Item Subject: Re[2]: labelling of prototypes in US
The DoC approach does not exempt you from compliance to labelling. If
you cannot (with clear consiousness) apply the DoC label then you must
use the demo/exhibition statement of non-compliance (2.803)
When I worked for a computer /terminal manufacturer we used this 2.803
label for both class A (2.902) and class B (2.904) equipment frequently for
protopypes or alpha marketing units.
The FCC will issue fines for equipment at certain trade shows that are not
compliant with (primarily) labelling rules. They (FCC) seem to attend the larger
shows frequently.
Hans Mellberg
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re[2]: labelling of prototypes in US
Author: Non-HP-Ron-Pickard ([email protected]) at HP-ColSprings,shargw5
List-Post: [email protected]
Date: 9/11/97 11:53 AM
Hello to all,
This query is in the applicability of FCC rule 2.803. Hans had
provided the Part 2 reference which caused me to look it up again.
This has raised a question for me.
According to 2.803, "... device which has not been granted type
approval, type acceptance, certification or notification, will not be
deemed an offer for sale if such advertising contains, and the display
is accompanied by, conspicuous notice worded as follows:"
As verification and declaration of conformity are not present in this
paragraph, is equipment that is subject to Verification (2.902) or
Declaration of Conformity (2.906) exempt from this labelling requirement?
Any opinions on this subject would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you in advance.
Best regards,
Ron Pickard
[email protected]
