Non-ham comm. on 446.025 in Seattle.

[k7mh]

Well, It was a dark and stormy night...
Actually, it was daytime a couple months ago and I had brought my Alinco DJ-S41 (that I bought on Ebay by the way) to work as I drive around downtown Seattle all day. I thought I would see what repeaters I could hear with it in the downtown area so I was scanning the entire band over and over. It kept stopping at 446.025 where I would hear foreign language each time. It sounded like it was an accent from India or similar. In leaving it on that frequency to listen, I found the signal to be weak to about S-4 for the area in town that I was in. It sounded like perhaps taxi drivers I thought. I couldn't make out much but did know there were no callsigns and it was not intermod. I could hear it for the days I listened.
As things go, I was off work for almost two months with a stress fracture in my left tibia. On return, I started listening as I drive and figured it out today! There is a large vessel currently in port at one of the terminals and the communications I hear has to do with offloading it and other related stuff. I have heard the same kind of accent as before, for the last week. The english is broken so I caught words such as ballast, starboard and port, as well as other shipboard comments regarding unloading cargos, etc. I drove around by the vessel, and of course signal strength increased dramatically when I got near the terminal it was docked in. I do not know if the communications operation is all on board but it does sound as though it is with references to cabin, gangway, different levels they are on, etc.
I wonder just how ongoing this is as it has been heard back in early November and now still (or again) being heard. Probably it is a perfectly legal frequency to use wherever they are from I suppose. Anyone ever hear of this kind of situation?? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif I wonder if they would like to make a small contribution to the US Treasury?! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[kn4ds]

I'd say bring it to Riley's attention.

[K7JEM]

That frequency is used in a European equivalent of our FRS. Probably people from out of our country using radios they bought in their own country.

[K7JEM]

Link to PMR-446 info. (http://www.446user.co.uk/article_8.html)

[PE1RDW]

if it was PMR then most likely the frequentie was 446.02375 and a bit more narow then usualy

[KS4VT]

It wouldn't be the first time that a ship be notified and/or fined by the FCC for illegal use of communication devices:

http://www.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-268345A1.html

A notification to fccham@fcc.gov is probabaly warranted.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

If this is indeed a foreign vessel than this is 100% legal.
The FCC rules do not apply to a foreign vessel and NTIA rules allow for PMR-446.
Note that some supercops have gone to the pen over this very thing, private citizens WILL be detained.
Foreign flags are a clear indicator that one is not in the US.
This applies to ships as well as cosulates and embassies.
Again, it is a US FEDERAL FELONY to hinder the correct and diplomatic function of any government.
Contact the FCC, FBI, NSA, CIA, FAA, perhaps even the peace corps while you are at it, but be sure it is in fact a federal agency, or YOU can be charged under federal law.

[WS2L]

The people operating these radios on foreign ships probably do not even know that they are operating on an American ham band. It would be the equivalent of one of us taking an FRS radio and using it in a country where those frequencies are assigned to a different service such as ham or public service

[n3zra]

Any ship operating on a licensed frequency in the US, I.E. GMRS repeater inputs (467.xxx) or even the amateur band by no means lawful. The ship is in violation of international regulations as well as US law, ships in US waters have to follow US laws, same as US vessels in other ports have to follow the laws of the other nation.

Riley should be given a head's up on the event, even if all that comes out is a friendly reminder to captain of the ship to FCC rules on radio usage in US waters.

[k2gsp]

" Hello.
If this is indeed a foreign vessel than this is 100% legal.
The FCC rules do not apply to a foreign vessel and NTIA rules allow for PMR-446.
Note that some supercops have gone to the pen over this very thing, private citizens WILL be detained.
Foreign flags are a clear indicator that one is not in the US.
This applies to ships as well as cosulates and embassies.
Again, it is a US FEDERAL FELONY to hinder the correct and diplomatic function of any government.
Contact the FCC, FBI, NSA, CIA, FAA, perhaps even the peace corps while you are at it, but be sure it is in fact a federal agency, or YOU can be charged under federal law.
Foreign flags are a clear indicator that one is not in the US.
This applies to ships as well as cosulates and embassies.
Again, it is a US FEDERAL FELONY to hinder the correct and diplomatic function of any government."


