|
|
Post by slackie on Dec 1, 2011 9:43:13 GMT 12
This is just a heads up for all forum members that like to video aircraft landing and departing whilst also tuning in to Air Traffic Control frequencies.
Whilst it is not an offence to listen to ATC/Police/other radio transmissions, it IS an offence against the Radiocommunication Act to use any information that you hear... that includes recording it and replaying it.
Air Traffic Controllers in New Zealand, their employer (Airways), and their professional association (NZALPA) take any breaches of this law very seriously and are very quick to report suspected breaches to the relevent authority who are also very quick to prosecute (just ask TVNZ and TV3 who have both ended up in front of the courts)!
I recently stumbled across some video on YouTube showing departures from Auckland International that I believe may have been taken by a member of this forum... I have left a couple of comments on the videos and will wait to see if my requests to remove the audio are actioned.
Dave, you may like to "sticky" this message so that everyone is aware and avoids any resulting "heartache"!!
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Masters on Dec 1, 2011 10:03:32 GMT 12
Slackie, with all due respect there are HUGE websites that transmit and record (as in archive) atc communications from all over the world. I used to broadcast ATC from Australia through that web site (and the Australian ATC had no issues with those transmissions). I tried it once here in NZ when I moved here (and you know the outcome of that one). Point I am trying to make is that there are bigger fish to fry. Someone is out filming arrivals/departures/whatever into Auckland and you can hear scanners in the background with ATC chatter. So what? This gets to the point that it gets ridiculous. I'm yet to learn about what sort of harm recording or even listening even does. Point taken re telecommunications rules etc but I'm yet to get a valid reason as to why this is harmful. If they are going for the whole terrorism/privacy stuff, bullshit because anybody can buy a scanner at Dick Smith. If Dick Smith does not have them don't think for a second that these guys can't construct there own with some resistors, solder and some PCB. Also, I'd love to know what happens to the audio that you guys record of us during communications. What would happen if we did not want to be recorded? I don't think we'd have much choice in the matter  PS-I'm sure you knew this thread would fire me up. |
|
|
|
Post by jonesy on Dec 1, 2011 10:26:34 GMT 12
Yeah-and its OK for the government to record everything I text,email,say over phone lines and read my mail? Yes folks its happening to YOU!! (just send a few emails with the words "Al-Queda, bomb, Pakistan and Mana Party; then you'll be on the Echelon mailing list!)
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 1, 2011 10:57:48 GMT 12
Thanks for the heads up on this issue Mike. Most people would probably be unaware of the rules and the penalties for recording such transmissions so I will indeed make this a permanent sticky thread to get the message out there.
I think the reasons behind the illegal nature of recording and rebroadcasting these transmissions are fairly obvious.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Dec 1, 2011 12:01:29 GMT 12
Yeah-and its OK for the government to record everything I text,email,say over phone lines and read my mail? Yes folks its happening to YOU!! (just send a few emails with the words "Al-Queda, bomb, Pakistan and Mana Party; then you'll be on the Echelon mailing list!) ;D  Great! so is this proboard too!  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by slackie on Dec 1, 2011 12:19:11 GMT 12
Darren, I didn't have you in mind when I started this thread and the object is one of education so that members in this forum (and elsewhere) realise that they cannot do this and even if the recording is in the background from someone else's receiver then the person owning the recording is still breaking the law...
To be blunt though... the point is... IT IS ILLEGAL IN NEW ZEALAND... I don't care particularly what laws allow you to do in other parts of the world but in New Zealand IT IS ILLEGAL!!
|
|
|
|
Post by mit on Dec 1, 2011 12:22:22 GMT 12
I don't mean to be dumb but what's the story with cockpit voice recorders? Does this mean they are illegal in NZ or do they not record what ATC has to say?
|
|
|
|
Post by slackie on Dec 1, 2011 14:19:08 GMT 12
No... CVR's are for the "intended purpose" and are therefore within the law.
