Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Hams & BPL Industry Spar
Comtek gets testy over powerline broadband interference complaints
(old news - 04:23PM Tuesday Jan 24 2006)
tags: competition · BPL
One of the nation's largest broadband over powerline (BPL) deployments is in Manassas Virginia, where a company named Comtek provides the service over the municipally owned electric power grid. The company serves 900 home and business subscribers (12,500 homes have the option) on frequencies between 4 MHz and 30 MHz. Residential customers get at least 200-500kbps downstream for $28.95 a month.

The ARRL has long taken issue with the deployment because - according to the group - it's causing harmful interference to amateur & emergency radio, and does not comply with FCC Part 15 (pdf) rules. The ARRL states that field tests conducted by Manassas hams and the Department of the Navy found the system "was an interference generator at distances of hundreds of feet from the modems on overhead power lines."

Complaints to the FCC have resulted in "no action or even interest" on the part of Commission, the group claims. Meetings between the ARRL, Manassas Power, and Comtek "have not produced any solution to the interference problem but have, instead, created the illusion that the problem is being addressed," says an ARRL attorney.

That "illusion" apparently continues today, with Comtek issuing a rather aggressive press release entitled: "Finetuning of BPL Technology in Manassas Complete, Legitimate Ham Radio Operator Concerns Now Addressed." The word "Legitimate" an obvious dig that the company does not consider many ham complaints to be such.

"We are not aware of any valid basis for the concerns of those who would deprive BPL broadband to Manassas families and small businesses," says Comtek Vice President Walt Adams. "The opposition from these almost entirely non-Manassas individuals and their national organization appears to be grounded in a fundamental opposition to BPL rather than any hard facts."

Adams calls the ham concerns "clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."

Related:
  1. California Embraces BPL
  2. FCC To Nudge BPL Deployment
  3. The FCC Gives Love to Powerline Broadband
  4. New Earthlink CEO May Trim The Fat
  5. Rosy Powerline Broadband Predictions Continue
  6. 2008: The Year Broadband Over Powerline Died
  7. IBM Didn't Get Memo That BPL Is Dead
  8. Powerline Broadband Just Won't Die
Forums » Hams & BPL Industry Spar
view: topics flat text 
Post a:
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL

Talk about a head in the sand attitude......

My guess is that they don't want to deal with it anymore and will just wait for a lawsuit to come about.

What I think is funny is all the people that said there was no interference at all yet why did Comtek have to make "adjustments" to their equipment?

Plus, that Yahoo article was about as one sided as you can get. No one bit of rebuttal. Can you say "stock pumper?"

guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix

Re: Talk about a head in the sand attitude......

One would tend to believe the Department of the Navy would have a legitimate concern over interference.Could any amount of
"adjustments" fix BPL.? The laws of physics says not possible.I'm 100% in favor of the hams winning.Why don't these $$$$ hungry corporations move forward with fiber.? Instead of pushing 20th century backwards,backwoods BS called BPL.?
--
Bass....the glue of rhythm and harmony...the heartbeat of the band.! Shaking the earth with deep,sonorous vibrations.The dark ominous thunder of an approching storm.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

Re: Talk about a head in the sand attitude......

The Ham Radio groups have very low visibility and generate little interest by the vast majority of the public. Their public relations efforts are doomed to failure. If they expect to take on Comtek(and the FCC which is pushing BPL), they will have to do it in the courts.

The Navy, on the other hand, has a lot of juice in the administration. And if the Navy determines that Comtek is treading on their communications, then I expect the FCC will be forced to listen up. The ARRL might get results quicker by getting the Navy to run interference(PUN intended) for them thru the bureaucracy.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page
audiog

join:2004-08-09
Detroit, MI

What is laughable about this is that the power companies that are pushing this have fiber in the ground or are buying bandwidth from some other fiber company to monitor their network. How about connecting those people to your data network if you are so worried. Most of the public don't know that the power companies have data networks in some cases even have fiber on the pole running past the houses in these areas.
CON Edison, Duke Power and others sold their network to bandwidth providers. Lets see.....so I can push a dead-end technology.
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest

said by moonpuppy See Profile :

Plus, that Yahoo article was about as one sided as you can get. No one bit of rebuttal. Can you say "stock pumper?"
What more did you expect from a press release issued by the company...I would call it more of a "stock fluffer", if you know what I mean.