You will have to show me that one. Unless something changed when I wasn't looking. A ship flying a flag of a foreign goverment has nothing to do with diplomatic mission. A lot of US ships are flagged by another country for tax and insurance purposes.They enjoy no diplomatic imunity.

Not only are the ships under US jurisdiction at dock they may also fall under state jurisdiction as well.

So yea they are breaking the law in Seattle and should be reported.

I found this too.

." Under the relevant treaties, any State can board a ship on the high seas if the ship is suspected of piracy, transporting slaves, or broadcasting illegally."

[ka5piu]

Hello.

First off, radio communications is the exclusive domain of the federal government, no state laws are being violated as there is no such thing.
Second, the 440 MHz band is Amateur Secondary, look it up in the FCC rules.
Finally, the frequencies used by PMR-446 are permitted on a bridge to bridge and bridge to shore basis.
The US military is primary on 440MHz and has given the green light.
I know this for a fact, as I have just renewed my USCG "Z" card, and it was on the test.
And, the fine folks at No-Code International had this to say about 440.
http://www.nocode.org/articles/NCI_cmts_RM9267.html
The NTIA is totally happy with the PMR-446 use aboard a ship and associated use.
As I fly an aircraft with several radios that do spectrum scans, I find this type of thing quite quickly.
And, after a few well placed questions was sent to the Houston office of the USCG for training and testing.
And, the communications act of 1934, section 605 spells out the law.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecod....05.html (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/47/chapters/5/subchapters/vi/sections/section_605.html)
Note the references to FEDERAL authority.

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 26 2007,18:01)]Hello.

First off, radio communications is the exclusive domain of the federal government, no state laws are being violated as there is no such thing.
Second, the 440 MHz band is Amateur Secondary, look it up in the FCC rules.
Finally, the frequencies used by PMR-446 are permitted on a bridge to bridge and bridge to shore basis.
The US military is primary on 440MHz and has given the green light.
I know this for a fact, as I have just renewed my USCG "Z" card, and it was on the test.
And, the fine folks at No-Code International had this to say about 440.
http://www.nocode.org/articles/NCI_cmts_RM9267.html
The NTIA is totally happy with the PMR-446 use aboard a ship and associated use.
As I fly an aircraft with several radios that do spectrum scans, I find this type of thing quite quickly.
And, after a few well placed questions was sent to the Houston office of the USCG for training and testing.
And, the communications act of 1934, section 605 spells out the law.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecod....05.html (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/47/chapters/5/subchapters/vi/sections/section_605.html)
Note the references to FEDERAL authority.
I never said they were violating state laws, but that they can fall under US and state jurisdiction when at dock. I think I could have worded the last part better where I said "They are breaking the law in Seattle."
You claimed they had some sort of diplomatic imunity which they do not. And I'm not quite sure what you think you have found in FindLaw, but it has no bearing on this at all. I also don't see what a document from 1998 by no code has to do with this.
And according to part 97, 446.025 is not on a secondary
basis.

"In the 70 cm band:


(1) No amateur station shall transmit from north of Line A in the 420-430 MHz segment.
(2) The 420-430 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service in the United States on a secondary basis, and is allocated in the fixed and mobile (except aeronautical mobile) services in the International Table of allocations on a primary basis. No amateur station transmitting in this band shall cause harmful interference to, nor is protected from interference due to the operation of, stations authorized by other nations in the fixed and mobile (except aeronautical mobile) services.

(3) The 430-440 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service on a secondary basis in ITU Regions 2 and 3. No amateur station transmitting in this band in ITU Regions 2 and 3 shall cause harmful interference to, nor is protected from interference due to the operation of, stations authorized by other nations in the radiolocation service. In ITU Region 1, the 430-440 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service on a co-primary basis with the radiolocation service. As between these two services in this band in ITU Region 1, the basic principle that applies is the equality of right to operate. Amateur stations authorized by the United States and radiolocation stations authorized by other nations in ITU Region 1 shall operate so as not to cause harmful interference to each other.

