Q for experts: Expired License

FRS / GMRS Radios
1

My GMRS license expired in February. I haven’t been using the radios
anyway, so unlicensed operation is not an issue.

After re-reading Part 95 (which is silent), and spending some time on the FCC
website, it appears that it will cost $85 to renew the expired license, plus
$170 to process a waiver (required because the license expired less than six
months ago). The website is so cumbersome that I can’t figure out what I
would seek a waiver for. Anyway, the total is $255.

However, a GMRS license isn’t a skill-tested license like an amateur license. I
don’t see any need to renew the expired license, and would prefer to simply
apply for a new license.

In any event, I think a new license would be my only option once the
license has been expired for more than six months (because a waiver is
unavailable after that time).

Is there any reason not to simply apply for a new license?

Thanks in advance.

KJT

2

Licensing Issue:
Radio station licensing goes back many years even before the FCC was created.

http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index.htm?job=service_home&id=family

Notice in the F.C.C RULES in the above link that they state “If you operate a radio under the rules that apply to GMRS, you must have a GMRS license.”

The FCC stated that “IF” you operate a radio under the “rules” (NOT the law, as we have NO laws pertaining to this in the U.S.A.)

AND I choose other then “IF”.

In other words I am NOT operating MY radio in direct accordance with the licensing request that they set and therefore I am not to be held liable to them for any corrective actions by my violating that “rule” they made because I never agreed to do so in any volunteered binding contract (I/E the license) in the first place,

They do not have my signature agreeing to do so on any legally binding contract with me so therefore no contract agreement can be broken by me.

Since the only LAW that the commission has is the communications act, I am not breaking any law by not applying for and/or holding a valid FCC issued license I/E (contract).

This is the SAME issue that the federal judge sided with me on back in the 70’s when he exempted me (but now so is everyone else not a current holder of any F.C.C. issued license) from all FCC “RULES” provided no harmful interferences.

Most everyone has figured out by now that there is no spectrum enforcement nor has the F.C.C ever been authorized to enforce any rules that they made AND admittedly have no records of. (that is the responsibility of another government agency) unless interference was the primary subject matter.

When operating a transmitting station employing commercially built equipment, CASE IN POINT GMRS RADIO one can assume spectral purity due to F.C.C type acceptance of the transmitting unit, therefore it would be impossible to generate interference when PROPERLY operating and “sharing” a service set aside for specifically that purpose.

In addition as part of our constructional rights we all have equal access to employing certain services without any license like AM-FM-TV broadcast bands, CB, FRS GMRS and the like, and also everyone has equal access to ANY un-used spectrum provided no harmful interferences. Some exceptions are in place such as accessing transponders or amateur radio repeaters that specify the need to have a valid ham license, non licensed operators would be considered by those users to be an interference to the normal operations on those frequencies.

Because energy knows no boundaries interstate commerce issues would be more of a concern then having a license do to the fact that the transmitted energy would be in nature crossing borders.

Just like the air that we all breath, we all own the airwaves, Not the FCC, not Clear Channel or any agency or group. Problems arise only when our right conflicts with the rights others also have to employ the airwaves,

In the beginning of radio so much interference was generated between broadcasters that it became apparent that some standards agreed on was needed to be set by some sort of a non biased regulatory third party.
The Federal Radio and Communications Commission was created to set our standards, license and channelize our broadcasters.

Having stated this, just because a transmitter operator does not have any F.C.C issued license, which is nothing more then a contract waving rights, restricting and limiting access to the airwaves, does not imply that we have no need to follow the FCC’s set standards that are in place to allow everyone else equal access to the air as well.

I/E one may be able to drive a car without having a license but that does not allow one the right to run red lights and or speed, as that would also be interfering with the normal access of others and endangering lives and property.

Understand that everyone, licensed or not is responsible for their over the air actions and transmissions, fundamental as well as all harmonic content.

No one should be allowed spectrum access unless they have some idea how to use the radio equipment and understand that they are responsible for their actions.

Ignorance of acceptable set standards is no excuse and improper operating practices would also be interfering with the normal access of others and potentially endangering lives and property.

Although licensing creates an artificial barrier to most spectrum access it does serve several worthwhile purposes.

As R.F output power goes up the responsibility for and consequences of improper operation of a radio system increase regardless if it is licensed or not.

3

I still think it would be permissible to simply apply for a new license.

Any other thoughts?

4

YES at least one more!

Aside from giving up certain rights and limiting your access to all airwaves and entering into a legally binding contract that even government attorneys do not fully understand but that you would be held legally and financially responsible should you not understand and violate any aspect of only after volunteering to surrender monetary funds to someone you do not know, only to name a few, why not 1-888-CALL-FCC and ask?

Just a few facts learned the hard way in a federal courtroom years ago by me.

5

Well, since you have been there before, please tell us the do’s, don’ts and any other tips you have? I just purchased the 9550XLR and before I sign away my rights (your own words) and fork over $85 of my hard earned money to uncle sam, please tell me what I should and shouldn’t be doing.