It's pretty clear that this technology isn't going to work on any kind of large scale. They'd be much better off using the Current wireless hybrid stuff. Oh yeah, that's their competition.

I can re-word their conclusion to be more factual: "Comtek BPL is clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.

ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI

Re: Talk about a head in the sand attitude......

said by RadioDoc See Profile :

...I would call it more of a "stock fluffer", if you know what I mean.
Yah, they learned that from the telcos and their DSL deployment program of the month, if ya know what I mean.

anonpronman

@optonline.net
Care to provide there stock details?

rf_engineer

join:2003-08-04
USA

Campaign

Adams calls the ham concerns "clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."

Yes, that's clearly what ham radio operators want to do, stop broadband. {/cynicism} Sigh. All of the hams I know actually have broadband or some kind of Internet access.

I've seen comments from the hams involved in the area. This appears to be a case of the service provider being unable to do anything more to reduce the interference with the BPL equipment they have chosen. Now that a technical solution isn't possible, they're seeking a media-based solution.

Here's a report that was sent to the FCC by several of the amateur radio operators:

»www.target-eng.com/bpl/manassas%···5-06.pdf

guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix

Re: Campaign

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

Adams calls the ham concerns "clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."
OIC and the RI** wants customers to have DRM free downloadable music also.
--
Bass....the glue of rhythm and harmony...the heartbeat of the band.! Shaking the earth with deep,sonorous vibrations.The dark ominous thunder of an approching storm.

rf_engineer

join:2003-08-04
USA

Re: Campaign

said by guitarzan See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

Adams calls the ham concerns "clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."
OIC and the RI** wants customers to have DRM free downloadable music also.
I expect the next press release to accuse hams of wanting to deny children cute, furry kittens.

N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: Campaign

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

said by guitarzan See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

Adams calls the ham concerns "clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."
OIC and the RI** wants customers to have DRM free downloadable music also.
I expect the next press release to accuse hams of wanting to deny children cute, furry kittens.
Well, I am a ham, and let me tell you, we ARE out to deny children cute, furry kittens.

I only have my general class license, though, so right now I'm assigned to denying children STUFFED furry kittens. When I get my Extra, I move to LIVE kittens.

But then again, I'm all ready a Mason, so I get to deny children cute furry puppies, if you read certain things on the internet

/sarcasm off

guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix

Re: Campaign

said by N3OGH See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

said by guitarzan See Profile :

....Adams calls the ham concerns "clearly a campaign to turn back the clock on broadband in the United States."
OIC and the RI** wants customers to have DRM free downloadable music also.
I expect the next press release to accuse hams of wanting to deny children cute, furry kittens.
Well, I am a ham, and let me tell you, we ARE out to deny children cute, furry kittens.

I only have my general class license, though, so right now I'm assigned to denying children STUFFED furry kittens. When I get my Extra, I move to LIVE kittens.

But then again, I'm all ready a Mason, so I get to deny children cute furry puppies, if you read certain things on the internet

/sarcasm off
LOL Since BPL must be compliant with FCC Part 15 rules. One could "burn in" a new hi speed reversable drill,blender or a new shop vac and take BPL off line at will.As for those cute furry kittens and puppies hmmm...
--
Bass....the glue of rhythm and harmony...the heartbeat of the band.! Shaking the earth with deep,sonorous vibrations.The dark ominous thunder of an approching storm.
K4GVT

join:2006-01-24
Manassas, VA

Am I surprised---no! Mr. Adams has tried to tell the FCC "we are going out of our way to look for BPL."
BPL interference is unavoidable, it's everywhere. One good thing about this "flawed technology" is it is highly susceptible to devastating ingress from all types licensed services. Yea, that's BPL reliability. Can you imagine trying to make an emergency call on VOIP, when puff down it does! The designers of these "flawed" BPL systems should be hung!
ClearRadio

join:2006-01-25
Manassas, VA

Re: Campaign

Go get 'em George!