(4) No amateur station transmitting in the 449.75-450.00 MHz segment shall cause interference to, nor is protected from interference due to the operation of stations in, the space operation and space research services."

Contrary to what you think no one is going to be arrested for reporting a possible violation to the FCC on a frequency they have a right to be on.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

At no point did I say diplomatic immunity.
Reread the paragraph.
What I did say was that "I" raised questions about the very same issues, and was sent back for testing by the US GOVERNMENT.
The other thing I pointed out was that states have no jurisdiction over radio.
And, finally, "Radiolocation service, to include Radio Detection and Ranging, Radio Direction Finding, and Bridge to Bridge and Bridge to Port communications".
Seamans manual, section 5, Signs Signals and Communications.
That little line was what I was retested on.

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 26 2007,20:01)]Hello.

At no point did I say diplomatic immunity.
Reread the paragraph.
What I did say was that "I" raised questions about the very same issues, and was sent back for testing by the US GOVERNMENT.
The other thing I pointed out was that states have no jurisdiction over radio.
And, finally, "Radiolocation service, to include Radio Detection and Ranging, Radio Direction Finding, and Bridge to Bridge and Bridge to Port communications".
Seamans manual, section 5, Signs Signals and Communications.
That little line was what I was retested on.
"Foreign flags are a clear indicator that one is not in the US.
This applies to ships as well as cosulates and embassies."

You equated a ship flying a foreign flag to a consulate or embassy and there is no comparison. A ship has none of the protections of the diplomatic service. So you didn't outright say it, you implied it or that's the way it read to me.

And because you got gigged for something in the military doesn't mean the same thing will happen to civilians. I have to assume you are using equipment capable of intercepting communications that aren't available to the public and this may have been the lesson they wanted you to learn because of that capability, but what was heard on the public airways by a licensed operator using a frequency he has first right to isn't possibly the same thing. Especially when what he heard may constitute a violation. As far as I can see the ship is a secondary user of the frequency and is causing interference.

Hey who knows. I went to a seminar on what to do if you find a DEA placed transponder on an aircraft your doing an annual on or repairing. It was a catch 22. If you removed it, because it's not an authorized piece of equipment the DEA pounced on you, they got one mechanic for taking one out the DEA had improperly wired to the comm switch, but if you left it there and the plane went down because of the unauthorized equipment you were responsible. So anything is possible I guess.

[KD8COO]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 27 2007,17:01)]Second, the 440 MHz band is Amateur Secondary, look it up in the FCC rules.
Yep, always remember to check the FCC rules on those! I've had a couple of those times I thought I caught improper use, but after referring to my FCC info, I found that they were indeed legit...

- Ran across a local garage door installer using a frequency in the upper end of 70cm somewhere... Yep, there's some business band stuff up there! Changed my setup so I don't scan quite that high up anymore.

- Ran across some kids talking about homework and school on the 900mhz calling frequency, never heard an ID for around 15 minutes. Sounded VERY loud too, like they were both next door. Well, they very well may have been... There's cordless phones that have a "channel" that's exactly the same as the 900mhz Amateur calling frequency! Unfortunately, they pop up right on the calling freq. from time to time. I compromise by locking out that freq if I hear anything that might be a phone call and not a ham (which is reasonably rare, maybe once a week) and then unlocking it again the next day.

[k2gsp]

Quote[/b] (KD8COO @ Jan. 26 2007,21:07)]Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 27 2007,17:01)]Second, the 440 MHz band is Amateur Secondary, look it up in the FCC rules.
Yep, always remember to check the FCC rules on those! #I've had a couple of those times I thought I caught improper use, but after referring to my FCC info, I found that they were indeed legit...

- Ran across a local garage door installer using a frequency in the upper end of 70cm somewhere... #Yep, there's some business band stuff up there! #Changed my setup so I don't scan quite that high up anymore.

