Phil Kane wrote:
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:47:03 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:


Do you have any idea how the rules might be rewritten so that they
exempt BPL, but don't apply to every other unlicensed service?


Simple. BPL will be defined as a specific non-licensed service
protected against harmful interference from the Amateur Radio
Service.

I'm curious how it will be protected from Amateur radio during the next
sunspot peak. Perhaps we will go to war with the offending countries?

Kaboom. End of discussion.

Phil, you are a lawyer. How often is the end of discussion the end of
discussion?


Even if it's taken to court, in
technical matters (as differentiated from non-tech policy or
quasi-political matters) the Federal appellate courts always
seem to give deference to the agency involved.




Those cheap Chinese TV's will be a couple bucks cheaper once they can
get rid of that stupid RFI shielding.

The same for computer monitors.


So many electronic items can be made cheaper by removing those stupid
interference regulations, it is a wondrous thing. The free market rulez.


The only ray of sunshine is that the EU standards for RFI protection
are stronger than those of the US and the cheapie manufacturers do
not want to tool up two different production lines for the sort-of-same
item.

Sometimes it is a simple as metal shielding inside the case. Just don't
put it in. Over a few hundred thousand monitors, that is quite the
savings in parts, shipping weight, and labor.

"Mike Coslo" wrote


I'm curious how it will be protected from Amateur radio during the
next sunspot peak. Perhaps we will go to war with the offending
countries?


Because you mention "offending countries" I presume you expect DX
signals might interfere with BPL.

Since even the very loudest DX signals will measure in the microvolt
range, they will not have any effect whatsoever on BPL here.

73, de Hans, K0HB