-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
Goodbye Tech Nine Videos
- Thread starter 357
- Start date
I understand your position, and most times I would side with you; but this is not one of those times.
We all have a right to express ourselves and a freedom of speech, but if I perform an act that someone could interpret to be illegal I sure wouldn't go posting that on the internet.
If I ran illegal power to shoot skip I probably wouldn't have those videos posted on my YouTube. Because if I was to run illegal power I wouldn't want an entire catalog of evidence to be posted online, readily accessible for whatever government agency to use against me.
I feel the same way about running a modified radio on the Citizens Band, it's illegal and therefore any modified radios shown on my channel are running to a dummy load.
Then again if I was going to ignore the rules and run power I probably would have a whole host of YouTube videos that contain content like: "showing off my big pill box to all the ducks, government be dammned."
Is the 4 watt limit restrictive? In my mind it is a little, but if you look at what the Citizens Band was intended for, 4 watts would cut the bill just fine.
Afterall It's kind of hard to tell people not to interfere with legitimate communications when, (if everybody was running 100 Watts or more and conditions were good) you would have so much crosstalk and cross chatter it would be impossible for any legitimate communications to exist in a reliable format on that platform.
( but I've never heard this band during peak solar activity so this is just speculation on my part )
Best Regards
-LeapFrog
Last edited:
All he said was that he got a warning from the FCC and he's done. CBers were getting letters about their illegal activities long before the Internet.
Tech 9 is doing what anyone with half of a brain would do if they got the same letter. No one forced him to take the videos down. Every idiot you see getting fined by the FCC was warned first and they ignored it.
Tech 9 is doing what anyone with half of a brain would do if they got the same letter. No one forced him to take the videos down. Every idiot you see getting fined by the FCC was warned first and they ignored it.
I agree that if the FCC warned him about building the amps, than he can stop building, or keep building but don't post. That is probably what happened. I doubt the FCC told him to take down the posts because they don't care about the posts, but rather the underlying crime. There are two issues here, the post, which is legal, and the building which may not be. I guess the two issues got mixed.
Last edited:
Maybe there is hope?
Reuters:
"U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's choice of experts to focus on new policies at the Federal Communications Commission signals a regime that will have a "lighter" touch on regulation"
"The two appointments are harbingers of "a more typical Republican FCC that is lighter on regulation and more focused on competition," said Roger Entner, an analyst at Recon Analytics. "The focus will be more on reducing regulation than creating new ones."
Reuters:
"U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's choice of experts to focus on new policies at the Federal Communications Commission signals a regime that will have a "lighter" touch on regulation"
"The two appointments are harbingers of "a more typical Republican FCC that is lighter on regulation and more focused on competition," said Roger Entner, an analyst at Recon Analytics. "The focus will be more on reducing regulation than creating new ones."
I hope the focus of regulatory change will be to reduce the laws that no one cares about, that do more harm than good, are low priority, are a misappropriation of law enforcement resources or simply put- that don't matter (What's more important: a licensed amatuer who forgets to properly identify and gets caught for an infraction or T-mobile and ATT bending you over and driving it home every single F**ing month). The laws that do matter should be enforced more rigorously.Maybe there is hope?
Reuters:
"U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's choice of experts to focus on new policies at the Federal Communications Commission signals a regime that will have a "lighter" touch on regulation"
"The two appointments are harbingers of "a more typical Republican FCC that is lighter on regulation and more focused on competition," said Roger Entner, an analyst at Recon Analytics. "The focus will be more on reducing regulation than creating new ones."
Last edited:
I did read that part
(c) The FCC will presume you have used a linear or other external RF power amplifier if—
(1) It is in your possession or on your premises; and
(2) There is other evidence that you have operated your CB station with more power than allowed by CB Rule 10, §95.410.
(d) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply if you hold a license in another radio service which allows you to operate an external RF power amplifier.
The AND part of the regulations means they need some other evidence - and to really be admissible in court it can't be hearsay from a neighbor or someone else's recording - it would have to be from the FCC themselves or a body of the government who used equipment that has been recently tested for accuracy to measure and record the illegal use of power.
A CB operator who owns a linear amplifier but has never operated above the legal limit is fully within the law. In fact if you buy an amplifier and hooked it up but only used it for the pre-amp function it still would be legal because you haven't operated with more power than allowed.
As someone else mentioned as well - the reason it's not illegal to own a 11 meter amplifier is because it's not breaking the law until it's used illegally and many amps that could be used illegally are perfectly legal when used legally. If some joe blow wants to build an 11 meter amplifier as a project and builds it and videos it and tests it into a dummy load he is completely within his rights.
