3 ms·

Most non-hams don't seem to be aware of the distinction between "transmit" and "broadcast" (transmit to the general public, no reply expected). There are likely

by kd0amg 16y ago

Most non-hams don't seem to be aware of the distinction between "transmit" and "broadcast" (transmit to the general public, no reply expected). There are likely to be other legal issues involved anyway (e.g. restrictions on handling international third-party traffic: I cannot legally receive a message from an Egyptian ham to pass on to a non-ham recipient). This discussion also reminds me that I ought to get PSKmail set up.

lutorm 16y ago
This discussion reminded me that I really should get a US ham license. (I have a Swedish one but the reciprocity is only one year at a time which makes it a pita.) I can probably pass the technician exam just on common sense (judging from the online test exams) so it wouldn't hurt.
lutorm 16y ago
This seems like a fine line. You can talk to an Egyptian ham about what's going on and then decide yourself to pass on the information. Also, how does the prohibition on passing third-party messages mesh with packet radio equipment? Am I not allowed to send email over packet? I thought that was one of the main uses back in the 90s.
- kd0amg 16y ago
  You can talk to an Egyptian ham about what's going on and then decide yourself to pass on the information. As I understand it, this is acceptable. The FCC defines third-party communication as: "A message from the control operator (first party) of an amateur station to another amateur station control operator (second party) on behalf of another person (third party)." If there's no particular person for whom the message is intended, it would just be something I heard on the radio. Also, how does the prohibition on passing third-party messages mesh with packet radio equipment? Am I not allowed to send email over packet? I thought that was one of the main uses back in the 90s. For domestic traffic (with no encryption, pecuniary interest, etc.), email over packet should be fine.

by kd0amg 16y ago

lutorm 16y ago

This discussion reminded me that I really should get a US ham license. (I have a Swedish one but the reciprocity is only one year at a time which makes it a pita.) I can probably pass the technician exam just on common sense (judging from the online test exams) so it wouldn't hurt.

lutorm 16y ago

This seems like a fine line. You can talk to an Egyptian ham about what's going on and then decide yourself to pass on the information. Also, how does the prohibition on passing third-party messages mesh with packet radio equipment? Am I not allowed to send email over packet? I thought that was one of the main uses back in the 90s.

kd0amg 16y ago
You can talk to an Egyptian ham about what's going on and then decide yourself to pass on the information. As I understand it, this is acceptable. The FCC defines third-party communication as: "A message from the control operator (first party) of an amateur station to another amateur station control operator (second party) on behalf of another person (third party)." If there's no particular person for whom the message is intended, it would just be something I heard on the radio. Also, how does the prohibition on passing third-party messages mesh with packet radio equipment? Am I not allowed to send email over packet? I thought that was one of the main uses back in the 90s. For domestic traffic (with no encryption, pecuniary interest, etc.), email over packet should be fine.