|
|
|
|
Post by slackie on Dec 1, 2011 14:27:29 GMT 12
The actual wording of the Act is as follows: 133A Offence to disclose contents of radiocommunications (1) Every person commits an offence against this Act who receives a radiocommunication and who, knowing that the radiocommunication was not intended for that person,— (a) makes use of the radiocommunication or any information derived from that radiocommunication; or (b) reproduces or causes or permits to be reproduced the radiocommunication or information derived from that radiocommunication; or (c) discloses the existence of the radiocommunication. In effect, when we are referring to the ATC environment, these are private transmissions between pilots and air traffic controllers... they are not intended for anyone else. If anyone's really interested the full Act can be downloaded www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0148/latest/096be8ed807079d2.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Dec 1, 2011 14:48:43 GMT 12
Seems fair to me. Listen but don't record. Besides, who would want to listen to that drivel anyway  |
|
|
|
Post by mit on Dec 1, 2011 17:08:33 GMT 12
No... CVR's are for the "intended purpose" and are therefore within the law. Ok, does that mean that I can have one in my personal aircraft? In effect, when we are referring to the ATC environment, these are private transmissions between pilots and air traffic controllers... they are not intended for anyone else. Does that mean I can record transmissions intended for me as the pilot? and if so is there anything I could do with them ie background in a youtube vid as mention on this thread already? Thanks for the clarification. mit |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 1, 2011 17:19:49 GMT 12
Even if you have recorded the transmission on your CVR under perfectly legal conditions Mit, the step of then putting it on Toutube is a matter of broadcasting it, and that is illegal. That's how I see it.
CVR's are there simply for safety and crach investigation reasons, not entertainment.
Mike, are documentary makers allowed to apply for the release of cockpit recordings for investigation style programes, such as the recent one of the chap who's Cessna engine failed and he was killed? Does the department allow dispensation under certain conditions? Or are the use of these tapes all done underhand like the cup of tea tapes?
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Masters on Dec 1, 2011 18:08:17 GMT 12
So in saying this if you say to a mate "Hey I heard that Air NZ flight today got diverted to blah blah" is committing an offence? Come on, I'd love to see someone prosecute you on that one! 133A (1) reads to me that anyone who even receives a radio communication that was not meant for them, ie, every scanner listener is committing an offence?
This is boarding idiocity. You really do need to use your brains in this case. Yes, I have taken your point slackie that it is ILLEGAL and so is a lot of other stuff for that matter. Whether you get prosecuted for it or not is a different matter. You refer to TV NZ etc etc that used the ATC audio. Indeed there is a distinct line and that is different but I do beg to see any magistrate that will prosecute an innocent aircraft spotter for having some audio in the background of their video...
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Masters on Dec 1, 2011 18:12:22 GMT 12
Oh and I might add, how about air traffic controllers having 'chit chats' to pilots that they know on the air? It is unnecessary communications and I hear it time and time again. I'm quite sure there is a law against unnecessary chatter on the radio too but do you see controllers get hauled into the courts for that one? Infact, it happened just before I had my engine failure the controller happened to be asking a pilot he knew something along the lines of "How is it up there today, we should catch up sometime soon" followed by my mayday. I'm sure my call woke him up though... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 1, 2011 18:50:24 GMT 12
Darren, how can you not see that the law is there to protect everyone who uses the system?
What right does anyone have to listen into a private conversation between two people who have no idea that the third party is listening to them, who may be recording their converation and may be even intending to then broadcast it via Youtube or live streaming? No-one should have that right, full stop. That is exactly why the News of the World was shut down, and a large scale enquiry is now in session to investigate the massive breach of privacy via intercepted voice messages - and that as we know is a very perverted misuse of people's privacy.
Why does someone with a scanner think they have the right to repeat information publicly or broacast the recording of where and when an aircraft and its passengers is going if they have heard it on their scanner? Or if that aircraft might have such issue such as being diverted, why would anyone thing that is worth broadcasting and that they have the right to do so? Its no-one's business whatsoever except the pilot and crew of the aeroplane and the controller they are talking with, surely?
That the reason it is an illegal practice to misuse what is overheard.
