ORIGINAL: Liberator
"Says who? How are you going to prove they were any less reasonable in exercise of due care in their operation than those at the sanctioned site? "
The mere fact that they are flying close enough to a sanctioned site to cause interference proves that they are not exercising reasonable care. They would not fly if they were being reasonable.
Well, okay......... you and bkdavy take that legal principle to court. Good luck.
BTW, what if it isn't a "sanctioned" site, and what is the responsibility of the "rogue" to determine if it is or is not?
What is his legal, reasonable, responsibility to know that he is within 3 mi of another flying site, sanctioned or not?
Where is anything about a 3 mile separation from other users stated in the FCC Part 95 rules?
Are FCC Part 95 rules superceded by AMA Safety Code in US civil courts?
Abel