Glenn Baxter, K1MAN Fined $21,000

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by AA7BQ, Mar 29, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. PE1RDW

    PE1RDW Ham Member QRZ Page

    If he is not on schedule will he get PUNished?
     
  2. N9VO

    N9VO XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    A real "gotcha" would have been for the NAL to have been for $14,375. That would have been a nice touch!
     
  3. KA1IIC

    KA1IIC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Errrr... did you say 'on schedule'[​IMG]?

    Now you know that will never happen!  The foolish Ratt-Shack timer will start up the tirade at mid-sentence and the foolish tape will break leaving a dead carrier on the frequency and upon asking what went wrong the boy broadcaster will say something like...  'timer?  It's fine... tape machine?  that's fine too!'  Finally there will be no station ID at the end of the broadca$h!!!

    Does this remind you?

    One man should just go to the bank and cut a check.  He does have millions of dollars...  Most of those dollars have Jefferson Davis' picture on them but it's still money right?

    I did have an on-line QSO with a ham that supports the 'one man' case.  He doesn't support 'one man' but he does support the case...

    Why? you might ask...

    He has a ham radio product that is in very low dimand and he wants to advertise over the air...  Now... who do we know does adverts on the air???  Interesting concept tho... SPAM via ham radio!!!  The folks will just love that one <heh>

    Imagine...  SPAM via ham radio...  Now that's "state of the art"!

    Also imagine... a person that claims to be fighting against commercialization of ham radio might just open the doors to that same cancer... IMHO

    Time to drop the curtain on this one...  Let the FCC do their job and maybe, just maybe, they can get to the jokers on the bands...

    Remember this fact; Anybody can be a scofflaw but it takes a REAL MAN to respect the rights of others...  that's a quote but I don't remember of whom to cite... sri

    73
    vince ka1iic
     
  4. K3VR

    K3VR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi Vince!

    We sure don't need SPAM on the ham bands - the IARN/AARA SPAM is bad enough in my email box!

    You're right of course, anybody can act like a sandlot punk and pick on a bunch of little kids on their jamboree, but it takes a REAL MAN to respect the rights of others and be someone kids can look up to!
     
  5. N1LAF

    N1LAF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Mr. Baxter has struck again on his website with his quoting of K3VR. And a good quote too. As I read the quote and Baxter's rantings, and another look at Part 97 rules, it has become very clear that it is Baxter who is in violation of rules that he often quotes on his website. Lets ignore the legality of K1MAN's broadcast, and look at how he conducts his broadcast.

    1. No one has exclusive rights to any frequency (per part 97), including K1MAN.

    2. It is the responsibility of the operator to check if the frequency is clear of ongoing QSOs before transmitting.

    3. It appears that K1MAN INTENDS to broadcast over ongoing conversations if they are occuring.

    4. When K1MAN broadcasts over ongoing QSO's, it is K1MAN in violation of Section 333/501 as he so often cites, not the individuals who were there first.

    So if it was Brian's intent to be listening on that frequency, and engaging in conversation, whether it be the Boy Scouts or anyone else, his actions were legal and well within Part 97.

    It doesn't matter if K1MAN broadcasts on the same frequency for 18 year of 800 years, the frequency is not reserved just for K1MAN.

    By the facts of the case, and K1MAN broadcasts over ongoing QSO's, he should cite himself a felony affidavit.
     
  6. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    But, wouldn't the government be obliged to make sure that Mr. Baxter understands the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution before it could accept such a piece of work?

    I think Brian had the best suggestion for Baxter to gather the funds needed to pay his FO. Collecting spent aluminum beverage cans.

    Actually, from one of his oft-posted pictures, it appears he could use some exercise. So, when he appears before the judge with respect to collecting the monies due the US Treasury, perhaps a fitting approach would be for the Court to order him to spend enough time collecting cans to fulfill the value in scrap aluminum. Assuming, of course, "x" number of aluminum cans per mile of freeway or per acre of national park land and a scrap value of those cans amounting to $21,000. If Brian's estimate of 420,000 is in the ball park, there's probably about 50 cans per mile. So, he'd need to cover just about 8400 miles of freeway to meet the quota. Of course, that guesstimate was based on my recollection of a Southern CA freeway, not one of the ones near me here in AL. They're all very tidy and neatly landscaped. He'd probably only find 5 cans per mile here.

    He might be seen on our roadways frequently enough for his activity to be recognized as a new public service. Something like Baxtering-up cans. Or maybe Baxterizing cans?

    Lee
     
  7. N9OGL

    N9OGL Banned QRZ Page

    Here's something from one of the footnotes of the ARRL comment on RM-8626 footnote #4

    "Maia criticizes the inherent infeasibility of information bulletin and regular scheduled code practice from W1AW to “listen before transmitting”. The League believes the regularly published, widely disseminated schedule of the W1AW bulletins and code practice, the limited duration of each, and the advance warning transmissions are sufficient to address that concern. However, it should also be noted that such a capability, even if feasible, is not particularly practical, given the dynamic propagation characteristics in the amateur MF and HF bands. For W1AW operator (or any amateur radio operator) to listen in New England before transmitting is not a guarantee against interference to other amateur stations. If W1AW is in the skip zone of a station transmitting, W1AW will not hear the transmitted signal. That does not mean, however, that the intended receiving station is in the skip zone of W1AW. Nor are electronic circuits to determine frequency activity successful at HF. One reason is the noise level varies constantly by both types and amplitude. It is difficult, therefore, to discern signal from noise in these bands by use of a squelch circuit. The problem is further complicated by the fact that HF frequencies are not channelized, and receiver bandwidths vary from amateur station to amateur station. These matters, however, are no more a problem for one-way information bulletins from W1AW then they are for any amateur station engaged in two-way communication, and do not offer any support for the allegation that HF bulletins, voice, cw, or data, are somehow improper on the HF bands."

