"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message
...

What's up with that anyway? It seems that on the back of most consumer
electronics there's a notice saying it must not cause interference and
it
must accept interference. What's it going to be? If my radio causes
interference, is my neighbor supposed to just take it because the notice
says so? And if that's the case, why should I as an op worry about it?

They do create a bit of an ambiguous situation.
When two unlicenced devices interfere, it would appear that both are SOL.
If a type-accepted CB device is interfering with a part 15 device, then as
I
understand it, the part 15 device is SOL.

But wouldn't the CB device op be required to make changes? He's the one
causing the interferance. My memory of such things is quite dusty.

--
KC6ETE Dave's Engineering Page, www.dvanhorn.org
Microcontroller Consultant, specializing in Atmel AVR

I checked out your site. I liked the "no active linear" amplifier. Have you
ever tried something similar to that to amplitude-modulate the collector of
a mosfet rf amp? Just curious. It would be like digital audio except the
audio amps would need to be at least about half the wattage of the rf amp.
(that could get ugly. :-P )

-Dr.X

"Dr.X" wrote in message
...
"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote
in message ...
"Dr.X" wrote in
:

"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge"
wrote in message ...
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2003 HOUSE BILL 257
RATIFIED BILL AN ACT TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF CITIZENS BAND RADIO
EQUIPMENT NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION.
The General Assembly
...

Federal law trumps state law no matter what side the state law takes.
Any normal judge would just say that a rule already exists to address
the issue so state level action is a waste of time and taxpayers
money.

-Dr.X


The FCC passed juridstiction over to local/state level for enforcement.
they are well within thier rights.

But doesn't that just mean enforcing existing federal regulations? I don't
think local laws need to be passed for local enforcement of a federal law.
I
could be wrong. I'm not a lawyer. :-)

-Dr.X

Research PL106-521 signed by Clinton in 2000.
That is where these state and local laws are coming from.


73

J

But wouldn't the CB device op be required to make changes? He's the one
causing the interferance. My memory of such things is quite dusty.

The part 15 device is the bottom of the food chain.
It is required to accept any and all interference, including that which may
cause undesired operation.

This assumes that the other device is either part 15, or unmodified CB, or
commercial licenced radio (unmodified), or ham radio operating in-spec.

If I read them right, a modded CB, or one with an amp, or a ham radio that
was operating out of spec, would be given the burden of cleaning up the
problem.
If you're operating illegally, then you go below the part 15 devices.


--
KC6ETE Dave's Engineering Page, www.dvanhorn.org
Microcontroller Consultant, specializing in Atmel AVR

Modded or not, I *think* it's up to the radio operator NOT to interfere with
his/her neighbors.

I look at it this way;
If your cordless phone was making my garage door go up and down all night,
I'd expect YOU to remedy that situation.

I had a situation once where I was broadcasting through a next door
neighbors, well, let's just say a "type of piano you find in a church"
because I can't think of how to word it without it coming out wrong:-) That
was about 20 years ago when I was running 750 watts through stacked
moonraker IV's. I tried installing filters every where I could plug one in
but to no avail. So I stopped running the linear and all was well....it was
just a cheap splatter box anyway. We moved and I sold everything.

We actually just stopped in to see them a few months ago and she still has
and plays that "type of piano you find in a church" :-)

Don

"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message
...
But wouldn't the CB device op be required to make changes? He's the one
causing the interferance. My memory of such things is quite dusty.

The part 15 device is the bottom of the food chain.
It is required to accept any and all interference, including that which
may cause undesired operation.

This assumes that the other device is either part 15, or unmodified CB, or
commercial licenced radio (unmodified), or ham radio operating in-spec.

If I read them right, a modded CB, or one with an amp, or a ham radio that
was operating out of spec, would be given the burden of cleaning up the
problem.
If you're operating illegally, then you go below the part 15 devices.


--
KC6ETE Dave's Engineering Page, www.dvanhorn.org
Microcontroller Consultant, specializing in Atmel AVR

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:58:46 -0400, "Dr.X"
wrote:

"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message
...

What's up with that anyway? It seems that on the back of most consumer
electronics there's a notice saying it must not cause interference and
it
must accept interference. What's it going to be? If my radio causes
interference, is my neighbor supposed to just take it because the notice
says so? And if that's the case, why should I as an op worry about it?

