At 05:30 PM 10/19/2006, WA3GIN in Alex. City, VA wrote:
>Don't think we have to feel too bad for them..$1M might sounds like a large
>fine to us but for a company who did over $500M it was probably a business
>decision to ignore the FCC regulations as a calculated risk of doing
>business. Feel sorry for future product consumers who will carry the brunt
>of the fine with higher retail prices for next years products.
I suspect that the FCC will be watching them pretty closely in the
future. Reading between the lines of the decision, it looks like the
were pretty cranky that they could only go back a year for the fines.
The FCC has also been pretty good recently at cracking down on things
like "cellular jammers". They must have gotten a few folks to
regularly cruise the web looking for stuff, and they're pretty good
at catching the repeat offenders who take the hit, go out of
business, and pop up again under a different name. A few months ago,
they just hammered on someone who did this; not to the million dollar
scale here, but serious upping of the fine and strong words in the
notice about attempts to evade etc..
Makes me proud of folks at a government agency actually doing a
halfway decent job with, I am sure, very sketchy funding, and
probably not a lot of support from above ("let market forces deal with it").
You can read the HQ and field issued notices citations on the fcc web
site (what is it with all these folks who don't paint their towers,
keep the lamps lit, or fail to have ASR numbers posted...)
But we're getting off tower topics here, and I feel the hot breath of
moderation breathing down my neck.
Jim, W6RMK
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|