ClearRadio in Manassas
W1RFI

join:2003-05-12
Burlington, CT

ARRL, BPL and Interference

Unfortunately, this has often been a pattern -- when interference is reported, the BPL operators try to fix it. Some do, but those that can't typically resort to the claim and position that it isn't "valid" interference. This has been more of the same.

If anyone wants to see the volume of interference reports, and the apparently failed attempts to fix it in Manassas, see:

»p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/ex2.html#VA_Manassas

The claim that Amateur Radio or ARRL is somehow anti-BPL because COMTek can't fix the interference from their system is flawed on its face. ARRL has been very clear about which BPL systems do -- and do not -- cause interference.

The Motorola BPL implementation that was set up at ARRL HQ did not cause any interference to a complex Amateur Radio installation located on the same premises as the BPL system:

»www.arrl.org/tis/info/pdf/0511085.pdf

ARRL has been equally clear that the BPL system installed by Current Technologies in Cincinatti has been operating without major interference problems. The same can be said for the IBEC BPL systems.

The "not valid interference" claim is a smokescreen, and instead of the technical solutions the law requires if there is harmful interference, we are seeing sidesteps and evasion.

ARRL will continue to try to work with those parts of the industry that are willing -- and some apparently able -- to address its interference issues responsibly.

Ironically, the most successful of the BPL industry is building on the cooperative work done by ARRL and HomePlug years before access BPL was really contemplated:

»p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/rfi/HomePlug···ARRL.pdf

Ed Hare, W1RFI@arrl.org
Tel: 860-594-0318

TScheisskopf
World News Trust

join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..

Re: ARRL, BPL and Interference

Excellent stuff, Ed. I am not a Ham, but my brother is an extra and I am an SWL. I have been following this megillah with great interest, since there is more at stake in this than most people generally know. I also know that the ARRL and Hams, in general, are not a bunch of whiny complainers and luddites, bent on destroying BPL on some vague hatred for technology. In fact, Hams are traditionally some of the earliest of early adopters, illustrated by the fact that a hell of a lot of people who built and ran Fidonet were also hams. They were some of the earliest computer owners.

You keep up the good fight on this. You are on the side of the angels here.

73
W1RFI

join:2003-05-12
Burlington, CT

Re: ARRL, BPL and Interference

> Excellent stuff, Ed. I am not a Ham, but my brother is an extra and I am an SWL.

The shortwave listeners are the ones at real risk here. The article discusses how the City of Manassas tried to notch all the ham bands in the entire installation. The issue is that the amount of protection that offers to Amateur Radio is minimal, and the end result is moderately strong inteference across major portions of Amateur bands, or even entire bands. If someone were creating noise that limited the range over which cell phones worked, or causes calls to be noisy or drop out, it would be "harmful interference." It is no different in Manassas.

But the notching protects only Amateur Radio. BPL operates at the full-legal-limit of emissions on the shortwave broadcast bands, and at that limit, only the strongest of shortwave stations will be heard local to the power lines, and they will be noisy.

The NTIA estimated that mobile stations within 55 meters of power lines has a moderate to strong risk of interference, and fixed stations have a risk of interference to 450 meters. For aeronautical mobile stations, the risk extends to 12 km.

A copy of a slide from an NTIA presentation is posted at:

»p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/NTIA_Int···ces.html

By my estimation, shortwave broadcast uses somewhat higher signals, so they won't have interference risk for that much distance. But I would imagine that they would have at least as much risk as mobile stations, so SWLs with antennas located 55 meters from electrical wiring or overhead lines will probably have interference on any spectrum that the BPL system is using locally.

