Amateur? (Was RE: [aprssig] Igateing a Non Amateur)

[Steve Dimse]

On Oct 3, 2005, at 5:29 AM, Dave Baxter wrote:

> Really?   Lookup the dictionary definition of "Amateur"...
>
> http://www.bartleby.com/61/98/A0239800.html for example (beware of
> pop-up's)

 From that link, there are three definitions:

1. A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic  
activity as a pastime rather than as a profession. 2. Sports An  
athlete who has never accepted money, or who accepts money under  
restrictions specified by a regulatory body, for participating in a  
competition. 3. One lacking the skill of a professional, as in an art.

At the risk of being immodest, I'll discard the third definition. The  
second definition very specifically applies only to sports. That  
leaves the first, which says nothing about making money, only that it  
is not done as a profession. Even if you insist on applying the  
sports definition, the phrase "or who accepts money under  
restrictions specified by a regulatory body" is significant. I do not  
know about the UK rules, the FCC is the regulatory body in the US for  
amateur radio, and they clearly allow people to make money with  
amateur radio, just not by using the airwaves.

Furthermore, as I said the meanings of words shift over time. When  
the phrase Amateur Radio was coined it had a different meaning, if  
created today it might have been called "Enthusiast Radio". Many  
people would like the name changed because of the shift in meaning  
towards the third definition.
>
> In the UK at least, we are not permitted to make any profit or gain
> whatsoever as an "Amateur" in any field, be it technology, sport or  
> art
> for example....  You can still be "Professional" in the way you go  
> about
> it however.

Really, so Roger was breaking UK law by making money on UI-View?  
Maybe he didn't die, the UK government arrested him and is holding  
him incognito. No, wait, it is my government that does that ;-)
>
> I have no problem with providing (a) service, or any other amateur  
> doing
> so.  But if you profit or gain from doing so (in the way that you more
> than cover your costs) you are not an "Amateur"...
>
> I am not talking companies here, just individuals.

The money made by companies goes to individuals. If it was that  
simple, an athlete could simply form a company, have all the money go  
to the company and still be considered an amateur.

I maintain there is nothing wrong with individuals making money from  
amateur radio. Making money from something does not automatically  
make one a professional (I just sold a one-time use of a photo of  
mine (http://rocdocphoto.com/fav/fav-Pages/Image8.html -- thank you  
Google Images!) to a corporation for their annual report for $250,  
but that hardly makes me a professional photographer). Likewise,  
making money does not automatically disqualify one as an amateur,  
particularly if you keep in mind the earlier meaning of amateur as  
enthusiast.
>
Steve K4HG