Showing posts with label Callsign: VE3KU / VE3XIX / VE3GPB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Callsign: VE3KU / VE3XIX / VE3GPB. Show all posts
TFMCS removed the "TRASH" in leadership
Has TFMCS removed the "TRASH" in leadership ? Has TFMCS clean up the TOXIC and poisonous members ?
TFMCS VE3TWR 444.400 LACK OF GOVERNANCE
TFMCS VE3TWR 444.400 LACK OF GOVERNANCE
TORONTO, CANADA
HOW DO WE GO LEGAL ?
RIC-3 — Information on the Amateur Radio Service
RP-25 – Policy Principles for Public Safety Radio Interoperability
RBR-4 — Standards for the Operation of Radio Stations in the Amateur Radio Service
Industry Canada we directed you here
TORONTO, CANADA
HOW DO WE GO LEGAL ?
RIC-3 — Information on the Amateur Radio Service
RP-25 – Policy Principles for Public Safety Radio Interoperability
RBR-4 — Standards for the Operation of Radio Stations in the Amateur Radio Service
Industry Canada we directed you here
Repeater owner / operator liability exposure
Repeater owner / operator liability exposure
With the painful and expensive lessons learned, it seems the litigants in the NCPRN kerfuffle have settled
In the matter of Kenneth Bryant v. NCPRN, Scott Whitaker and Wade Hampton, Jr., this issue has been resolved. We regret this matter occurred and acknowledge that it could have been handled better, and regret some of the unfortunate public comments made pertaining to this litigation and to Mr. Bryant. It is in the best interests of Amateur Radio that this matter be resolved without further litigation.
Of course the greater community must talk about this case as it highlights the exposure repeater system operators have concerning liabilities resulting from actions that cause defamation per se, injury, or other harm to a person's reputation, etc. Just because you
have the federal legal authority to ban someone on your repeater does NOT immunize you from liability if it was done for illegal or injurious purposes... even if incidental or accidental. To think otherwise is reckless.
To all repeater operators thinking the FCC rules shield them from all things, consider the following scenarios:
Ban repeater user for causing interference? No problem so long as you amass "and archive" sufficient evidence.
Ban repeater user for being black (or female, or Hispanic, etc.)? You will be sued out of existence and rightfully so.
Ban repeater user for "unsubstantiated" poor/illicit conduct causing defamation per se? You might be sued and rightfully so.
The point is the FCC doesn't give one carte blanche to violate other rights a citizen may have. Think I'm wrong? Lawyers, please tell me where.
The other key takeaway from this case is the notion NCPRN declared itself not an organization while acting like one towards the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiff sued NCPRN and all the "members" within it. It isn't clear a precedent was set on this particular aspect, but I think it is safe to say one can't pretend an organization isn't one when it is clearly active and acting "organized."
In the matter of Kenneth Bryant v. NCPRN, Scott Whitaker and Wade Hampton, Jr., this issue has been resolved. We regret this matter occurred and acknowledge that it could have been handled better, and regret some of the unfortunate public comments made pertaining to this litigation and to Mr. Bryant. It is in the best interests of Amateur Radio that this matter be resolved without further litigation.
Network privileges for Kenneth Bryant are restored.
The parties ask the community not to discuss this matter further.
http://ncprn.net/?p=517
With the painful and expensive lessons learned, it seems the litigants in the NCPRN kerfuffle have settled
In the matter of Kenneth Bryant v. NCPRN, Scott Whitaker and Wade Hampton, Jr., this issue has been resolved. We regret this matter occurred and acknowledge that it could have been handled better, and regret some of the unfortunate public comments made pertaining to this litigation and to Mr. Bryant. It is in the best interests of Amateur Radio that this matter be resolved without further litigation.
Of course the greater community must talk about this case as it highlights the exposure repeater system operators have concerning liabilities resulting from actions that cause defamation per se, injury, or other harm to a person's reputation, etc. Just because you
have the federal legal authority to ban someone on your repeater does NOT immunize you from liability if it was done for illegal or injurious purposes... even if incidental or accidental. To think otherwise is reckless.
To all repeater operators thinking the FCC rules shield them from all things, consider the following scenarios:
Ban repeater user for causing interference? No problem so long as you amass "and archive" sufficient evidence.
Ban repeater user for being black (or female, or Hispanic, etc.)? You will be sued out of existence and rightfully so.
Ban repeater user for "unsubstantiated" poor/illicit conduct causing defamation per se? You might be sued and rightfully so.
The point is the FCC doesn't give one carte blanche to violate other rights a citizen may have. Think I'm wrong? Lawyers, please tell me where.
The other key takeaway from this case is the notion NCPRN declared itself not an organization while acting like one towards the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiff sued NCPRN and all the "members" within it. It isn't clear a precedent was set on this particular aspect, but I think it is safe to say one can't pretend an organization isn't one when it is clearly active and acting "organized."
In the matter of Kenneth Bryant v. NCPRN, Scott Whitaker and Wade Hampton, Jr., this issue has been resolved. We regret this matter occurred and acknowledge that it could have been handled better, and regret some of the unfortunate public comments made pertaining to this litigation and to Mr. Bryant. It is in the best interests of Amateur Radio that this matter be resolved without further litigation.
Network privileges for Kenneth Bryant are restored.
The parties ask the community not to discuss this matter further.
http://ncprn.net/?p=517
CN Tower REMOVE the Toronto amateur radio repeater
CN Tower REMOVE the Toronto amateur radio repeater from your site / location.
We are contacting the CN Tower and promoting they REMOVE the amateur radio repeater run by TFMCS Toronto FM Communications Society.
We are contacting the CN Tower and promoting they REMOVE the amateur radio repeater run by TFMCS Toronto FM Communications Society.
Canada Lands Company (CN Tower) - WE CONTACTED YOU TO HAVE THE REPEATER REMOVED