FCC Cracking Down on Property Owners From Which Pirate Broadcasters Operate

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by K5XS, Dec 18, 2020.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: QSOToday-1
  1. K0UO

    K0UO Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    And then Radio New York
    But then Allan (and his crew Scott and Tim-tron were able to put together WBCQ a shortwave station legally near Monticello Maine.
    A 500 kW transmitter and big big antenna
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2020
    KX4O likes this.
  2. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    I read the new law, and the enforcement letters. I don't see any problem with doing any of this. Just some new requirements for the FCC to handle, and some new penalties for people who knowingly allow these pirate stations to operate.
     
    WQ4G likes this.
  3. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I was using an example that many might relate to. I was not presuming a judgement on it.

    73
    Chip W1YW
     
    K3XR likes this.
  4. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    What confuses me why there is a need: if, before the law, the FCC chose to copy the landlord of the tenants violation, why would a landlord not take action against the tenant? Is there an example where this happened? Sounds like there must be...
     
    WQ4G likes this.
  5. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Unscrupulous or unwitting landlords make this type of urban radio piracy possible. This new law puts some teeth into the consequences, and the landlords may choose to change their ways, after an initial letter. But maybe not, all depends on the landlord, I suppose.

    One example of a pirate station I heard about in NYC (IIRC) a few years ago, was a transmitter mounted in a box on the roof of a multi-story building. It was attached to the AC power feed for a roof mounted fan or A/C unit. A relatively small box with a HW dipole antenna, I think around 10 watts or so, but enough to serve the local area. As I recall, the transmitter was attached to an MP3 player or some such, and played "urban" music, along with ads for local businesses, both legal and illegal. The building owner claimed no knowledge of the TX, but I suspect someone involved in maintenance for the building was involved. In other cases, landlords knowingly rent to these guys. But could be either way.
     
    K3XR likes this.
  6. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Perhaps they were looking to smooth out some legal technicalities that were showing up in the pursuit of these cases. What those technicalities might be is a good question. It would also be interesting to get a feel for the number of cases the FCC pursues in the course of year for this type of violation.
     
    W1YW likes this.
  7. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Roger that.

    I guess I see the other side--not just that it holds the landlord accountable, but that it empowers the landlord to get rid of troublemakers. The Feds are basically making it easier for tenants to get rid of riff raff, by backing them up with the liability.

    73
    Chip W1YW
     
    WQ4G, K3XR and K7JEM like this.
  8. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    A very good point. Not only a tool for the FCC in their enforcement effort but an effective back up for the landlord who wants to get rid of one of these miscreants.
     
    WQ4G and W1YW like this.
  9. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Looking at the three notices linked in the OP, two of them are owned and managed by the same entities. The third is a different name. All of these appear to be multi story residential buildings, and all three of them are within 1000 feet of each other, from what I can see when mapping the addresses.
     
    W1YW likes this.
  10. AH7I

    AH7I Ham Member QRZ Page

    Because it is not the landlords job. A tenant who is in compliance with his rental agreement and runs afoul with the FCC should be dealt with by the FCC. It's totally unreasonable to threaten an owner with seizure of his property because he does not evict someone whom the feds claim is violating the law. There are so many ways this can go wrong for the owner. What a tenant who picked up an eagle feather and stuck it in his hat?
     
    WZ7U, K9GLS and AD5HR like this.

Share This Page

ad: AlphaRF-1