- Ran across some kids talking about homework and school on the 900mhz calling frequency, never heard an ID for around 15 minutes. #Sounded VERY loud too, like they were both next door. #Well, they very well may have been... #There's cordless phones that have a "channel" that's exactly the same as the 900mhz Amateur calling frequency! #Unfortunately, they pop up right on the calling freq. from time to time. #I compromise by locking out that freq if I hear anything that might be a phone call and not a ham (which is reasonably rare, maybe once a week) and then unlocking it again the next day.
But the frequency in question is not a secondary use frequency.

According to part 97, 446.025 is not on a secondary
basis.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

This had nothing to do with any military.
The Bell model 47 has undergone a full refit, snazzy new glass cockpit, FADEC engine with turbo, Full electronic auto advance ignition with magneto fallback, X2, the works.
In addition, all of the old radios were replaced with NTIA approved hardware.
That means that I can now scan from around 60 KHz to well into microwave, lock onto the signal with the ADF or RDF and follow same.
Transmit coverage is likewise massive.
So for a test run, I decided to see what was on the ham bands, and locked on a PMR 446 radio.
Everything aboard the aircraft is FAA and FCC as well as NTIA approved, no government specials here.
And, nothing would have been said, except I said something to a local offical.
A "Z" card is a merchant marine ID card.
I use this in place of a US passport.
That and an ATP pilots license will get one in just about any country in the world, no questions asked.
So, the issue is not so much what one says as it is who one says it to.
And, the local police were totally sleeze about it.
Kind of like the DEA transponder thing.
BTW, transponders work on 1030 and 1090 MHz.
To find one that might be hidden aboard an aircraft turn off all avionics and listen with a talkie, the TH-F6 works well for this.
The local police are a lot like the DEA, get some real heavy hitters like the US Secret Service involved and they roll over like a puppy.
And, as a side note.
The original engine was equipped with a 24 volt alternator, something like 50 amps.
The dual glass cockpit units are normally powered by the 24 volt bus but can run off the magnetos auxillary output that is normally only used in very old aircraft for panel lighting that have no other electrical system.
The aircraft lighting has been replaced with LEDs and very efficent strobes.
The main rotor tach generator can provide a few amps to the emergency bus, and the battery.
But, something was amiss, the use of the HF radio or the spotlight would start to discharge the battery.
As I am not a full A&P, I had very little to do with the engine and transmission replacement.
So, the aircraft was finally brought in for the annual inspection.
In the inspection it was discovered that the belt to the alternator was never put on.
The aircraft ran nearly a year on just the current from the auxillary systems.
The Alternator needed to be replaced in the conversion as the old one will not align correctly.
This is not visible in normal inspection with this conversion, an inspection plate has since been fitted.
A new 225 amp 24 volt unit and 2 new NiCad batteries were fitted, along with the correct primary and secondary buss wiring.
And, the tail rotor tach is now connected to the emergency bus.
Some of the "redundant" instruments were again refitted.
All at no cost.
The FAA approved this conversion that left a few steps out.
And, the HF radio IS rated for 550 Watts. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[WA2ZDY]

Geez cowthief, how deep can you pile it on?

Your assertions about the ship being legal are completely incorrect. And you know it. Go find something else to read and quote back. But it'll help if you actually understand what you've read.

[ka5piu]

Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Jan. 28 2007,18:49)]Geez cowthief, how deep can you pile it on?

Your assertions about the ship being legal are completely incorrect. # And you know it. #Go find something else to read and quote back. # But it'll help if you actually understand what you've read.
Hello.

Well, YOU can raise all the hell you want in Houston.
This goes on day and night.
The FCC field office in Houston is not real excited about it.
The PMR-446 channels are listed, program a radio and knock yourself out.

[W0LPQ]

PIU are you implying you have an ATP rating?

No one cares where you scan or transmit.

Bill, W0LPQ

[KL1ZB]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 27 2007,20:29)]Quote[/b] (WA2ZDY @ Jan. 28 2007,18:49)]Geez cowthief, how deep can you pile it on?

Your assertions about the ship being legal are completely incorrect. # And you know it. #Go find something else to read and quote back. # But it'll help if you actually understand what you've read.
Hello.