Amateur Radio has been the squeaky wheel, so it is getting its problems addressed by some of the BPL companies. If the others wake up, though, the scope of the interference issue will grow.

Ed, W1RFI@arrl.org
Tel: 860-594-0318

1guest



Re: ARRL, BPL and Interference..spin it baby

DS2's Radio Friendly BPL Technology puts Competition on the Defensive
14 September 2005

Speaking at 2005 UPLC Annual Conference, Victor Dominguez, DS2's Director of Strategy and Standardization, outlined the reasons why DS2's 200Mbps powerline solution is the only regulatory compliant technology available for BPL commercial deployments.

Dominguez was dismissive about claimed alternatives to DS2.

Mr Dominguez was adamant about competitors claims "I think that we have put the competition on the defensive. Our competitors would love to have the flexible notching capabilities that we have for BPL and In-Home PLCs, but the truth is that they don’t. DS2 has had dynamic notching since its first chip set and can mitigate radio interference in a programmable way and other PLC chipsets do not. We would like to thank our competition for the rumours propagated at several press interviews, they have been attracting attention towards one of the main competitive advantages of our technology, we mastered programmable notches in a 200 Mbps chipset more than 2 years ago, since then we have been shipping in volume for BPL and In-Home applications, and still remains to be proven that competition can follow us.”

DS2's technology is well known in the BPL industry for being one of the first proponents of programmable notching in powerline communications, as the best method for addressing potential interference to radio services. DS2’s 200 Mbps BPL technology, available in silicon since 2003, already implements this dynamic notching functionality, which has been tested in the field, in several commercial BPL deployments, and demonstrated in several BPL industry trade shows.

“Other competing technologies have some notches, but they are fixed, including the most advanced designs from followers (on top of that they exhibit performance below 40% our speed). This means that they fall short for the demands of regulators and consumers everywhere from the FCC to the European Commission who require that frequency bands can be selectively notched out, even after the equipment has been deployed. Operators deploying non-DS2 based solutions risk having their equipment withdrawn from the field because once it is out there, there is nothing that can be done to prevent interfence with radio signals. With DS2, however, any issues can be resolved even when the equipment is in the field by remotely disabling problematic frequencies thus complying with today's or future regulatory requirements and automatically avoiding any radio signals in any part of the world". Mr Dominguez placed special emphasis on the radio friendliness of the system.

In February this year, DS2's 200 Mbps powerline technology has been chosen as the baseline technology for the European utilities developing PLC standards to accelerate the adoption of low cost, high performance broadband access PLC. As part of the selection process, an extensive set of tests were performed, including notching functionality benchmarks for avoidance of potential interferences to radio services. In addition, report from Ofcom, the British telecom regulator recognised the significant advance represented “The flexibility of the DS2 product, with its programmable spectrum mask and downstream notching capability, represents a significant step towards a more EMC friendly PLT solution.”

Specifically, DS2 BPL system can implement notches in any frequency band, not only in radio amateur bands. This means that the system can be adapted to changing regulations in several countries. For example, FCC recently prohibited BPL Operators to use frequencies within defined "excluded bands". Only products based on DS2 technology can be adapted to this new regulation remotely from the Operator’s Network Operation Centre, while products based on competing chips would need to replace the hardware in the field.

DS2 200 Mbps the technology which underlies the majority of commercial access PLC and IPTV/ADSL deployments worldwide and has been built into equipment manufactured by the leading US, European and Asian BPL manufacturers. It is used by XDSL/IPTV operators like Telefonica and electricity giants such as Consolidated Edison, Duke Energy, EdF, EdP, Iberdrola and Endesa, to drive their broadband over powerline offerings. As of September 2005, the estimated number of consumers and businesses that enjoy access to IPTV, internet and voice-over IP services is estimated at 500,000, with more than two million homes passed in deployments with more than 30 power utilities world-wide.

