Linking is over,.. But,..

[SvenMarbles]

So the online repeater audio monitoring on the MyGMRS map hasn't been functional for a while. I assume that it correlates with when everyone took their links down for repeater linking.

But, if I understand things correctly, the language clarification was such that it disallowed linking machines to each other via the internet. But does that necessarily mean that standalone machines cannot continue to provide an audio stream to MyGMRS for monitoring?

I'd kind of like to see this feature return. I actually had some pretty good utility for it (hearing your own incoming at a remote site to better understand how you're doing).

 

[SteveShannon]

31 minutes ago, SvenMarbles said:

So the online repeater audio monitoring on the MyGMRS map hasn't been functional for a while. I assume that it correlates with when everyone took their links down for repeater linking.

But, if I understand things correctly, the language clarification was such that it disallowed linking machines to each other via the internet. But does that necessarily mean that standalone machines cannot continue to provide an audio stream to MyGMRS for monitoring?

I'd kind of like to see this feature return. I actually had some pretty good utility for it (hearing your own incoming at a remote site to better understand how you're doing).

 

I don’t know, but I was apparently wrong in my interpretation of the actual rules anyway.  This sentence from the commission’s interpretation might indicate that sound cannot be streamed:

 

Quote

Repeaters may be connected to the telephone network or other networks only for purposes of remote control of a GMRS station, not for carrying communication signals. 

 

[amaff]

That's actually a good question. Would being able to monitor it remotely count as remote control, and not communication? You aren't talking out through it that way.

[SteveShannon]

7 minutes ago, amaff said:

That's actually a good question. Would being able to monitor it remotely count as remote control, and not communication? You aren't talking out through it that way.

It is a good question and you also make a good point.  In the United States the limitations on monitoring signals are very limited.  Almost all of the regulations are aimed at transmitting.

[amaff]

1 minute ago, SteveShannon said:

It is a good question and you also make a good point.  In the United States the limitations on monitoring signals are very limited.  Almost all of the regulations are aimed at transmitting.

Exactly how I was thinking of it. It's not too much different than listening in on a ham (or really any other analog, think Fire / EMS) frequency.

[SvenMarbles]

3 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

It is a good question and you also make a good point.  In the United States the limitations on monitoring signals are very limited.  Almost all of the regulations are aimed at transmitting.

Well just by virtue of the fact that ,yet again, the language is ambiguous it seems like it  would allow for people to just go on ahead and do it just the same way that people just went on ahead and linked repeaters before..

[SteveShannon]

Just now, SvenMarbles said:

Well just by virtue of the fact that ,yet again, the language is ambiguous it seems like it  would allow for people to just go on ahead and do it just the same way that people just went on ahead and linked repeaters before..

Exactly.  When the commission released their interpretation that made it clear they were against linking repeaters, they listed the harms done by linking repeaters: 

Quote

In addition to violating Commission rules, linking repeaters is not in the public interest.  Because GMRS spectrum is limited and used on a shared “commons” basis, the service only works well on a localized basis when users can hear each other and cooperate in the sharing of channels.  Linking repeaters not only increases the potential for interference, but also uses up a limited spectrum resource over much larger areas than intended, limiting localized availability of the repeater channels.

In my opinion (worth nothing), streaming the sound for the sole,purpose of listening does not have any of those negative consequences. But I can’t predict how the FCC might rule.  I wouldn’t be afraid to try it though.  We all know that a person would simply receive a letter first anyway.

[SvenMarbles]

12 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

Exactly.  When the commission released their interpretation that made it clear they were against linking repeaters, they listed the harms done by linking repeaters: 

In my opinion (worth nothing), streaming the sound for the sole,purpose of listening does not have any of those negative consequences. But I can’t predict how the FCC might rule.  I wouldn’t be afraid to try it though.  We all know that a person would simply receive a letter first anyway.

And it likely wouldn't even get to that point. The FCC is rarely compelled to enforce unless something is causing an actual problem, even in cases where rules are slightly bent. And I don't see how this would cause an actual problem for anyone..

[gortex2]

In the end your looking for a scanner feed. You are certainly able to set one up on your own. Takes a scanner, PC and internet. I have multiple scanner feed for SAR stuff but dont have any GMRS stuff on them.