FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in 'Ham License Hijacking':
from
The ARRL Letter, Vol 26, No 18
on
May 4, 2007
Website:
http://www.arrl.org/
View comments about this article!
FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in 'Ham License Hijacking':
The FCC has terminated with prejudice a hearing proceeding involving a case
of apparent ham radio identity theft. The FCC has said its evidence suggests
that Joseph W. Hartmann Jr of Lansing, Michigan, "intentionally submitted
fraudulent administrative updates" to obtain the privileges associated with
the General class license of a Delaware radio amateur with a very similar
name. In a Memorandum Opinion and Order (MO&O) released March 23
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518915438, the FCC further ruled to dismiss with prejudice Hartmann's
pending new Amateur Radio license application, which he filed after the FCC
questioned his attempts to change the Delaware ham's record in the Universal
Licensing System (ULS). After several apparently unsuccessful attempts to
deliver a Hearing Designation Order (HDO) to Hartmann and even affording him
more time to file a written appearance, Hartmann sent Presiding
Administrative Law Judge Arthur I. Steinberg three identical e-mail
messages.
"Mr Steinberg I am writing you in regards to this letter. I do not have the
resources to obtain legal counsel for this hearing nor have the resources
for driving to hearing in Washington.D.C," the FCC quoted Hartmann, noting
that capitalization, punctuation, spelling and spacing were reproduced as
they appeared in Hartmann's e-mails. "is there another way we can please
have a phone conference in regards to this matter. please write back with
your reply."
Several pieces of Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested to Hartmann came
back to the Commission as unclaimed, the FCC recounted in its March MO&O.
"Interestingly, neither of the regular First Class Mail envelopes sent to Mr
Hartmann's Lansing, Michigan, addresses has been returned," the Commission
noted.
The FCC had put Hartmann's January 2006 application for an Amateur Radio
license on hold while it was looking into why he'd filed a half-dozen
administrative updates during 2005 seeking to change the name and address of
Joseph V. Hartman Sr, K3GUX, of Oceanview, Delaware, to his own name and
address.
In its March MO&O, the FCC declined to accept Hartmann's e-mails to Judge
Steinberg as a proper written appearance, because he did not file in
accordance with FCC rules. Consequently the Commission dismissed the hearing
proceeding and Hartmann's pending Amateur Radio application with prejudice
"for failure to prosecute."
The FCC had scheduled a hearing on Hartmann's January 2006 Amateur Radio
license application after deciding that his alleged actions had raised "a
substantial and material question of fact as to whether he possesses the
requisite character qualifications to be a Commission licensee." In its
December 2006 HDO, the Commission said Hartmann's repeated attempts to alter
licensee information for the call sign K3GUX from Joseph V. Hartman Sr's
name and address to his own name and address also raised "substantial and
material questions of fact as to whether Hartmann Jr made false
certifications, misrepresented facts to the Commission, and/or demonstrated
a lack of candor."
Source:
The ARRL Letter
Vol. 26, No. 18
May 4, 2007
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in 'Ham
|
|
|
by K0RFD on May 4, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Sounds like a whole lot more work than studying for the exams.
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by STRAIGHTKEY on May 4, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"a substantial and material question of fact as to whether he possesses the requisite character qualifications to be a Commission licensee."
If the FCC read eham regularly they would probably be questioning the requisite character qualifications of several hams here.
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by DUALGATEMOSFET on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K0RFD said "Sounds like a whole lot more work than studying for the exams."
Not really. It appears that Joseph W. Hartmann Jr. perceived learning Morse code to be more work than identity theft. He should be prosecuted for attempted identity theft and do some time. Personally, I find it difficult to believe that someone would go to those lengths to avoid learning Morse code. Was he that desperate for HF privileges that he would commit a crime? Two more years to wait for a no-code General was too long to wait that Mr. Hartmann had to stoop so low as to attempt identity theft?
STRAIGHTKEY said "If the FCC read eham regularly they would probably be questioning the requisite character qualifications of several hams here."
