Radio Microphone Licensing

[JCC1996]

Hi,

 

We're putting on quite a big school show this year and we're planning on using nine Sennheiser G2 radio mics. I'm aware of the changes in licensing rules, but after trawling through the ofcom website I'm still a little baffled.

 

Do we need a license to run nine radio mics? What frequencies are we bound to? Or has the change even come into force- I came across a site which seemed to suggest the changes were't enforced in my area (I had to put in my postcode) until 1st January 2013.

 

I just want some clarification on what we can and can't do, and what, if any, licences we need to obtain?

 

Joe

[Mr Steve]

I'm not 100% sure of the dates for switch off as the goal posts keep moving, but I was in a similar position to you 9 months ago and we got things sorted early. Hopefully this will help if not now, in the imminent future

 

Post change over, you can run 4 mics in channel 70 - 863-865MHz. So you can continue to use your G2s. Unlike G3s, you can't send your G2s away to be modified down to the new channel 38 band, so you will only ever be able to run 4 units at once. The other 5 will be doorstops (assuming they are yours and not hired in).

 

Any further mics used will need to be in channel 38 where you will need a licence (2 years £135 from JMFG).

[cedd]

Hi Joe

Yep, you're going to need a license to run 9 radio mics. You can fit 4 G2's in the license-exempt band (channel 70 as we refer to it - between 863 and 865MHz). If you had G3's you'd manage 6 in the same space (they're a bit "tighter" to use simple terms).

 

Sennheiser made different variants of their G2 systems, just like they do with the G3 now. This is because the transmitter and receiver can only tune between a certain range of frequencies. Assuming your receivers are the variant that will tune to channel 70, the best bet is to get hold of a channel 69 license from JFMG (look for a "shared" license). This sits directly below channel 70 and so your mics should tune to its' frequencies and still be within its tunable "width".

 

The new frequencies we're being moved to are in channel 38, which is a long way from channel 69/70, so it requires different variants of radio mics to do it.

 

You should be ok using channel 69 up until 1st Jan 2013, then I'm afraid you'll need to come up with a new solution. You'll still be able to use 4 of them simultaneously up in channel 70 as it remains where it is, but channel 69 is gone.

 

If you get a shared license, it will cover you for both channel 69 and the new channel 38 until that date. JFMG specify fixed frequencies on the license you can use in channel 69 (about 14 of them I seem to remember), but in channel 38 they leave that choice up to us.

[paulears]

If you buy a license at the moment, you get access to channel 69 for the moment - when the exact moment runs out keeps getting put off, but at some point, it's going - and I notice the Freeview people are now starting to get quite vocal about what is happening with the new 'owners' of the old TV channel bands They're concerned about interference to their TV channels - so the future for 69 is a bit of a mess. Lots of schools don;t have licenses for their equipment, so never even got to hear of the problems on the horizon.

[JCC1996]

Thanks everyone,

 

I'm still a bit unsure though. If the changeover hasn't taken place yet (which if the information I already came across is correct it hasn't), am I able to use the nine mics on channel 69 without a license?

 

Joe

[Al M]

No, it's always been illegal to use ch69 without a license. The difference is that after the switchover date, you won't be able to use channel 69 at all, as they won't grant you a license to use it

[Oldradiohand]

If you hire in the licence may be covered by the hirer but if they're your own you must have a licence. I think the current deal is that the channel 69 licence is also valid for channel 38 so you won't have to relicence when the changeover occurs and you have to replace your mics.

[Bobbsy]

Thanks everyone,

 

I'm still a bit unsure though. If the changeover hasn't taken place yet (which if the information I already came across is correct it hasn't), am I able to use the nine mics on channel 69 without a license?

 

Joe

 

If you've been using Channel 69 without a licence in the past, you've been breaking the law. Chances of enforcement are fairly slim--but had you been caught they would likely have confiscated all your gear.

 

Too late now, but had you had a licence, you'd have been eligible for the scheme where they'd have bought your old mics from you and paid at least part of the cost of replacing them with Ch. 38 gear.

[JCC1996]

We don't ever really use the radio mics because our shows haven't been big enough to need them, its just because the shows big this year and we're holding it in a larger venue that we are wanting to use them. Hence the reason I'm checking out the legalities before we go ahead and run them. I've passed on the info to the folk in charge for them to decide where we go next!