OxfordSt

@secureserver.net

Re: ARRL, BPL and Interference..spin it baby

Why hasn't DS2's technology fixed the problems in Manassas, VA? So far the only thing it has put on the defensive has been Comtek.

dingus_b

@69.7.x.x
OK,

So you can cut and paste from a press release. Why doesn't DS2 come in a fix the situation?

rideboarder
welcome to the social
Premium
join:2003-07-28
Snohomish, WA
clubs:

Go BPL!

I hope Comtek keeps up the good work.

DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou

Re: Go BPL!

What good work. Their equipment clearly breaks guidelines set by the national government.
--
:: my trivial ramblings ::

rideboarder
welcome to the social
Premium
join:2003-07-28
Snohomish, WA
clubs:

Re: Go BPL!

said by DaSneaky1D See Profile :

Their equipment clearly breaks guidelines set by the national government.
Says ARRL. If they don't have any hard facts, then that's too bad for them. It's up to the ARRL to provide some accurate information that can be taken seriously by the FCC and Comtek, but at this point it looks like they are whining just for the sake of whining...

rf_engineer

join:2003-08-04
USA

Re: Go BPL!

said by rideboarder See Profile :

said by DaSneaky1D See Profile :

Their equipment clearly breaks guidelines set by the national government.
Says ARRL. If they don't have any hard facts, then that's too bad for them. It's up to the ARRL to provide some accurate information that can be taken seriously by the FCC and Comtek, but at this point it looks like they are whining just for the sake of whining...
How does it look like they are whining for the sake of whining? There's plenty of documentation if you look. »www.target-eng.com/bpl/manassas%···5-06.pdf

On the other hand, Comtek is accusing hams of wanting to deny people of broadband. Where's their proof of that? It sounds like they are whining because they can't fix their system to comply with the law.
W1RFI

join:2003-05-12
Burlington, CT

Re: Go BPL!

A more dramatic representation of the BPL interference is seen at:

»www.target-eng.com/bpl/video/bpl···2004.wmv

That is not happening on a few spot frequencies; it is happening on entire bands.

Would that kind of noise on top of your favorite radio station be "harmful interference?"

Ed Hare, W1RFI
ClearRadio

join:2006-01-25
Manassas, VA

rideboarder, you show you lack of understanding of FCC Part 15 rules, you lack of knowledge of the BPL interference situation in Manassas, and your equal lack of understanding of precisely what has been done to prove the BPL interference does, indeed exist.

You say "If they don't have any hard facts...", but obviously you have not bothered to look at the several web pages documenting in very precise detail the harmful interference from BPL in Manassas over the past 2 years.

You say "It's up to the ARRL to provide some accurate information...", and again this shows how you have failed to do even a modicum of research on the subject. As stated in this thread earlier, the ARRL and other web pages have extensive documentation by certified Electrical and Professional Engineers, take to accepted industry standards, documenting the harmful interference from BPL in Manassas in painstaking detail.

And you state "...they are whining just for the sake of whining...". Think how rediculous this statement is, but I suspect you would never appreciate the interference unless you 1) Heard it, and 2) Cared whether it affected the radio spectrum in question.

I suspect your response would be substantially different if BPL were causing harmful interference to your wireless phone, your WiFi network, or other wireless device. But the difference is that all of those devices, by FCC law, must accept any interference they receive, but can NEVER generate harmful interference to ANY licensed radio service.

The bottom line is that BPL is and unlicensed radiator, and by law can not harmfully interfere with any licensed service. Ham radio frequencies are shared with many other licensed users equally affected by this harmful interference, like the Department of the Navy. The big difference is that hams are just more vocal because it affects them the most.

Next time before commenting on something, do some research so you will be informmed about that which you are commenting.