It's that whole marketing thing that gets you into trouble with the FCC. If you've ever read their reports when they shut down shops they really focus on the fact that the sellers were advertising and promoting for sale the illegal items. They do this because in some cases they may not have the proof that any sales took place, but because the law says it's illegal to market non-fcc type accepted equipment the FCC can proceed to shut them down. They'll make references to the websites and any units that are visibly on sale in the store.
I PRESUME YOU DID IT, THEREFORE YOU DID IT.
We cannot be 100% certain, although we can be reasonably certain, that he was building in the United States. The whole video could have been a computerized hoax, although I doubt that very much. We really don't know, beyond a reasonable doubt, what was going on. At this point, we must conclude he is innocent, although he probably isn't. The FCC may have jumped the gun, although they probably didn't.......
The FCC is clearly operating from a tough spot since the law struggles to make amps illegal only under a very narrow circumstance. The idea that the law contains a "presumtion clause" i.e. "the FCC can presume you used it" flys in the face of the consitutional requirement that you commited the illegal act if and only if it is PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
Here you can be convicted based on a presumtion with no requirement of actual proof. Seriously??? Why did the legislature give the FCC a break? Why did they not make them prove it like everyone else? My guess is the law is there mainly to deter and would collapse if brought to trial. I am not aware of any single case where a person was convicted under that scenario. Ten times out of ten, the person cops a plea. The only one that went to trial, was Ranger RCI Texas Star trial, and we know who WON that one!
Moreover, Judges hate laws that lower the standard to convict because there exists a much higher propensity for wrongful conviction. Charges under the "we think you did it" "you probably did it" I bet you did it" or even worse is this case, "I presume you did it" probably wouldn't get past the beginning stages of a criminal court conviction.
I know they exist, but I cannot think of any other law that doesn't require actual proof that you did something wrong, can you?
We cannot be 100% certain, although we can be reasonably certain, that he was building in the United States. The whole video could have been a computerized hoax, although I doubt that very much. We really don't know, beyond a reasonable doubt, what was going on. At this point, we must conclude he is innocent, although he probably isn't. The FCC may have jumped the gun, although they probably didn't.......
The FCC is clearly operating from a tough spot since the law struggles to make amps illegal only under a very narrow circumstance. The idea that the law contains a "presumtion clause" i.e. "the FCC can presume you used it" flys in the face of the consitutional requirement that you commited the illegal act if and only if it is PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
Here you can be convicted based on a presumtion with no requirement of actual proof. Seriously??? Why did the legislature give the FCC a break? Why did they not make them prove it like everyone else? My guess is the law is there mainly to deter and would collapse if brought to trial. I am not aware of any single case where a person was convicted under that scenario. Ten times out of ten, the person cops a plea. The only one that went to trial, was Ranger RCI Texas Star trial, and we know who WON that one!
Moreover, Judges hate laws that lower the standard to convict because there exists a much higher propensity for wrongful conviction. Charges under the "we think you did it" "you probably did it" I bet you did it" or even worse is this case, "I presume you did it" probably wouldn't get past the beginning stages of a criminal court conviction.
I know they exist, but I cannot think of any other law that doesn't require actual proof that you did something wrong, can you?
Last edited:
there is more than just tec 9 that got the letter in the last week ...some have posted publicly they got one..some in private chat ..if they wish to speak up they will ..not my place to do so on their behalf .
all i do know post pics and videos on line of their amp building on FB and YT and use of on cb radios while "testing" these amps is clear evidence they are doing so .(weather thats admissible in USA courts i dont know ..certainly here it is)..
since most likely fcc seem to have a account here (lets face it do we know or not.?) no need to fuel their fire more.
although i personally found his videos "entertaining" he seems like a honest fellow and have heard many nice things said about him as a person from other amp builders..weather they agreed with his electronic theory or building
practices or not...
every one has a opinion...some speak it out of turn or with little knowledge.
@pappas and bear..i would hardly think tec 9 would post a fake video on his own account he does not seem the guy to do that .
ok off to break a number of laws working skip with my big fat linear on my cb radio ..with a grin and a dont care attitude
all i do know post pics and videos on line of their amp building on FB and YT and use of on cb radios while "testing" these amps is clear evidence they are doing so .(weather thats admissible in USA courts i dont know ..certainly here it is)..
since most likely fcc seem to have a account here (lets face it do we know or not.?) no need to fuel their fire more.
although i personally found his videos "entertaining" he seems like a honest fellow and have heard many nice things said about him as a person from other amp builders..weather they agreed with his electronic theory or building
practices or not...
every one has a opinion...some speak it out of turn or with little knowledge.