Do these people with scanners also get their jollies listening to where private individuals are going when picked up by a taxi? I know some get a massive fixation over listening to transmissions from emergency service vehicles which I find plain sick. It is a creepy form of voyeurism.
I guess in this day and age with the way our media feels they can operate outside the law and reality television continues to push the boundaries, the X and whY generation simply don't seem to care what they do illegally with this stuff.
Your attitude seems to be "ok, sure, so it's illegal, that has now been pointed out to me, but hey, I'm sure I can get away with it so who the hell cares?" Reminds me of your philosophy on breaking the speed limit...
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Masters on Dec 1, 2011 19:41:13 GMT 12
Dave, again, with all due respect there is a big difference between 'private' conversation and phone tapping (which you speak of) and public listening of communications (such as ATC) that are broadcast in the public radio spectrum. Huge huge difference there. Totally agree with illegal phone tapping by media etc being illegal. Rightly so. Who the hell would you want to listen to your phone calls? Certainly not me either (although you can pick those up with a scanner too if the phone is cordless). What I am saying is using them for paparazzi 'gain' is wrong yes. An aircraft hobbyist listening to ATC communications...highly doubt that is harmful! You must understand that people that listen in to ATC and emergency services are just that, plain hobbyists. Some people collect stamps. So what? The people that listen to these conversations so what by that? Are they doing anyone harm? So what if someone wants to go record train regos and listen to communications between the locomotive driver and the station? What harm is that person doing? As for the speeding thing, don't even go there. Plain revenue raising and nothing but. You know I worked with the police for a long time Dave and it is gospel and known fact that it is revenue raising. Nothing more nothing less. The Netherlands has a lot less laws than us and a lot less crime. This is getting off topic again and silly. People will argue both points for years (as was in the speed thread then you locked it). Funnily enough people were really pro speeding and it hit a soft spot with you or other forum members so the thread was locked. The same here. The not listening/recording ATC stuff is rubbish yet the govt can monitor EVERYTHING we do. Let's face it, it's fact. I will NOT change my viewpoint on beaurocratic bullshit!
ATC conversations are NOT private!
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Masters on Dec 1, 2011 19:46:18 GMT 12
And actually I did this too Dave. Used to make me heaps of cash with my freelance video camera work. News websites used to pay me good money for breaking stories that they could embed on their websites with the stories. Don't think that would have been possible without a scanner (and occasionally tip-offs). Remember Dave, everyone has hobbies. There are voyeurs in each of us. Don't tell me if a plane crashed in Cambridge you would not go look? |
|
|
|
Post by slackie on Dec 1, 2011 20:40:17 GMT 12
What am I missing here? This isn't rocket science! I'll say it slowly for Darren's benefit one more time and then I'm afraid I'm going to have to ignore anymore of his incessant bleeting.
It's legal to listen, it's illegal to do anything with the information. That includes telling anyone, or acting on the information.
Darren, if you don't like the law of the land then find another land in which to live that aligns with your point of view... there are probably plenty of places out there but NZ aint one of them!
|
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Dec 1, 2011 20:42:44 GMT 12
I think you're missing the point Darren. It is clear that while you may listen to the transmission, it's illegal to record and broadcast a transmission that is not intended for you, i.e to disclose the contents or existence of that transmission to anyone else.
133A Offence to disclose contents of radiocommunications
(1) Every person commits an offence against this Act who receives a radiocommunication and who, knowing that the radiocommunication was not intended for that person,—
(a) makes use of the radiocommunication or any information derived from that radiocommunication; or
(b) reproduces or causes or permits to be reproduced the radiocommunication or information derived from that radiocommunication; or
(c) discloses the existence of the radiocommunication.
You can listen, you can go see a plane crash, but you cannot disclose the contents of any transmission that was not intended for you.
Come up with all the analogies you like, the fact remains per the law as outlined by Mike earlier. There's little point in getting hot under the collar over it mate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darren Masters on Dec 1, 2011 20:43:11 GMT 12
Geez that's nice mate. Thanks for that. Maybe the reason so many Kiwis go to Aussie... |
|
