I agree with Ken. It seems that the FCC has become a passive player in the
enforcement role. Getting any enforcement action is a very very difficult
issue. Just look at the recent issue regarding K1MAN and the "willful
interference" complaints. The FCC in so many words, after many many
complaints documented extensively even by the FCC, said "don't do that any
more". Did the interference stop, NOPE!
73
Bob, K4TAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Brown" <ken.d.brown@verizon.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 11:16 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Boeing and IEEE NOI Comments
>
> >There is no question of BPL being legal to start up, under existing part
15
> >rules, just how it should be regulated and measured.
> >
> There is also no question that when BPL is identified as causing harmful
> interference to a licensed service it must be shut down, under existing
> rules. The problem is that the BPL promoters and the FCC (excuse me if
> that sounds redundant, I am thinking back to days when the FCC
> remembered what it's job is) would rather just deny the interference and
> forget about having to protect licensed services from interference.
>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|