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 your reasoning!
We don't deal with the FCC as we are a medical manufacturer, but we do deal
with the FDA and the Europeans. We are a small medical manufacture compared
to the Big Boys and we must play by the same rules! Size and dollars has
nothing to do 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);
however, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
The FCC Rules do make the assembler responsible for compliance. And the FCC
was NOT created to protect big companies from themselves but to allocate
spectrum and watch for abuses. The air waves were consigned to bona-fide
communication equipment. The early computers were nothing more than
super-whiz-bang typewriters-cum-adding machines and not considered
communication devices. Thus, they were not supposed to interfere with
communication equipment;-- e.g., the Rules.
The fact that you can assemble your own, and that you are small fry compared
to the big companies, has nothing to do with the fact that your assembled
equipment need not comply with the Rules. (I sympathize with small fry,
being one myself.) If you disagree with the Rules, you have ample
opportunity to write to the FCC and present your case to them;-- they have
to publish your letter and present an argument for or against your position.
And the FCC in the past has relented and conceded many points when presented
with convincing evidence from the industry and from communication companies.
(Witness the recent changes to accept DoC instead of the cumbersome
Certification procedure for Class B devices.) I believe that this is the
democratic and responsible way of addressing the problem rather than
disregarding the law because it is inconvenient 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
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 the big alphabet
communication companies from themselves. Me building
my own PC is peanuts compared to some of the issues
these guys deal with. And cable tv is starting to
make the issue of interfering with commercial
broadcast a moot point. Heck, I don't even see
the pixels blink at all anymore even with the
microwave being used only 10 feet away.
I was told, not sure how true it is, that the
FCC in the early years of Part 15 took to task
a famous computer company selling computers
which hooked up to your tv screen. They were
famous for intereference. I know, I had one.
So the FCC threatened to confiscate the units
from said company. Well, the sales were going
down and the company said, "sure big brother,
to ahead ..." So the FCC took them. Lots of
them. In fact, so many, they had to store them
all in an area which closed down part of the
FCC facility. The company went on to declare
it all as a loss. The FCC got stuck with the
inventory.
I don't think they want to repeat that again.
And thus the reason for the wording of the
label. Unless you're a real threat to
commercial communications (such as a ham)
they really don't want to be bothered.
Just my 3.1415 cents worth ...
- Doug McKean
-------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety
Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list.
Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/
To cancel your subscription, send mail to:
majord...@ieee.org
with the single line:
unsubscribe emc-pstc
For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Michael Garretson: pstc_ad...@garretson.org
Dave Heald davehe...@mediaone.net
For policy questions, send mail to:
Richard Nute: ri...@ieee.org
Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org
All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.rcic.com/ click on "Virtual Conference Hall,"