    ARRL comments on RM-8626 footnote #4

    Todd N9OGL
     
  8. K3VR

    K3VR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Lee and Paul,

    Regarding Baxter's silly web page - as if we needed more proof, Baxter has demonstrated yet again that he is a fact-deficient bumbler.

    #1 Baxter Myth Debunked:

    The Boy Scouts were tragically trampled on October 16, 2004. A cursory glance at the Forfeiture Order shows that the instances of interference cited by the FCC occurred in November and December 2004, and March, 2005. Therefore, K1MAN's interference to the Boy Scout Jamboree is not in the Forfeiture Order.

    #2 Baxter Myth Debunked:


    April 14, 2004

    Mr. Glenn A. Baxter
    RR 1 Box 776
    Belgrade Lakes, ME 04918

    RE: Amateur Radio license K1MAN

    Regarding deliberate interference, we receive continuing complaints, and our monitoring verifies, that your transmissions start up on top of existing communications of individual licensees as well as nets such as the Salvation Army Team Emergency Radio Network. Such operation constitutes deliberate interference. Stations engaging in ongoing communications are not obligated to stop transmitting when K1MAN wants to start transmitting on a frequency, and complainants are so advised by the Commission. You appear to believe that the publication of a transmission schedule gives you the right to begin transmitting on a certain frequency at a certain time, even if the frequency is occupied. It does not.

    All frequencies in the Amateur Radio Service are shared--no frequency is assigned for the exclusive use of any station, and your Amateur station has no greater rights to a frequency at any particular time than any other Amateur station. Section 97.101(d) of the rules prohibits an Amateur station from willfully or maliciously interfering with any radio communication or signal.




    ALSO SEE:



    October 29, 2004

    Mr. Glenn A. Baxter
    RR 1 Box 776
    Belgrade Lakes, ME 04918

    RE: Warning Notice: Amateur Radio license K1MAN
    Case #EB-2004-07

    On September 15, 2004, we notified you that we had received approximately a dozen complaints that your Amateur radio station's transmissions started while the communications of individual operators and groups such as the Salvation Army Team Emergency Radio Net, which was handling health and welfare traffic for this season's hurricane victims, were ongoing.

    We have received additional complaints of interference from your station's transmissions starting at 9:31 PM on 3.890 MHz on October 16, 2004; 6:23 PM on 3.890 MHz and 7:59 PM on 3.977 on October 19, 2004; and 7:59 PM on 3.977 MHz on October 20, 2004.

    The letter cited an April 14, 2004 warning issued to you about your transmissions starting while existing communications were ongoing, and warning you that your publishing a "transmission schedule" does not give you the right to begin transmitting on a certain frequency at a certain time if there are ongoing communications on that frequency.


    Now, I realize Baxter has never let himself be inconvenienced by facts in his reportage, but I ask you, are the principles in the two different Commission letters above difficult to understand? Are they written in Greek? Do they contain difficult terms from Linear Algebra, or Metallurgy? Is it possible Baxter is in possession of a secret rule book that applies only to Glenn Baxter?

    Bottom Line: A published schedule is meaningless and no one has the right to willfully, maliciously, or negligently commence transmitting over other amateurs using a frequency! Is this clear enough, or do we need to write a few more pages on the topic?
     
  9. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Nope, clear enough. Even ARRL's machinations about its own errant interpretation of the regulations won't help.

    They've been warned unofficially, of course. And, its fairly common knowledge that they do listen before commencing code practice or broadcasts.

    Of course, they use modern, synthesized, phase-locked loop VFOs in their equipment, so they know where they supposedly are, before initiating a broadcast.

    Use of an old analog, permeability-tuned oscillator with a yellowed-plastic scale is out of touch. Seriously. What's the dial uncertainty with respect to a 32S-1 or KWM-1,2 or whatever? Probably at least a kHz or two. And, let's hope its warmed up enough not to drift.

    So, its even more important, when using antiquated equipment, to listen first. You might not even be where you think you are.......

    And, that doesn't even touch the difference between where one's signal envelope is vis a vis where the nulled-out carrier is assumed to be.

    Yes, non-ownership of the spectrum used takes on new meaning when one understands just how nebulous citing a given frequency can be. Perhaps best to describe an occupied bandwidth within frequency limits. :)

    Might I suggest something that can be measured with the proper tools: The distance between bars in a jailhouse.

    Lee
     
  10. K3VR

    K3VR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi Lee,

    I worked a bunch of stations on 20 meters today. There was a Florida QSO party going on. Most of the time Florida bangs in here like gangbusters. Also worked a little AM with my Flex Radio tonight on 75 meters but the static level was gruesome. My Alpha 99 can put out a 250 watt carrier with plenty of head room, but I prefer to use the Henry 3K Premier which just smiles when you push it to produce a 500 watt carrier. Of course, I keep it to 375 watts or below when on AM in order to keep it legal.

    I sent you a decision someone sent me from the DC Circuit that was just handed down a couple of weeks ago about the red light rule. Looks like the Commission will be going back to the drawing board (again) to figure out how to collect forfeitures and such. Baxter's previous NALs were dismissed because they were improperly calculated by the Commission. I guess the news is out since I've seen it all over the net. Depressing in one way, but heartening in another. The court exists to protect our rights and that's what they're doing I guess. Check it out and send your comments via email when you get a chance. Paul, send me some email and let me know when you can get on the air!

    Brian
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page