dbarc
join:2000-01-22
Fort Wayne, IN | reply to jbrooks987
Re: Good for them!! said by jbrooks987:
Since the inception of the FCC it has been their policy that the offending TRANSMITTING station is the one at fault. The transmitters are to be DESIGNED to eliminate that interference. Would you like it if someone's radio transmitter blocked your favorite TV show???
I agree that the transmitter is usually sited, but that is generally if (a) the transmitter is actually causing interference, and (b) which means the transmitter is either not transmitting on the appropriate frequency or emitting spurious emissions which cause a problem.
It seems neither is the case here. In the article is says the request is made by Sirius because it 'could possibly overlap'. It doesn't site any instance of doing so nor does it specificy a specific manufacturer of causing a problem with a specific device. For the FCC to come in after the fact and reduce specs and in any way then cause not only new products to be change but require a retrofit of all existing products (as indicated in the article) seems to be absurd. I can't wait to see the lawsuit against the government for that one. Are they going to suddenly recall or declare every WiFi device, every 2.4ghz phone, etc, illegal to use???? The 'concern' seems to be a radio and a WiFi device in a car. One can't block all interferance, I'd say live the use has to decide which one they want to use at a given point in time. It's like the FCC all of a sudden requiring any 50,000 watt AM station to reduce their power to 3000 watts because if you're standing next to the transmitting antenna, you can get interferance on other AM frequencies. Sheesh. |