Any tips are appreciated

6

You can just apply for a new license. Pay the $85 and be done with it.

I do not advocate violating regulations by not having a license. It angers me to no end those who blatantly disregard regulations or argue them.

I’m glad to see your interest in maintaining your license.

Take care.

7

Perhaps I have not made my points very clear. The do’s and don’t are no different if one is licensed or not where radio frequency emissions are concerned.

DO educate yourself on the FACTS!

AND

DON’T interfere with others.

Having a license does not grant any additional rights and in many cases does just the opposite.

License or not the standards must be followed.
Breaking any rule when not having one will result in receiving a notice from the FCC advising you of the problem(s) that you are responsible for creating and no farther actions can be made without at least additional 10 notices. (as with my pre case notices) No law was broken.

Having a license on the other hand could result in fines and or serving time, NOT for violating any rule but for a breaking of contract agreement that IS unlawful.

Please go back and read again and understand my post on this issue.

This is another great thing about living in America! The fact that we are able to even talk about these issues sets us apart from the rest of most of the world where this topic could not even occur.

I also do not advocate violating regulations set for standardizing organization on the airwaves, however anyone considering if having a license is the best way to go needs to study this matter deeper.

I will not respond to this issue with any opinion as facts are stranger then pre conceived ideas.

I can only advise on the facts that I have learned having spent over a half year in a federal courtroom on the case of “The United States Of America V/s Michael Shearer” On Operation of a radio station without a license.

Notice that the F.C.C was NOT the federal agency responsible for the case, they only persuaded a judge to issue the warrant and since NO law was ever broken I was never arrested. Other government agencies took over for the FCC and only called on them to the stand.

My case would have been over much sooner had I understood at that time that I was not only correct about the not needed a license issue but the FCC was afraid that I would start a class action law suite against them. To make a long story short, that was never my intention and at the end of the trial the chief engineer with the FCC at that time walked up to me and said “Mr. Shearer, you have placed my department in a very embarrassing position” and walked away.

That statement among other reasons was his admission of wrong, and my case and others after mine, forced the FCC to not only remove the need for holding a license for operation of any citizens band radio equipment, but also required that that stop charging a fee for them.

Today that fact is still in place on our books do to the outcome of my case.
By NOT challenging the systems that should be working for us we can never expect any improvements with our regulating system.

If it were not also for others like Alan H. Weiner and the likes that do have an understanding of the licensing issues,
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/1559501634/sr=11-1/qid=1045710455/ref=dp_image_0/104-8507784-4980753?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books&qid=1045710455&sr=11-1

he would not be transmitting today employing his 5 transmitters of 50,000 waits on the ONLY totally free speech radio station in the world. http://www.wbcq.com/

His relentless winning cases every time the FCC took him into court over the non licensing issues after 20 years paid off when they finally issued him a license just in order to end the expenses he was making for them.

http://www.wbcq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=98&Itemid=39

Most people like him have a much better understanding of how best to conduct radio emissions then the majority of the ham radio operators on repeaters today that have less of an understanding of radio then the average CB’er from 20 or so years ago.

Most new ham operators memorize the answers to the test questions and as quickly as they can take the test. Today not even any understanding of the Morse code qualifies one for a license.

Most, not all but most can not repair any radio equipment they own and non that I know that have been licensed for less then 20 years have any knowledge on how to design or build a transmitter with over 5 watts of output power.

I have successfully designed, built and operated a FM stereo broadcast station within my community without holding any FCC issued license for well over a year without any FCC intervention. Only after that did I encounter my first report of interference to a license commercial broadcast some 60 miles away from my transmitter and the report came from the station owner (also a ham operator) NOT from the FCC, and the problem got corrected by only the both of us.

He and I became good friends and after his holding a FCC issued license for over 20 years the FCC forced him off the air by issuing someone with more money permission to displace his station on the same frequency.

This is what he and I sent in an e-mail.
**Sent e-mail message
From: LPFM103@webtv.net (LPFM*103.1) Date: Mon, May 13, 2002, 2:01pm
To: XXXX@aol.com Subject: Re: 103.1 KCDX
Rich
Please forgive my ignorance on this but how and why if you have been granted a license years ago to employ 103.1 MHZ for the operation of a translator, would they do that to you?
Why should you even bother with the license?
Even us “pirate” broadcasters know not do make interference with anyone else.
–mike–
From: XXXX@aol.com Date: Mon, May 13, 2002, 6:40pm (MST+3) To:
LPFM103@webtv.net Subject: Re: 103.1 KCDX Yes Mike * — we (translator owners) all agree to be prempted should a full power come along. Oh yes — now we could bid against the full power guy for the channel. Wonder what a channel that covers Phoenix is worth. All comes down to money doesnt it ? Good luck with your project – you see why a non licensed operator is safer in the short run than a translator guy. my best * Rich

I am still free to this day to continue my FM broadcasting however I have recently given up FM broadcasting station on my own free will.

8

Thanks for the reply – I’d reinstate the expired license, but not for an additional
$170. Especially since I have not been operating the radios.

Have a great weekend.