Third Party Anarchy

Third Party Anarchy
by Derek Winterstien W0DBW
January 2019, last revision January 2019

So Joe Schmoe local ham operator says to me, “I talked to so and so with the ARRL and he says it is not an FCC violation if I let kids talk on my radio using my call sign as if it were theirs, and I don’t have to say anything myself. I am right and I am going to do it this way.”

Well, my research and casual correspondence some time ago with a previous local Section Manager suggests that it would not be very good operator practice and that there's a better way to allow a non-licensed person to use your station. You have to understand that much of the conventions we use in amateur radio have less to do with FCC compliance and more to do with suggested good operator practice often decided upon collectively by ham operators, then documented and defined in books and guides published by the ARRL, such as The ARRL Operating Manual for Radio Amateurs.

The FCC requires certain and very specific things, beyond that we tend to conduct ourselves based on a code of good practice. For example, it is not illegal to call "CQ" on a repeater, however, it is discouraged as bad practice. In fact the amateur radio band plan contains a mix of FCC regulation and then ARRL recommendation. Operating FM voice on the SSB portion of the 2-meter band does not violate FCC rule, it just annoys other hams, however doing so on 30-meter does result in a violation.

So Joe Schmoe one day decided to let a child use his station and talk on the local repeater. This is commonly known as third-party traffic in ham radio and when done properly there is no infraction. However, Joe himself never spoke up, and the child used Joe's call sign as though it were his own.

Is it illegal? No, it is just bad practice. However, it may become illegal under certain circumstances when a repeater is involved.

Is it wise? Emphatically NO.

So, was Joe present? Well we know he was because I said so above! Don't you believe me? Actually, only Joe and the kid really knew, because no one else listening could have known. Joe never said, "Third party traffic to follow" and the kid used Joe's call in the first person.

Now, lets say ol Joe Schmoe starting making this a somewhat regular thing, letting non-licensed people operate from his station, and Joe sits back in the ham shack easy chair observing, but never speaking other than muttering off-air reminding them to ID every ten.

Once you have granted non-hams permission to use your call sign in the FIRST PERSON, then observers (those listening) hear a voice that is _not_ yours, and a call sign that _is_ yours. When you don't announce your permission has been granted, to listeners the voice is heard in a vacuum and the call does not match the voice with no other data.

"Who's that? Doesn't sound like Joe!"

Maybe you don't care, but if my fellow hams hear my call sign used in the first person from a voice other than my own, and not preceded by nor followed by any warning or advisement that it is 3rd party with permission granted, I want to know, because someone is using my call without my permission. I would never do that. I always announce that I am about to allow a 3rd party to speak from my station.

After some instances in the past of non-licensed people using real ham radio calls without the licensed operator knowing about it, there were discussions and recommendations made to help mitigate the problem.

"This is [call] with third party traffic." was advised.

In our first example, Joe should have spoken first, especially if he and the 3rd party intended on using a local repeater. At the very minimum Joe could have wisely said, "This is Joe [Joe's call sign] with 3rd party traffic" and then handed the microphone to the child. Or, better yet, he could have said a bit more, possibly explaining that he was going to let a non-licensed person use his station as part of an introduction to ham radio, a kindness that I encourage every ham to do. Exactly how it is said is not that critical, Joe could simply use his own words and briefly introduce the child to the listening radio community. Joe's student would more likely find a willing ham to answer and engage in a friendly QSO now that Joe has been clear about what's going on.

Moving forward we have the child talking and we are coming up on the ten minute mark. Should the child say Joe's call sign as if it were his own?

I personally don't want a 3rd party anouncing my call in the first person. I suggest the guest operator say, "This is [so and so] and my controls station is [Joe's call sign.] On this point I strongly recommend that other operators consider this as good practice as well as basic common sense.

"My control station is [call]."

That is for my protection. With a club call as is the case with a ham radio club or youth outreach organization then it would not matter if it was used by the non-licensed in the first person as long as a licensed ham is present. However, it should still be announced ahead of time by the station control operator that 3rd party traffic will occur.

1. Control operator announces there is 3rd party traffic to follow, be it for a single QSO or for a duration such as the rest of the afternoon.

Now you have proven and established that you are in control of your, club, or special event station.

2. The 3rd party then can use the call sign directly. However, if at a private station, the 3rd party should probably use the control operator's call sign in a 3rd person form, not in the first person.

It continues to be clear to anyone listening, or newly listening, that the unrecognized voice is not an impostor, but simply using a licensed ham's station.

3. All established regulatory procedures apply including the requirement to provide the call sign identification a minimum of every ten minutes.

As an individual you have now made listeners aware that your call sign will only be used in the first person by you, and any other voice is thereby suspicious. After all, someone may have turned their radio on after the 3rd party announcement and thereby missed it, but can clearly tell that the strange voice is not claiming the call sign, but rather referencing it as the control operator of the station to which he or she is using.

Any freebander with a police scanner will know if you let others use your individual call sign in the first person willy nilly without you saying a word (such as Joe Schmoe did) and they will take note as your call sign is now one they can barrow and use when they feel like going on air. It happens, and quite often more than you realize, mostly on the HF bands and IRLP.

Consider when little Jonny goes home and plays radio saying he is [Joe's call sign,] and Joe's nowhere nearby. Then a listening ham hears it and thinks, "Oh Joe is kindly letting some little fella use his station to get on the air again, it's probably legit."

They've heard it before with Joe's call sign, so why be alarmed this time?

That is simply not an intelligent thing to be identified with as an operator characteristic. Now everyone's guard is down and you have declared open season on your own call sign!

Amateur Radio is by and large a self regulated hobby, and your local ham radio neighbors can be your best friends in looking out for you and alerting you if someone is using your ham radio call sign without your knowledge, but only if you don't set a precedent to the contrary!

You should be interested in protecting your license and call sign the same as you would your financial identity such as your SSN. But if you're not, then consider other people you put at risk. If you are on a repeater, you might expose the repeater owner, trustee, and possibly a ham radio club to liability.

If you feel it is perfectly compliant and acceptable practice to let non-licensed persons use your callsign in the first person, without you saying anything, you're probably deficient in plenty of other operating practices that will eventually catch up with you and your license. But please think about others that you might drag into the murky waters of fringe operation with you and the collateral damage it may cause, possibly including a new generation of lid operators that you failed to set a good example for.