Well, YOU can raise all the hell you want in Houston.
This goes on day and night.
The FCC field office in Houston is not real excited about it.
The PMR-446 channels are listed, program a radio and knock yourself out.
Ok ka5piu so you were proven wrong on most of your statements and you have the audacity to make reply like that?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[K4KWH]

Fellas,

Instead of trying to play one-upmanship in a web forum, just report the alleged violation to Mr Hollingsworth with a copy to the Seattle (?) FCC office and let them sort it out. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

73

[ka5piu]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 28 2007,00:09)]A "Z" card is a merchant marine ID card.
I use this in place of a US passport.
That and an ATP pilots license will get one in just about any country in the world, no questions asked.
Hello.

Let us read the original post, shall we?
I hold a "Z" card.
What I said was that this card, and an ATP card, will get one in just about any country in the world.

Now, for the rest of the story.
Yes, Motorola and I have since worked out what issues there were.
This does not mean I want anything to do with anything but Amateur and GMRS radio.
Yes, I have started to reprogram and repair Motorola radios, for my use only.
The whole cowthief thing ended when Monty Sisco died.
That is what a small number of " SuperHamsters ® " are upset about.
The last gripe was that I was a novice, and what was a novice doing with VHF and UHF radios, Motorola or otherwise.
That is no longer an issue.
Amateur radio is a hobby.

So, now, with a little insight, people might understand what has happened, why the sudden issues.

Have a nice day.

[KI4PEQ]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 27 2007,10:51)]Hello.

If this is indeed a foreign vessel than this is 100% legal.
The FCC rules do not apply to a foreign vessel and NTIA rules allow for PMR-446.
Note that some supercops have gone to the pen over this very thing, private citizens WILL be detained.
Foreign flags are a clear indicator that one is not in the US.
This applies to ships as well as cosulates and embassies.
Again, it is a US FEDERAL FELONY to hinder the correct and diplomatic function of any government.
Contact the FCC, FBI, NSA, CIA, FAA, perhaps even the peace corps while you are at it, but be sure it is in fact a federal agency, or YOU can be charged under federal law.
The key word is GOVERNMENT.

Ships in U.S. ports registered under foreign flags do not enjoy free reign to run roughshod over FCC regulations. They are privately owned entities. They do not enjoy diplomatic immunity. Even the United States government must abide by the rules of other countries when using communications frequencies in a foreign country. Coordination with the host country's PTT authorites is done by the embassy staff. DoD must work hand in hand with the embassy to ensure that DoD communications operations are done in strict compliance with the host country's regulations.

Where did you get the idea you posted? Can you cite SPECIFIC instances?

[PE1RDW]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 28 2007,02:01)]And, the fine folks at No-Code International had this to say about 440.
http://www.nocode.org/articles/NCI_cmts_RM9267.html
That article is about PMRS (closed networks) not about PMR446, those are completly different things.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

Here is what I was given.

"(3) The 430-440 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service on a secondary basis in ITU Regions 2 and 3. No amateur station transmitting in this band in ITU Regions 2 and 3 shall cause harmful interference to, nor is protected from interference due to the operation of, stations authorized by other nations in the radiolocation service. In ITU Region 1, the 430-440 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service on a co-primary basis with the radiolocation service. As between these two services in this band in ITU Region 1, the basic principle that applies is the equality of right to operate. Amateur stations authorized by the United States and radiolocation stations authorized by other nations in ITU Region 1 shall operate so as not to cause harmful interference to each other. "

And, again, my ONLY point of ALL of this was that ONLY the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT had jurisdiction.
There are no STATE laws that can regulate a foreign vessel.
There was nothing said that FEDERAL law did not apply to a ship under a foreign flag.
What was said was that the FEDs tend to get upset with people who involve other than FEDERAL agents.
I did not get in trouble for talking to any FEDERAL AGENTS, it was talking to LOCAL police that was the issue.

[PE1RDW]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Jan. 29 2007,17:52)]Hello.

Here is what I was given.