If you compare Internet flaming to identity theft, you're really a sick individual. Nobody goes to prison for Internet flaming, but they do for identity theft. It is not a crime if I call you a stupid idiot on the Internet, but it sure is a crime if I steal your identity or even if I attempt to steal your identity.
73 from DUALGATEMOSFET
aka
The "Epitaxial" One
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by K0RFD on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
DUALGATEMOSFET wrote:
>I find it difficult to believe that someone would go to
>those lengths to avoid learning Morse code
That was kind of my point.
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by DUALGATEMOSFET on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K0RFD said "That was kind of my point."
I agree. Most normal people would. Hartmann obviously didn't agree. To him, learning Morse code and passing a test was more difficult than hijacking somebody else's license. I'd like to see this jerk pay, but he probably won't. The FCC won't prosecute and the victim doesn't appear to be filing charges.
73 from DUALGATEMOSFET
aka
The "Epitaxial" One
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by STRAIGHTKEY on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"If you compare Internet flaming to identity theft, you're really a sick individual"
No, I'm not comparing Internet flaming to identity theft, I'm referring to character. (Comparing the two may be misguided, but calling it "sick" is a bit melodramatic.) I'm talking about the jerks we have that continually put down new hams due to testing changes or for other reasons. These people don't have the requisite character qualifications to be hams in my opinion. We've got other people here that lack character. Call it flaming, but it's still public behavior that's abhorrent and not becoming of ham radio operators. I think someone lacks the character to be a ham if they commit a felony, shoplift, slander, or just act like jerks.
"To him, learning Morse code and passing a test was more difficult than hijacking somebody else's license.
I don't think anyone but him can say why he did it.
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by DUALGATEMOSFET on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
STRAIGHTKEY said "No, I'm not comparing Internet flaming to identity theft, I'm referring to character. (Comparing the two may be misguided, but calling it "sick" is a bit melodramatic.) I'm talking about the jerks we have that continually put down new hams due to testing changes or for other reasons. These people don't have the requisite character qualifications to be hams in my opinion. We've got other people here that lack character. Call it flaming, but it's still public behavior that's abhorrent and not becoming of ham radio operators. I think someone lacks the character to be a ham if they commit a felony, shoplift, slander, or just act like jerks."
You can't compare a person's behavior on the Internet to a person's behavior on the radio or in person. On the Internet, most everyone tends to be more brazen, bold and uninhibited than they would be in other circumstances. It is the same with drivers. How people act behind the wheel is quite different from they way they act when the other person is in front of them, face-to-face. A person's behavior and actions on the Internet should not be used by the FCC to determine whether that person's license should be granted or renewed. A person's behavior and actions on the radio should.
I agree with you that hams shouldn't put down new people who have no control over the test that they took. A new ham has no control over the testing requirements. However, no-code hams that waited 16 years for the code test to disappear DID have control over the test that they took. They chose to moan and complain about the requirements and wait for easier requirements. I have a problem with such people. They waited 16 years for the code testing to disappear, and after getting a quick easy General, they are demanding acceptance. I'm not speaking of those who waited quietly without complaining. I'm sure there are many of them. I speak of those who were obnoxious and nasty about the issue. I speak of those who were very vocal about the issue with an attitude that the code testing was an unfair barrier to their God-given right to HF. These obnoxious no-coders have pure distain, hatred and resentment for any ham who wanted the code test to remain. If you defend such hams, you are no better than they are. These obnoxious no-coders with an attitude and a chip on their shoulder are just as detrimental to ham radio as "jerks we have that continually put down new hams due to testing changes or for other reasons", as you say. The problem is on both sides, so don't defend the no-coders as the "poor innocent" victims that you portray them as.
STRAIGHTKEY also said "I don't think anyone but him can say why he did it."
This is true. However, I don't think I'm too far from the truth. I believe that Mr. Hoffmann would not have resorted to such drastic criminal measures had he known that the code test would be gone in two years.
73 from DUALGATEMOSFET
aka
The "Epitaxial" One
|
| |
|
Mostly anonymous?
|
|
|
by OK1RR on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What happened to DUALGATEMOSFET, TRAIGHTKEY etc.? They don't have any callsign? If they have, why using rather a silly nickname than a callsign?