They do create a bit of an ambiguous situation.
When two unlicenced devices interfere, it would appear that both are SOL.
If a type-accepted CB device is interfering with a part 15 device, then as
I
understand it, the part 15 device is SOL.

But wouldn't the CB device op be required to make changes? He's the one
causing the interferance. My memory of such things is quite dusty.


LEGALLY operated CB's are protected by FCC statute under the FCC
rules, part 95, in much the same way Amateur operator operate under
Part 97 rules. What this means is that a CB that is operating as type
accepted equipment under part 95 is considered to be spectrally
acceptable to any and all receivers, intentional and non-intentional.
Part 15 devices are "low dog" devices. If they are interfered with by
legally operating equipment, operating under ANY FCC rules, then it is
up to the owner or the Part 15 device to resolve their interference
problems. Conversely, if a part 15 device CAUSES interference to any
other device, it is again up to the owner of the part 15 device to
resolve any interference issues.

Some caveats here... Illegally modified CB radios or CB's operating
with external amplification are NO LONGER considered to be operating
under the protection of FCC Rules part 95. They are considered to be
unlicensed, and as such, ANY interference they cause to ANY device is
considered to be the fault of the CB operator and they MAY be held
liable.


Raymond Sirois KAXN-9546
SysOp: The Lost Chord BBS
607-733-5745
telnet://thelostchord.dns2go.com:6000

On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:39:40 -0400, "M-Tech"
wrote:

Modded or not, I *think* it's up to the radio operator NOT to interfere with
his/her neighbors.

I look at it this way;
If your cordless phone was making my garage door go up and down all night,
I'd expect YOU to remedy that situation.

I had a situation once where I was broadcasting through a next door
neighbors, well, let's just say a "type of piano you find in a church"
because I can't think of how to word it without it coming out wrong:-) That
was about 20 years ago when I was running 750 watts through stacked
moonraker IV's. I tried installing filters every where I could plug one in
but to no avail. So I stopped running the linear and all was well....it was
just a cheap splatter box anyway. We moved and I sold everything.

We actually just stopped in to see them a few months ago and she still has
and plays that "type of piano you find in a church" :-)

Don


Well Don, in a Good Neighbor type of way, you would think that the
owner/operator of the transmitting equipment would do "the right
thing" and resolve the interference issue. I agree that the operator
should take reasonable effort to do what they can. Example, a
neighbor nearby complained that my Amateur gear (unamplified, no more
than 70 watts to the antenna) was interfering with their TV. I put a
low-pass filter on my antenna feedline and haven't heard a word from
them since. Now granted, I'm operating under Part 97, and they are
owners of Part 15 devices, but since they live two houses down, I
figure maybe someone else might be hearing my SSB signal on their TV.
Turns out later that they're using a satellite system and their
internal wiring is point to point with SPEAKER WIRE!

Trust me. If the low-pass filter didn't do the job, I'd have sent
them packing and looking for other solutions. I made an effort.
Possibly a token effort, but still an effort beyond what the law
required.

Then again, unlike you, I tend to operate legally, and therefore I
have very few interference complaints and if I DID have any other
complaints, would be 100% legal in telling the owner of the Part 15
device that they need to look at THEIR installation first, THEN come
talk to me...


Raymond Sirois KAXN-9546
SysOp: The Lost Chord BBS
607-733-5745
telnet://thelostchord.dns2go.com:6000

On Thu, 16 Sep 2004 23:17:21 -0400, "Dr.X"
wrote:
X


The FCC passed juridstiction over to local/state level for enforcement.
they are well within thier rights.

But doesn't that just mean enforcing existing federal regulations? I
don't
think local laws need to be passed for local enforcement of a federal
law. I
could be wrong. I'm not a lawyer. :-)

-Dr.X


It's quite obvious that you are not a lawyer. States are free to pass
any law that does not conflict with federal regulation. In this case,
the state's law compliments the federal statute, and does not come in
conflict with the federal law.

And you ARE a lawyer? I bow to your knowledge and experience, Perry Mason.

-Dr.X


Cool! Thanks!


Raymond Sirois KAXN-9546
SysOp: The Lost Chord BBS
607-733-5745
telnet://thelostchord.dns2go.com:6000

"KAXN-9546" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:58:46 -0400, "Dr.X"
wrote:

"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message
...

