Privacy - Ham Callsigns Lookups on FCC Database?

catchy_handle asks: "In the US, all amateur radio (ham) call signs are public record. Anyone with a decent police scanner can listen to the local hams on the 2m and 70cm bands. Given an operator's call sign, one can search the FCC databases which will return the licensees street address, among other data. As a future ham, I found this thread on eHam.net somewhat alarming. The majority of respondents stated that it's always been this way, that they have nothing to hide, and to stop being paranoid. [I disagree.] As a victim of ID theft, the less joe-crack-head knows about me the better. I'm pretty sure of the typical Slashdot reader's angle here, but my question is to the hams: Does this bother you? Or is it part of tradition and something a good operator should be proud of? Is it too late since these guys already know all?"

"I was surprised by the resistance to reconsider the status-quo, to adapt to the new reality of criminals with computers.

I suggested that the portals to the public databases be replaced with a challenge/response system such that if someone wanted my address, I'd get a notification from the QSL bureau, or the FCC that so-and-so was requesting access to my data. I could then decide to grant or deny that request. One person said that California's DMV works this way already (very cool). Another option: anyone is allowed to provide a PO Box to the FCC, instead of a street address, but that's an extra expense to many. "

Comments

Re:They have nothing to hide?

[GigsVT]

This is really not the time for that argument. This is really not a privacy issue.

Being a ham radio operator is entirely optional, there's no way to argue that not being one deprives you of livlihood. If you want to make a "free speech" argument, then you better complain about the many other ham rules that prevent you from cursing on the air, and many other rules about the types of traffic that are acceptable. Those would be much more important to address if you view ham as some sort of outlet for free speech.

The global nature of the airwaves means that unique rules apply. It's entirely possible for one person, unknowingly, to spew noise over a bunch of frequencies over a large area. You might not even know what frequency that person is listening to. With the database, you can send him a letter and let him know about the problem.

Do you have a problem with domain names requiring contact info that is publicly available? It's a similar situation, where one site operator can adversely affect many other sites. Do you advocate a system where there are no listed abuse contacts for a domain?

Not just an issue for hams

[swillden]

How many slashdotters own a domain name (or 10)? My name address and phone number have been available in the Whois database since Jan 1997. Those who aren't such Internet newbs have had their info in Whois for better than a decade. So many of my friends have domain names that I've occasionally used Whois to look up their phone numbers. (I'm not sure I want to think about what that says about me or my friends).

Is it a problem? I don't think so. Home/mailing addresses and phone numbers are pretty trivial to get for just about anyone. What's the harm in having yet another source?

Then again, maybe this attitude will come back to haunt me...

Re:You couldn't operator with out one.

[BrynM]

But what about these? Are there different requirements for different license types?

BURNS, JERRY P, KE6PTD (Technician)
PO BOX 245554
SACRAMENTO, CA 95824-5554
Issue Date: Jan 05, 1995
Expire Date: Jan 05, 2005
Date of last Change: Jan 05, 1995

Gasser, William M, AK6G (Extra)
PO BOX 246143
Sacramento, CA 95824
Previous call sign: WA0KIU
Previous license class: General
Licensee ID: L00207752
FRN: 0002142552
Issue Date: Apr 04, 2002
Expire Date: Apr 04, 2012
Date of last Change: Apr 04, 2002 (License Issued)