That Tony is a very good point... Too bad no FCC people are here to
actually answer that question. It would seem FCC enforcement is lacking
in this case.
73s and thanks,
Dave
NK7Z
https://www.nk7z.net
On 07/07/2018 02:55 PM, Tony wrote:
All:
There seems to be a fine line between malicious interference caused by
an individual and the continuous operation of a device known to cause
interference by an electronics manufacturer. In both cases, the
responsible party is aware that their actions are causing radio
interference yet they choose to continue those actions.
Having said that, one wonders how the FCC enforces the rules for
individuals v.s manufactures in such cases and whether manufactures are
given more lenient punishment i.e., more time to comply for some
legitimate reason.
In a recent case involving malicious interference by an individual, a
ham in California received a $25,000 fine after he failed to comply to
multiple warnings by the FCC to stop his malicious interference on the
ham bands.
In contrast, the FCC has notified solar panel manufacturer Solar Edge
about their solar panel systems causing interference to a ham radio
operator who belongs to this reflector. They have not complied, they
were not given a fine and they continue to install those components
nation-wide knowing that they cause interference.
The cause and effect in both cases are similar in that the responsible
parties who have control over their actions are told to comply yet they
fail to do so. Maybe someone can shed some light on this with fact-based
information?
Tony -K2MO
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|