What's up with that anyway? It seems that on the back of most
consumer
electronics there's a notice saying it must not cause interference
and
it
must accept interference. What's it going to be? If my radio causes
interference, is my neighbor supposed to just take it because the
notice
says so? And if that's the case, why should I as an op worry about
it?

They do create a bit of an ambiguous situation.
When two unlicenced devices interfere, it would appear that both are
SOL.
If a type-accepted CB device is interfering with a part 15 device, then
as
I
understand it, the part 15 device is SOL.

But wouldn't the CB device op be required to make changes? He's the one
causing the interferance. My memory of such things is quite dusty.


LEGALLY operated CB's are protected by FCC statute under the FCC
rules, part 95, in much the same way Amateur operator operate under
Part 97 rules. What this means is that a CB that is operating as type
accepted equipment under part 95 is considered to be spectrally
acceptable to any and all receivers, intentional and non-intentional.
Part 15 devices are "low dog" devices. If they are interfered with by
legally operating equipment, operating under ANY FCC rules, then it is
up to the owner or the Part 15 device to resolve their interference
problems. Conversely, if a part 15 device CAUSES interference to any
other device, it is again up to the owner of the part 15 device to
resolve any interference issues.

Some caveats here... Illegally modified CB radios or CB's operating
with external amplification are NO LONGER considered to be operating
under the protection of FCC Rules part 95. They are considered to be
unlicensed, and as such, ANY interference they cause to ANY device is
considered to be the fault of the CB operator and they MAY be held
liable.

I'd say it sucks to be a part 15 device.

Thanks Raymond.
-Dr.X

KAXN-9546 wrote:
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 20:39:40 -0400, "M-Tech"
wrote:

Modded or not, I *think* it's up to the radio operator NOT to interfere
with his/her neighbors.

I look at it this way;
If your cordless phone was making my garage door go up and down all
night, I'd expect YOU to remedy that situation.

I had a situation once where I was broadcasting through a next door
neighbors, well, let's just say a "type of piano you find in a church"
because I can't think of how to word it without it coming out wrong:-)
That was about 20 years ago when I was running 750 watts through stacked
moonraker IV's. I tried installing filters every where I could plug one
in but to no avail. So I stopped running the linear and all was
well....it was just a cheap splatter box anyway. We moved and I sold
everything.

We actually just stopped in to see them a few months ago and she still
has and plays that "type of piano you find in a church" :-)

Don


Well Don, in a Good Neighbor type of way, you would think that the
owner/operator of the transmitting equipment would do "the right
thing" and resolve the interference issue. I agree that the operator
should take reasonable effort to do what they can. Example, a
neighbor nearby complained that my Amateur gear (unamplified, no more
than 70 watts to the antenna) was interfering with their TV. I put a
low-pass filter on my antenna feedline and haven't heard a word from
them since. Now granted, I'm operating under Part 97, and they are
owners of Part 15 devices, but since they live two houses down, I
figure maybe someone else might be hearing my SSB signal on their TV.
Turns out later that they're using a satellite system and their
internal wiring is point to point with SPEAKER WIRE!

Trust me. If the low-pass filter didn't do the job, I'd have sent
them packing and looking for other solutions.

I've seen lo-pass and high-pass have -no effect- because of fundamentals
and cheap home electronics. In the end you still have to deal with a ****ed
of neighbor.

"M-Tech" wrote:
Modded or not, I *think* it's up to the radio operator NOT to interfere
with his/her neighbors.

I look at it this way;
If your cordless phone was making my garage door go up and down all
night, I'd expect YOU to remedy that situation.

I had a situation once where I was broadcasting through a next door
neighbors, well, let's just say a "type of piano you find in a church"
because I can't think of how to word it without it coming out wrong:-)
That was about 20 years ago when I was running 750 watts through stacked
moonraker IV's. I tried installing filters every where I could plug one
in but to no avail. So I stopped running the linear and all was
well....it was just a cheap splatter box anyway. We moved and I sold
everything.

We actually just stopped in to see them a few months ago and she still
has and plays that "type of piano you find in a church" :-)

Don


HA!..that frigging church pianne' doubles as a field strength meter!