on a different service for which I am also licensed as long as the content of the message is not prohibited?”

It looks so far like we have a winner!

For the purposes of part 95, a "station" is defined as "Any transmitter, with or without an incorporated antenna or receiver, which is certified by the FCC to be operated in one or more of the Personal Radio Services.
 

Quote

§ 95.303 Definitions.

The following terms and definitions apply only to the rules in this part.

...

Individual. A human being, e.g., one man or one woman.

...

Operate. Control the functioning of a Personal Radio Service station; in particular, cause a Personal Radio Service station to begin, continue or cease transmitting.

Operator. An individual who operates a Personal Radio Service station.

...

Person. An individual, a corporation, a partnership, an association, a joint stock company, a trust, a state, territorial or local government unit, or other legal entity.

Personal Radio Services station. Any transmitter, with or without an incorporated antenna or receiver, which is certified by the FCC to be operated in one or more of the Personal Radio Services.

So, when we plug that definition back in...
 
Any transmitter, with or without an incorporated antenna or receiver, which is certified by the FCC to be operated in one or more of the Personal Radio Services is prohibited from communicating messages (except emergency messages) to any station in the Amateur Radio Service.

Quote

 § 95.1733 Prohibited GMRS uses.

(a) In addition to the prohibited uses outlined in § 95.333 of this chapter, GMRS stations must not communicate:

...

(9) Messages (except emergency messages) to any station in the Amateur Radio Service, to any unauthorized station, or to any foreign station;

So, a more logical interpretation of the regulation yields a prohibition on the equipment communicating a message; presumed on its own and not focused on the person. In the back of my mind, there is still a little wiggle room until "communicate" and "message" are defined by regulation; when a station transmits under a person's control, a message from amateur service to GMRS, is the station still a station "certified by the FCC to be operated in one or more of the Personal Radio Services" when it is in the act of passing a message from one service to another? Or, is that a recursive reading of the prohibition? For example, FRS units are licensed by rule as long at they comply with part 95 (a) and (b). However, the minute the radio has a removable antenna, is frequency agile outside of channels, exceeds bandwidth, exceeds power, etc, it is no longer "certified by the FCC to be operated in one or more of the Personal Radio Services." Likewise, when a GMRS station is used to transmit a message from an amateur station or a GMRS station, is the transmitting station still a certified GMRS station?
 
 But, I believe that the station definition clears up the main, read most probable, prohibition.
 

Thank you, @SteveShannon. Hopefully, when I forget this in the years to come (happens all the time anymore with me), others will remind me that we all hashed it out and remind of the definition of station.