Amateur Radio Operator Fined $25,000 for Interferring With Other Transmissions
The FCC Enforcement Bureau fined an amateur radio operator $25,000 for allegedly interfering with other amateur operators. The operator, William Crowell of Diamond Springs, California, told us he would fight the fine. The forfeiture represents the full penalty initially proposed…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
for the violation last year, plus $3,000 for continuing violations, the bureau said. The bureau said it responded to multiple complaints of interference, primarily from members of the Western Amateur Radio Friendship Association (WARFA). Bureau field agents investigated. They found Crowell’s amateur radio station “intentionally interfering with other amateur licensees by transmitting on top of other amateurs, and repeatedly interrupting amateurs using noises on the WARFA net, recordings and music, so as to not allow them to transmit on 3908 kHz.11,” the order said. “Between 7:45 P.M. and 9:45 P.M. PDT, on both August 25 and August 27, the Agents ... observed at least a dozen instances, lasting from thirty seconds to at least four minutes each, of Mr. Crowell intentionally transmitting on top of and repeatedly interrupting amateurs on the WARFA net.” The interfering transmissions included racial, ethnic and sexual slurs and epithets, the bureau said. Crowell responded to a proposed fine, saying he was exercising his First Amendment rights of free speech, the order said: “Mr. Crowell argues further that the Bureau characterized his transmissions as jamming or interference because it does not like what he wants to say.” Crowell was cited for the interference itself, not the content of the transmissions, the bureau said. “It is well-established that regulation of radio in general does not violate the First Amendment or Section 326 [of the Communications Act], and courts have made clear that this conclusion applies to the amateur service as well.” Crowell vowed to fight the FCC in court. "I haven't had an opportunity to study the Forfeiture Order very carefully yet, but from what I have seen so far I think it is on very weak legal grounds and represents nothing but more bluffing, bullying and denial of Constitutional rights by the FCC," Crowell emailed us. "I am not going to be paying anything on the Forfeiture Order, and I fully expect to fight it in the U.S. District Court in a trial de novo under Sec. 504 of the Communications Act, if the U.S. Attorney sees fit to file such a suit."