To: Chris Maxwell; chris maxwell; 'emc-pstc internet forum'
Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Someone else on this thread quoted chapter and verse from Title 47 of the US
code stating that individuals who built their own ITE were not covered by
Part 15 rules. Regardless of that, I find it hard
...@emccompliance.com, Chris Maxwell
chris.maxw...@nettest.com, 'EMC-PSTC Internet Forum'
emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Date: Mon, Jun 25, 2001, 8:00 AM
Ah,
I see what you're saying.
Point 7 was intended to say that a test should be performed if there was any
: Friday, June 22, 2001 6:08 PM
To: Chris Maxwell; 'EMC-PSTC Internet Forum'
Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
I have no trouble with your checklist except #7. Like it or not, the FCC
RE
limits protect I Love Lucy broadcasts. More basically, the limits
protect
the broadcasters
evaluated using my checklist? Would you have your company write
the check for a re-test?
Chris
-Original Message-
From: Ken Javor [SMTP:ken.ja...@emccompliance.com]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 3:21 PM
To: Chris Maxwell; 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC
83d652574e7af740873674f9fc12dbaa675...@utexh1w2.gnnettest.com, Chris
Maxwell chris.maxw...@nettest.com inimitably wrote:
Why not call a vertically-
applied manulo-pedally-operated quasi-planar chernozem-penetrating and
excavating implement a SPADE?
BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT'S A SHOVEL!
All the
Hi all,
This thread has been interesting. However it has taken a somewhat
philisophical turn. I'd like to distill it a little bit. In short, FCC
+ FCC does equal FCC in certain circumstances just like CE + CE = CE in
certain circumstances.
You need to ask yourself: (honestly and sincerley
Ed,
Not a problem with my relatives - they never pay for anything!
Gary
-Original Message-
From: Price, Ed [mailto:ed.pr...@cubic.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 3:54 PM
To: 'Doug McKean'; EMC-PSTC Discussion Group
Subject: RE: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
I
-Shock - Metrology - Reliability Analysis
-Original Message-
From: Doug McKean [mailto:dmck...@corp.auspex.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:11 PM
To: EMC-PSTC Discussion Group
Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Decide among yourselves who of you are outlaws ...
TITLE 47
I forgot to mention, however we do test four equipment for emissions to FCC
Class B.
-Original Message-
From: Dick Grobner
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 3:33 PM
To: 'Tania Grant'
Cc: 'emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org'
Subject: RE: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Will put Tania and I agree
with it and shouldn't.
-Original Message-
From: Tania Grant [mailto:taniagr...@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:23 AM
To: Doug McKean; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Re: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Hello Doug,
I may or may not agree with FCC (on some issues I agree, on others I don't
20010621143204.UCHV1335.femail1.sdc1.sfba.home.com@[65.11.150.27], Ken
Javor ken.ja...@emccompliance.com inimitably wrote:
The limits as placed prevent most but not all
interference. For instance, some AM radios are susceptible to conducted
interference below 48 dBuV. The limits were placed,
Decide among youselves who of you are outlaws ...
TITLE 47--TELECOMMUNICATION
CHAPTER I--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
PART 15--RADIO FREQUENCY DEVICES--Table of Contents
Subpart A--General
Sec. 15.23 Home-built devices.
(a) Equipment authorization is not required for devices
for you, or because your equipment is just a small pebble in a big
pond of boulders and no one will notice.
Tania Grant
taniagr...@msn.com
- Original Message -
From: Doug McKean
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:19 AM
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
dmck...@gte.net
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 2:32 AM
Subject: RE: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Sorry but I respectfully disagree ...
If the FCC were to say yes to anyone being an
outlaw for building their own PC and not having
it tested, then why does the FCC label
to broadcast reception still occurs, it is your responsibility
to ameliorate it, up to and including ceasing usage of the offending device.
--
From: Doug McKean dmck...@gte.net
To: emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: FCC + FCC = FCC? - Outlaw
Date: Thu, Jun 21, 2001, 1:32 AM
Sorry
Sorry but I respectfully disagree ...
If the FCC were to say yes to anyone being an
outlaw for building their own PC and not having
it tested, then why does the FCC label essentially
tell everyone suffering from interefernce to take
care of it themselves?
The FCC was created to protect
I think the FCC would say- Yes!!
However - with component level tests you would
not be. OK - Before you all jump all over me..
Yes there will be cost added to the components.
After all it is hard to skim every cent out of a
part when you do not know the system it will go in.
However the
17 matches
Mail list logo