[paulears]

You could find the larger venue already have a license. We never rely on visiting shows having licences, so we have our own, just in case. However - using them is not a get-out. You have in the schools possession equipment that operates in a frequency band for which a license is required. As they can simply be switched on, possession is the requirement for making a license mandatory, not use. That's been the key requirement for virtually all radio equipment over the years - and is why they can seize pirate radio equipment even when it's not connected. You must have a license, they don;t have one, therefore it can be seized! By being ignorant - your school lost a big chunk of compensation which they could have used to buy new ones!

[revbobuk]

I don't really want to argue with people who have a lot more experience than I have - but I don't think that a licence is mandatory for equipment capable of operating in Ch 69 if it is also capable of operating legally in Ch. 70, as the G2s are. I've got Trantec s5 kit that I run quite properly in Ch. 70 - but it could also work in Ch 69 - or even in frequency bands that aren't licensable. The relevant authorities might argue that having 9 sets implies that intention, and they may be right. But I don't think that simply being capable of working in Ch69 requires a licence, does it?

[Oldradiohand]

He's going to use 9 mics over band 69 and 70 = he needs a licence. Having 7 mics capable of working in band 69/70 you don't need a licence unless you intend to use channel 69 frequencies ("it's just this once" won't wash) It all becomes academic at the end of the year. Using channel 69 will become illegal and will probably gradually become unusable.

[chelgrian]

I don't really want to argue with people who have a lot more experience than I have - but I don't think that a licence is mandatory for equipment capable of operating in Ch 69 if it is also capable of operating legally in Ch. 70, as the G2s are. I've got Trantec s5 kit that I run quite properly in Ch. 70 - but it could also work in Ch 69 - or even in frequency bands that aren't licensable. The relevant authorities might argue that having 9 sets implies that intention, and they may be right. But I don't think that simply being capable of working in Ch69 requires a licence, does it?

 

The license applies to operating the equipment not to owning it. It is perfectly legal to own radio mics capable of operation in a variety of bands however to operate the equipment when tuned to licensed frequencies you require a license.

[paulears]

In practice, that is how it works, but strictly speaking, the Act contains this wording:

It is unlawful—

(a)to establish or use a wireless telegraphy station, or

(b)to instal or use wireless telegraphy apparatus,except under and in accordance with a licence (a “wireless telegraphy licence”) granted under this section by OFCOM.

It has already been established in law (the earliest I can find being the second World War) that instal is taken as preparing the equipment for operation - so putting batteries in a portable transmitter, or plugging an external aerial into a main powered unit is evidence of it being 'installed' - as I mentioned, it's the bit of legislation that allows pirate radio equipment to be seized. It doesn't have to be even connected. This kind of thing the authorities find serious, but for radio mics, considering the thousands out there that are unlicensed, it would be impractical to take action. It doesn't change the status of the equipment though.

 

The license terms grant you permission to operate it. Nobody will really care about you having equipment in these bands and not using it - however, it doesn't mean it's legal. The act, as far as I'm aware didn't have any get out of jail cards for low power equipment.

 

I suppose it's a little like when people have been in bother for having a Leatherman, with the locking blade making it a weapon, while a Swiss Army Knife isn't? The law exists, as I understand it to cope with negative use - so let's say somebody tuned their radio mic to the sound carrier frequency of the old analogue TV system, in a weak signal area and played rock music to annoy their elderly next door neighbour. Not having a license would be sufficient for the powers that be to use the act to prosecute you. I'd bet it's never happened, but I can see how the law could be used to make it stop!

 

So although the law is rarely enforced, it is present.

 

The other section of interest is this bit:

Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006 (c. 36) Part 2 — Regulation of radio spectrum Chapter 4 — Enforcement

 

Keeping available for unauthorised use

A person who has a wireless telegraphy station or wireless telegraphy apparatus in his possession or under his control commits an offence if—

(a) he intends to use it in contravention of section 8; or

(b) he knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, that another person intends to use it in contravention of that section.

A person who commits an offence under this section where the relevant contravention of section 8 would constitute an offence to which section 35(2) applies is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both;

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine or to both.

[WeaveMcQuilt]

Your two best sources for this information are:

 

Beirg and Shure

 

It's an annoying thing to get your head around, but I think these guys have laid out the information quite well.