Repeater Group Lawsuit

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by KE0LCL, May 9, 2016.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: HRDLLC-2
  1. KE0LCL

    KE0LCL QRZ Member QRZ Page

    On June 4th, 2015, Ken Bryant (K1DMR) sued the 42 repeater owners that had repeaters on the PRN System at that time. Ken Bryant filed this lawsuit after he was asked not to use the linked System because he was observed contacting radio operators over the air in order to sell radios for his business, North Georgia Communications.

    ok so we all know about the bad apples in every area of the world for ham radio right? well if you want to continue to use it for free then you might want to read this. http://ncprn.net/?p=379
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 9, 2016
  2. WA7SON

    WA7SON Ham Member QRZ Page

    Would this possibly be an issue for the ARRL to tackle? Seems appropriate enough to me.
     
  3. K5GHS

    K5GHS Ham Member QRZ Page

    Repeaters have always had the ability to be private or require membership to be used.

    Commercial use of a repeater (or ham radio in general) has always been prohibited.

    The FCC does have jurisdiction.

    Hopefully this gets tossed quickly.
     
    KD4POJ, AD0JA, W2CPD and 1 other person like this.
  4. WG7X

    WG7X Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Private radio networks, huh? Is that in the province of good Amateur radio practices?

    Seems to me that anyone desiring a private radio network should move off of ham radio to commercial spectrum.

    Now just based on the biased web site report, I would also say the fellow allegedly selling radio equipment on the "PRN" was probably out of line, but so is the "PRN" for even existing.

    Two wrongs most definitely do not make a right.

    Since I have no dog in this fight, I will leave it at that. Just my opinion, which you did ask for by posting this in a public forum.
     
    K9FV, K1TGX, N5PZJ and 5 others like this.
  5. W0DLR

    W0DLR Ham Member QRZ Page

    I owned a repeater for 25 years, and it was "private" if you wanted to call it that. If I didn't want some windbag blow hard in there I told
    him so. As long as it was my money and my equipment I'll do what I wanted with it. If some yoyo drove up in front of your house and said
    I saw your antennas, I'm a ham and I'm coming in to use your HF radio, I want to contact a friend in Mongolia, what would you do?

    I never took anyone's money, therefore, I didn't want or need their advice. After 25 years and two meters outlived it's shelf life, I took
    it down, put it in the shed and use the cell phone.
    W0DLR
     
    K2CPR, KC9ZHR, K3RW and 6 others like this.
  6. W5LMM

    W5LMM Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    All they had to do was set a policy (in writing on a web site) that sales or business was not to be discussed on the system, as a stipulation for it's use. If he violates that policy, he has no recourse.
     
    N5PZJ likes this.
  7. K5GHS

    K5GHS Ham Member QRZ Page

    They don't even have to do that. Its prohibited in the Amateur Service anyway. The only "sales" is for people conducting swap nets or similar. If he was on there actively hawking radios on a regular basis, that likely violates the FCC rule.

    That's probably why he filed saying the FCC doesn't have regulatory rights, but I don't get that one at all. Course, those rules have been debated for years, and many times I've heard them stretched a bit. But the FCC not having jurisdiction? Don't get that one at all.

    Being that I never heard the conversations, I can only assume he was doing a lot of it from what I'm reading.
     
    K2CPR, KF7PCL and KD4POJ like this.
  8. VE7JBX

    VE7JBX Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hmmm.... got to say, in that scenario, I'd say sure, be my guest. If he can make my gear work Mongolia, I can learn some tricks from this guy, yoyo or not! :D

    But amusing example aside - yes. Many of the local 2m repeaters I use are owned / hosted / operated by individual hams, and I would respect their having rights to restrict who uses their repeater. Isn't that kind of the point of CTCSS or similar, though? Just give that out to your friends who you want to have access? Similarly, one of the bigger local ham groups which hosts a very big repeater system on nearby mountaintop, charges $20 for a 1-yr access to the IRLP and autopatch codes. That's arguably a "PRN" of sorts, although one I have been happy to support especially before I had a HF rig and IRLP was my only way to reach exotic locales with my HT.

    But, if someone set up a "PRN" of any sort I'd still expect them to have to abide by amateur regs about no commercial activity, etc if it was in the allocated amateur spectrum.

    Just my opinions - freely given and worth what was paid for them.
     
    K2NCC likes this.
  9. W6KCS

    W6KCS Ham Member QRZ Page

    So are you guys thinking that K1DMR is just trying to bully them into letting him back on the system by threatening to harm them financially? It's hard to imagine this ever going to trial, but it makes me nervous as a repeater owneer. I'll be following this one closely and will contribute to the cause as soon as they set up a Paypal account, or some other way to make it easy.
     
    K3RW likes this.
  10. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Bringing a lawsuit is one thing having success is yet another. Seems to raise at least one point that you would think would not be at issue at all that is that the FCC has no jurisdiction over the Amateur Radio Service if that is an accurate representation in the PRN article. Will be interesting to follow.
     

Share This Page