@pappas and bear..i would hardly think tec 9 would post a fake video on his own account he does not seem the guy to do that .
ok off to break a number of laws working skip with my big fat linear on my cb radio ..with a grin and a dont care attitude
"since most likely fcc seem to have a account here (lets face it do we know or not.?) no need to fuel their fire more."
I agree with everything you said but not that we should avoid making the FCC angry. They are obligated to set aside their "angry feelings of fire" and uphold the law. Speak as you wish, more than any other law enforcement agency, they are protectors of your right to speak freely.
I agree with everything you said but not that we should avoid making the FCC angry. They are obligated to set aside their "angry feelings of fire" and uphold the law. Speak as you wish, more than any other law enforcement agency, they are protectors of your right to speak freely.
As long as what you say is within the law. Try using profanity or nudity on public airwaves and see how well the FCC protects your "right" to do it.
Maybe there is hope?
Reuters:
"U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's choice of experts to focus on new policies at the Federal Communications Commission signals a regime that will have a "lighter" touch on regulation"
"The two appointments are harbingers of "a more typical Republican FCC that is lighter on regulation and more focused on competition," said Roger Entner, an analyst at Recon Analytics. "The focus will be more on reducing regulation than creating new ones."
I think you will find this pertains to big business and broadcasting. CBers and hams won't even enter into the mix is my guess.
well this has been a colorful discussion now hasn't it!
There are about two pages of stuff that just doesn't matter, and less than a page of relevant info IMO.
so ol' Tech Nine got a letter from the FCC because he showed himself on video in possession of an item that the FCC deems to be illegal to merely possess.
could he have told them to go suck eggs?
SURE!
Why didn't he?
Because of three letters that mean a heck of a lot, and im not talking about the FCC.
Im talking about the IRS.
If tech nine's only concern was an FCC agent showing up at his house and asking to search his radio room, then he could have simply moved his amplifiers and parts off of his property, and continued to make videos all day long, and the FCC can't do crap about it because they can't prove that he isn't faking the whole thing.
how would the FCC know that he didn't make the "pills" in his kitchen with super glue and baking soda. they wouldn't.
the video alone has nothing to do with it.
it's because he SELLS amplifiers. the FCC is a crippled government agency and they have to choose very carefully where they allot their budget.
Busting people for youtube videos by taking them to court is WAAAYYYY too expensive for them to even consider.
HOWEVER! the FCC sending someone a letter reminding them that the IRS is only a few doors down and DOES have the resources to go after someone who is selling something illegal, is very cheap, and is usually the end of it.
ask yourself how willing you are to tell the FCC to F off and operate a linear amp on the CB band.
then ask yourself how willing you are to flip off the IRS and continue to sell that same linear amplifier to someone.
the IRS folks. they are the FCC's bulldog, and they bite HARD.
LC
There are about two pages of stuff that just doesn't matter, and less than a page of relevant info IMO.
so ol' Tech Nine got a letter from the FCC because he showed himself on video in possession of an item that the FCC deems to be illegal to merely possess.
could he have told them to go suck eggs?
SURE!
Why didn't he?
Because of three letters that mean a heck of a lot, and im not talking about the FCC.
Im talking about the IRS.
If tech nine's only concern was an FCC agent showing up at his house and asking to search his radio room, then he could have simply moved his amplifiers and parts off of his property, and continued to make videos all day long, and the FCC can't do crap about it because they can't prove that he isn't faking the whole thing.
how would the FCC know that he didn't make the "pills" in his kitchen with super glue and baking soda. they wouldn't.
the video alone has nothing to do with it.
it's because he SELLS amplifiers. the FCC is a crippled government agency and they have to choose very carefully where they allot their budget.
Busting people for youtube videos by taking them to court is WAAAYYYY too expensive for them to even consider.
HOWEVER! the FCC sending someone a letter reminding them that the IRS is only a few doors down and DOES have the resources to go after someone who is selling something illegal, is very cheap, and is usually the end of it.
ask yourself how willing you are to tell the FCC to F off and operate a linear amp on the CB band.
then ask yourself how willing you are to flip off the IRS and continue to sell that same linear amplifier to someone.
the IRS folks. they are the FCC's bulldog, and they bite HARD.
LC
"And he said, "What about all that whiskey and the cocaine"
I said, "Well, yeah, but that's no reason to throw me in Hell
'Cause I didn't use the cocaine to get high
I just liked the way it smelled"
-Ray Wylie Hubbard
I said, "Well, yeah, but that's no reason to throw me in Hell
'Cause I didn't use the cocaine to get high
I just liked the way it smelled"
-Ray Wylie Hubbard
- No one is chatting at the moment.