"(3) The 430-440 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service on a secondary basis in ITU Regions 2 and 3. No amateur station transmitting in this band in ITU Regions 2 and 3 shall cause harmful interference to, nor is protected from interference due to the operation of, stations authorized by other nations in the radiolocation service. In ITU Region 1, the 430-440 MHz segment is allocated to the amateur service on a co-primary basis with the radiolocation service. As between these two services in this band in ITU Region 1, the basic principle that applies is the equality of right to operate. Amateur stations authorized by the United States and radiolocation stations authorized by other nations in ITU Region 1 shall operate so as not to cause harmful interference to each other. "

And, again, my ONLY point of ALL of this was that ONLY the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT had jurisdiction.
There are no STATE laws that can regulate a foreign vessel.
There was nothing said that FEDERAL law did not apply to a ship under a foreign flag.
What was said was that the FEDs tend to get upset with people who involve other than FEDERAL agents.
I did not get in trouble for talking to any FEDERAL AGENTS, it was talking to LOCAL police that was the issue.
There are two reasons why that bit has nothing to do with this situation:
1) pmr446 operates on 446.0 to 446.1 mhz and not inside the 430-440mhz region.
2) pmr446 is licenced free landmobile radio not radio location service.

pmr446 is not permitted in the usa and a ship in territorial waters of the usa has to folow usa law including the rules and regulations, outside teritoral waters the rules of the flag count be then again pmr446 doesn't have enough range to be a problem then.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

So far, I have not disagreed with any of this.
Yes, PMR-446 is not in the 430 to 440 MHz range, it is in the 446 MHz range, hence the name.
I have never said that a ship has any diplomatic immunity, immunity was never brought up by I except as a response.
Do I feel that there is an issue with this type of thing in the ham bands?
Ask yourself this question.
Did I not say that I had voiced my concerns over this in Houston Texas?
What I did say was that the Feds get a little upset when the locals are called in.
That was what was said.

[k7mh]

Oh well, argue on if you like. The vessel left sometime over the weekend. I would bet it is different vessels from the same country though, that I have heard over a couple months time.

[w4hwd]

This PIU dude has elevated double-talk to something way beyond an artform...

[wd0ct]

I am deeply concerned by this.

[B]WHEN WILL THE FCC COME TO THEIR SENSES AND DEPUTIZE ALL QRZ COPS?

[kf7qq]

What a tracker.

[WA7KKP]

Betcha a cold 807 someone's using PMR446 (Euro FRS) handies here in the US of A.

Gary WA7KKP

[KI4SWY]

Did any of you read the PMR446 Link from earlier?

Quote[/b] ]
Before using PMR 446 radios outside the United Kingdom, users should check that the relevant administration has implemented the Decisions. Users who fail to do this and use their radios overseas, may break the laws of the country concerned, run the risk of prosecution and the confiscation of equipment.



Its states right there that they may break the laws of the country concerned, which is the last time I checked, is "USA"..

You could always contact the shipyard manager to notify the caption of the ship that there PMR radios are transmitting on a amatuer radio license band.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

I am back in the US for a few days, so could ask some questions.
"A free port (porto franco) or free zone (US: Foreign-Trade Zone) is a port or area with relaxed jurisdiction with respect to the country of location. Most commonly this means being free of customs or being a special customs zone with favorable customs regulations. Earlier in time some free ports enjoyed political autonomy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_port
Now, it turns out that as a matter of policy, the US
simply allows this type of thing.
And, yes, the FCC is going after domestic ships who have cellular networks on board, but nothing is being done about the foreign flag vessels, even in a US port.
The US cruise lines have started to provide this service to compete with everyone else who already has this.
And, this policy goes as far as to not arrest a person with an active warrant for arrest.
This, from the UK.
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Diplomacy/6580.htm
This US policy seems to be the same.
And, as far as the feds are concerned.
http://library.findlaw.com/1996/Mar/7/130663.html
And, it is in fact a violation of the law to use any civil aircraft in the manner that I did.
I am not a police officer, so what I did was an "unwarranted intrusion".
That seems to be the key in my case.