>From what I read at the link you provided, it is precisely as I said:
"US Law applies and the operators must comply with FCC rules as if
they were physically within the USA".
I see nothing that changes that.
More specifically, anyone operating a remote station in the USA must obey
the USA FCC Law as if they were here in the USA.
73,
Bob W5OV
On Mon, June 5, 2017 12:02 pm, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> Sorry Bob you're wrong there. FCC has adopted the CEPT T/R 61-01
> regulation to make reciprocal licensing easier.
>
> http://www.arrl.org/foreign-licenses-operating-in-u-s
>
>
> Peter G4MJS
>
>
> On 5 June 2017 at 13:07, <w5ov@w5ov.com> wrote:
>
>> N2RJ said:
>>
>>
>> " Just be careful that you are indeed doing so. CEPT T/R 61-01 is not
>> sufficient authorization for a European licensee to operate an internet
>> remote base in the US while being physically present overseas...."
>>
>> EU rules do not apply to amateur radio transmissions made from within
>> the USA under any circunstances.
>>
>>
>> Where the operator is located is completely irrelevant.
>>
>>
>> What happens on the air from a USA station is governed by US FCC Law -
>> nothing else.
>>
>> US Law applies and the operators must comply with FCC rules as if they
>> were physically within the USA.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>>
>> Bob W5OV
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
>> Ria
>> Jairam
>> Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 5:53 PM
>> To: W4AAW@aol.com
>> Cc: CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KU1CW location
>>
>>
>>> W1VE and other serious operators of remote-capable stations will
>>> agree with me: We remote-capable stations are not trying to fool
>>> anyone or gain some sort of geographical or unfair advantage. We're
>>> just being
>> competitive and striving to do so strictly within the rules.
>>
>>
>> There is really nothing wrong with trying to gain an advantage during a
>> contest. That's what contesting is. As long as it is within the rules.
>> Operating from elsewhere to do better in contests has been a staple of
>> contesting for pretty much as long as it has existed.
>>
>>> 2. Alex is a member of TeamW4AAW, which operates the first Totally
>>> Remote
>>>
>> M/M station.
>>
>>> We have 31 team members who operate W4AAW's positions from all over
>>> NA,
>>> from Panama, Europe and Asia, provided they meet legal/licensing
>> requirements.
>>
>> Just be careful that you are indeed doing so. CEPT T/R 61-01 is not
>> sufficient authorization for a European licensee to operate an internet
>> remote base in the US while being physically present overseas. Even if
>> they were allowed, their home license restrictions and power limits
>> (while not
>> exceeding US Extra) apply. In the UK it is 400 watts for full licenses
>> and in Germany it is 750W for class A licenses. Other European countries
>> may be different. The best thing for them to do to be compliant with the
>> laws of the US is to get a US license. There are VE sessions in many
>> countries overseas and one can get a license by passing the (now very
>> easy) exams. No code required, even.
>>
>>> 4. The 3830 comments for KU1CW @ W4AAW in the CQWPX CW test very
>>> clearly show the locations of each operator.
>>
>> An awards chaser who isn't competing in the contest is unlikely to know
>> about nor care about 3830. The best thing to do would be to put the
>> location of the stations in the QRZ profile, which is the first place
>> they look.
>>
>> 73
>> Ria, N2RJ
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:30 PM, W4AAW@aol.com via CQ-Contest
>> <cq-contest@contesting.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Here is the correct information on KU1CW in the CQWPX CW contest.
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. Alex has just moved to Washington State. He has not yet modified
>>> his
>> license to reflect this recent development.
>>>
>>> 2. Alex is a member of TeamW4AAW, which operates the first Totally
>>> Remote
>>>
>> M/M station. We have 31 team members who operate W4AAW's positions
>> from all over NA, from Panama, Europe and Asia, provided they meet
>> legal/licensing requirements.
>>>
>>> 3. Since a W4 call sign is common in WPX tests, I suggested to Alex
>>> we use
>> KU1CW for the contest. Alex agreed. So, the entry (as shown on 3830)
>> was KU1CW@ W4AAW.
>>
>>>
>>> 4. The 3830 comments for KU1CW @ W4AAW in the CQWPX CW test very
>>> clearly
>> show the locations of each operator.
>>>
>>> If some people had bothered to read information that is readily
>>> available
>> in that posting, it would not have been necessary to cast aspersions.
>>>
>>> During some periods of the contest, Alex even operated SO2R, using
>>> two
>> W4AAW positions remotely, from Washington State.
>>
>>>
>>> W1VE and other serious operators of remote-capable stations will
>>> agree
>> with me: We remote-capable stations are not trying to fool anyone or
>> gain some sort of geographical or unfair advantage. We're just being
>> competitive and striving to do so strictly within the rules.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>>>
>>> 73, Mike W4AAW
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|