That QST review is the least considered piece of writing I've ever seen
from Steve, WB8IMY. He dismisses concerns about legality by saying it's
just like "using a very long microphone cord." But who, I ask, is the
control operator responsible for seeing that the station operates
properly? Is the paying guest op responsible, or the "landlord", even
though neither is on-site? If this is done internationally, who is
responsible for getting a proper license for the remote ops? Remember
the big flap in HK a few years ago?
73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at
http://reversebeacon.net,
blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com.
For spots, please go to your favorite
ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node.
On 4/15/2013 12:24 PM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
On 15/04/2013 16:12, Pete Smith N4ZR wrote:
<snip>
I *would* be opposed if, as someone has suggested, entrepreneurs set up
excellent stations and collected "rent" for allowing them to be used for
contesting. As I think I've said before, I don't even believe that
would be legal in the US. I hope not.
It's here already. QST for May 2013 includes a review of
RemoteHamRadio, with subscriptions running from $2999
to $4999 annually, plus additional access charges by the
minute. It's legal for DXCC, apparently.
73,
Paul EI5DI
_______________________________________________
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
|