73, Martin OK1RR
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by STRAIGHTKEY on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"You can't compare a person's behavior on the Internet to a person's behavior on the radio or in person."
Perhaps, but behavior on the Internet says something of person.
"A person's behavior and actions on the Internet should not be used by the FCC to determine whether that person's license should be granted or renewed.
A person's behavior and actions on the radio should. "
How do you feel about the FCC revoking licenses due to a licensee being found guilty of murder? They've done it at least once, maybe twice if I remember correctly. Serial killers have often been good neighbors and arguably could hold a nice friendly QSO with you on the air. Their character is somewhat lacking however.
I basically agree with your point that the FCC shouldn't make decisions based on Internet behavior. Logistically it would be impossible to do. I'm pointing out the irony of the "requisite character" requirements. It's easy to identify someone who breaks the law. We have many others in our ranks who lack character and just shouldn't be here.
"However, no-code hams that waited 16 years for the code test to disappear DID have control over the test that they took. They chose to moan and complain about the requirements and wait for easier requirements. I have a problem with such people. They waited 16 years for the code testing to disappear, and after getting a quick easy General, they are demanding acceptance. I'm not speaking of those who waited quietly without complaining. I'm sure there are many of them."
I don't know of any people who complained for years or even months about the CW requirement. We had some obnoxious no-coders in the months leading up to CW test removal, but their numbers are few. I don't ever recall any reasonable no code test people demanding acceptance but I've seen many of them denied it.
"These obnoxious no-coders have pure distain, hatred and resentment for any ham who wanted the code test to remain. If you defend such hams, you are no better than they are."
Who's defending obnoxious no-coders? I'm not. They lack character as well.
"The problem is on both sides, so don't defend the no-coders as the "poor innocent" victims that you portray them as. "
Of course it's a problem on both sides, but the magnitude of the problem comparing the two is quite different. Let's not kid anyone; there's been many, many more "victims" on the no-code side. I can think of maybe one or two obnoxious no-coders on eham. Obnoxious pro-coders I estimate number in the twenties to thirties, if I would have been keeping a list. Obnoxious no-coders are not a systemic problem.
STRAIGHTKEY also said "I don't think anyone but him can say why he did it."
"This is true. However, I don't think I'm too far from the truth. I believe that Mr. Hoffmann would not have resorted to such drastic criminal measures had he known that the code test would be gone in two years. "
Perhaps, but I think it's unfair to write him off as the ham forum stereotype lazy no-coder....at the end of the day he was quite simply a lawbreaker.
|
| |
|
RE: Mostly anonymous?
|
|
|
by KD8Z on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Looks to me like the FCC has dropped in respect of another agency stepping in to handle the forgery, fraud and plethora of other felonies yet to be determined. "It ain't over til' the fat lady sings!" and there are very few fat ladies in the federal pen.
Can you say "J. Edgar Hoover?"
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by K1XT on May 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Geeezzz... Enough already. Can't you see by reading the quotes from this guy that he's barely literate? In addition, he's obviously not much better at hacking his way into a government website. What he needs most is to go back to school. He can take a crack at the license after he receives his diploma.
K1XT
|
| |
|
RE: FCC Terminates Hearing, Denies Application in
|
|
|
by K7IJ on May 7, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"You can't compare a person's behavior on the Internet to a person's behavior on the radio or in person."
If you think you can accurately compare a person's behavior on the radio to the behavior of that same person off the radio, as a long term trustee of three repeaters, your observation is just not ready for prime time. Some of the biggest jerks I've dealt with on the air are very decent people when you meet them in person. However, it never seems to be the other way around. A jerk in person is invariably a jerk on the air. Go figure.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other News Articles
The New Frontier for School Radio:
New Vice Directors in Central, Roanoke Divisions:
New Amateur Radio Web Site Launches:
Announcing Railroad Depots on the Air:
Rowley Shears, G8KW (SK):
|
