|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
|
1-10 of 17 messages
|
Page 1 of 2
Next
|
|
K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection):
|
Reply
|
|
by ZENKI on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A good petition as I see it.
This petition should also be extended to protecting ones privacy in regard to the many callsign databases. All levels of government have privacy laws, and they should give you the option of opting in or out when releasing callsign data. All other hams need to know if the callsign holder is licensed and maybe a first name.
I dont know why people like QRZ.COM dont give people the right to opt out and withdraw your callsign and personal data. Several European countries already have such laws for their callsign databases.
Unfortunately the sickos have moved into ham radio and there have been numerous cases of stalking and threatening behavior. Hams do not need to know other hams personal information. I wonder how ordinary people would feel if their drivers license details, car registration details or other personal information were so easy to obtain like ham radio callsign databases!
Those willing to provide information can do so, those who do not want to do so should have the choice to removed this information.
Privacy is worth protecting
|
| |
|
RE: K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection
|
Reply
|
|
by KG4RUL on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
The BIG questions are how the FCC and law enforcement would prioritize these heinous acts? Who will bear the cost of enforcement and prosecution? Way too many other things haywire in our society for this to gain any traction.
|
| |
|
K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection):
|
Reply
|
|
by AI2IA on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In 2009 America as in many other places, unfortunately, privacy has become a myth. In addition, banks, hospitals, government agencies, schools, and utilities, and many other institutions really have absolutely no respect for the identity or the privacy of the individual. Do any of these places or their employees and managers really care if your signature in genuine? Do they carefully verify identity before they give out information, your funds, or accept false information under your name or forged signature? Do they care? Of course not!
Outside of those who personally know us, we are nothing more than account numbers, license numbers, student numbers, or what have you. Our "identity" cannot and is not "stolen." What really happens is that institutions and their employees out of complete disrespect for individualism accept any old false information tagged to our names and numbers. There are always two criminals involved here - the one who offers the false information, and the disgusting slobs who refuse to make the time to verify the information presented. BOTH ARE EQUALLY GUILTY AND BOTH SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AND GIVE IDENTICAL PUNISHMENT. Will this happen? Not likely.
Although this petition presents a strong case for change, truly revolting, it is in the eyes of those who could do something about it merely one more alligator among thousands and thousands of alligators that are snapping at everyone who is "just trying to do their job."
|
| |
|
K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection):
|
Reply
|
|
by KB2FM on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Personally, I am involved with law enforcement and I use PO Boxes for my license, vehicle registration etc. But realistically, there are so many ways that a person can get your personal information such as your home address, DOB & SS# that it's really not worth being overly paranoid about. I take the normal precautions, including running my credit report once a year. Trying to keep the call sign database private would create more problems than it would solve. And if some wacko does want to pay me a visit, they are in for a big surprise.
|
| |
|
RE: K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection
|
Reply
|
|
by KD7YVV on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I find it strange that a lot of agencies ask for your
social security number.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Number
As far as I'm concerned, I could make up any 9 digit
number or use the algorithm described in the above
wiki and become anyone I wish to be.
There are no check digits, biometrics, or other forms
of security with a social security number.
My standard answer when asked for my social security
number is "no". When pressed and told they are
required to have it, I tell them I'm not required to
provide it.
Places where you can look up callsigns basically only
show a name and address. IMHO, even that is too much
information, but then again, anyone going through a
junk mail barrel at an apartment complex can get that.
Since the FCC is a government organization, they can
check with the Social Security Administration and
the Post Office to be sure the information is accurate.
That, I don't have a problem with since it's within
the government. What I have a problem with is commercial
entities asking for it. (Wal-Mart etc.)
I'm just waiting for the mark of the beast.......
--KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA
|
| |
|
RE: K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection
|
Reply
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I dont know why people like QRZ.COM dont give people the right to opt out and withdraw your callsign and personal data.
----------
They don't?
QRZ Privacy Policy is posted here:
Source: http://www.qrz.com/i/privacy.html
However, even if you do remove yourself from QRZ it doesn't affect the information from appearing on several other non QRZ callsign server databases, or the FCC database etc.
Also keep in mind even if this petition is successful, it doesn't somehow eliminate "archives" such as those stored on personal computers, CD ROMS, call books etc, callsign database programs that are already widely available from many other sources which also contain the same information.
So is the next step to petition all these other information sources too? How about them internet time machine websites? Will the information suddenly disappear from them too?
One would have to erase history and time itself to become completely "callsign anonymous." This is not something any petition with the FCC could possibly achieve.
The concept is a false sense of security at best.
73 de`Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
RE: K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection
|
Reply
|
|
by KC8VWM on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Additionally, the petition reads like a "complaint" rather than a "proposal" for a needed change.
The petition for rule making references to what is termed as a "Psycho Cybercriminal" making offending posts using "bogus/fabricated" callsign letters over the internet.
Firstly, the use or misuse of FCC assigned callsigns over the internet is not an area the FCC has any jurisdiction.
Secondly, an assigned callsign issued by the FCC is not a "federal fingerprint" any differently than the license numbers issued to the vehicle you drive.
The comparison suggesting a radio callsign is, "Using the same principle as unique Federal Social Security Numbers" is an erroneous statement because a callsign issued by the FCC is public information whereas a Social Security Number is controlled and protected by federal law.
To suggest we should protect amateur radio callsigns is a similar manner as we protect our Social Security Numbers would seems to suggest we don't tell one another or divulge what our callsigns are. Would we identify each other using our first names instead?
I'm not even going any further with this... The ranting petition speaks for itself and I can't even bring myself to take it seriously in my view.
73 de Charles - KC8VWM
|
| |
|
K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection):
|
Reply
|
|
by KD6HUC on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Oh boy. Here we go again... Do we really want MORE laws on the books that are meant to protect us from ourselves? Since I am only a General class ham and only been licensed half my life, perhaps I am missing something...
|
| |
|
RE: K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection
|
Reply
|
|
by W6EM on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Whoa!!!
K6VVA, sadly, hasn't done his homework. Frankly, his submittal will be ignored, if not outright rejected and slammed back at him.
I won't spend the effort, but the Communications Act (the law passed and amended by Congress)restricts infractions under promulgated FCC regulations to the category of misdemeanors. Only intentional interference with a federal station is considered a felony, as I seem to remember.
So, the FCC can't just go off and throw humungous fines and such willy-nilly just because some ham who doesn't want his or her address posted for all to see.
I happen to know several folks who use post office boxes for the public portion and I suspect they gave the FCC their physical address, but don't wish it to be shown. One is a public official who doesn't wish to publish his residence address.
K6VVA should rent a post office box and be done with it. Our government has many more important things to occupy its time.
73.
|
| |
|
K6VVA's FCC Petition For Rulemaking (Identity Protection):
|
Reply
|
|
by AI2IA on November 8, 2009
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In fairness to K6VVA and others in similar situations, for them it is not merely or even trivia that their address is published. It is having unauthorized persons using their call signs to send obscene, vulgar, and vicious communications.
While I don't see much good at all coming from this petition, I do feel strongly that these people are having their good name being dragged through the mud via their FCC station call sign. I don't see a solution through the FCC for this, but there may be other avenues to force such creeps to cease and desist. In any event, I am confident that every ham would be greatly incensed to discover ugly communications goig out under their call sign.
|
| |
|
This Topic is Linked
This discussion is regarding an item in the
Articles area
of eHam.net.
View the item being discussed
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
Forum, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Forum Manager.
|
|
|