ClearRadio in Manassas

rf_engineer

join:2003-08-04
USA

said by DaSneaky1D See Profile :

What good work. Their equipment clearly breaks guidelines set by the national government.
Don't feed the trolls

I think this interference case has been dragging on for two years. They're in violation of Part 15 which states the device must be shut down if it continues to interfere. If anyone created the same interference with a piece of communications equipment and antenna and didn't call it BPL, they would probably be incurring $10K in fines per day. The FCC doles out $10K to $40K fines to radio and TV stations for not having a public file available for inspection or no ASR numbers on a tower, and that's for just one visit by an inspector and not an ongoing violation. While TV and radio stations aren't under Part 15, you would think after two years it would be time for the FCC to do something.
PDXPLT

join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR


1 edit

not quite

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

...Part 15 which states the device must be shut down if it continues to interfere.
Not exactly. Part 15 precludes license-exempt devices from causing harmful interference, which is a more relaxed standard than causing no interference whatsoever. Or conversely, Part 15 devices are permitted under the law to generate interference, so long as it does not rise to the level of "harmful".

This has interesting implications, in how the FCC is interpreting this Rule in light of their Spectrum Policy Task Force. For example, it means there's a "if a tree falls in the forest" criterion; for example, if there's no aeronautical user nearby, an unlicensed device is free to use an aeronautical band to their hearts content.

That's why the Comtek PR talks about "outside of Manassas" critics and their "national organization". They want to paint the picture that their are no/few resident HAMs (and thereful harmful interference is not possible), and that this is just theoretical FUD caused by "outside agitators" with no standing in the matter. From what I understand, though, it was Manassas HAMs that sought assistance from the ARRL in this matter.

See 7 replies to this post

dingus_b

@69.7.x.x
Yes that's a great idea. Let's continue to interfere with the Department of the Navy. So how much stock do you own in Comtek?
AT1

join:2003-03-05
Sedalia, MO

Just money hungry

As with any commercial operation, once they have to fix their issues they will be out of business so their operating model has to be to deny that there is an issue and try to sweep it under the rug by releasing smoke screen information.

Jafo232
You Can't Spell Democrat Without Rat.
Premium
join:2002-10-17
Boonville, NY

Just Get RIAA

Why don't they team up with RIAA? RIAA would have no problem helping get rid of broadband anywhere..
--
Design, Hosting, Programming At MediaFlavor.com.

guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA
·epix

What effect would

powerlines from a nuclear power plant have upon BPL.? As i live at the max maybe 3 football field lenght's away from those overhead cables.A light drizzle when both towers are operational,produces one hell of a loud humming buzz.Is it possible BPL would never exist near such an environment.?
--
Bass....the glue of rhythm and harmony...the heartbeat of the band.! Shaking the earth with deep,sonorous vibrations.The dark ominous thunder of an approching storm.
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission

Re: What effect would

said by guitarzan See Profile :

powerlines from a nuclear power plant have upon BPL.? As i live at the max maybe 3 football field lenght's away from those overhead cables.A light drizzle when both towers are operational,produces one hell of a loud humming buzz.Is it possible BPL would never exist near such an environment.?
I use to do HF and low VHF in the Navy (inshore ops) and back in the 70's those HV lines were a problem even without a BPL signal to cause an issue. Had to make sure our op zones were well clear of any overhead lines since we tried to use minimum power for OPSEC (operational security or some such translation) and it would mess us up.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.

anonpronman

@optonline.net

Fcc Puppet

Until bush's puppet is removed from the Chiefs chair i would expect alot more of this. The Corruption needs to END!

With Bush at the helm you can guarantee your rights will be violated.

»www.theage.com.au/news/world/bus···165.html
»www.chris-floyd.com/bush/

Bush and his administration forget The law applies to everyone!
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL

Re: Fcc Puppet

said by anonpronman :

Until bush's puppet is removed from the Chiefs chair i would expect alot more of this. The Corruption needs to END!

With Bush at the helm you can guarantee your rights will be violated.

»www.theage.com.au/news/world/bus···165.html
»www.chris-floyd.com/bush/

Bush and his administration forget The law applies to everyone!
And what corruption would that be Mr. "BPL Stock Fluffer?" President Bush is supposed to be the "champion" (along with Michael Powell) of BPL as a third pipe.

What? No article to show how BPL will bring broadband to the masses, eliminate world hunger and cure cancer?

Face it, The FCC is dropping the ball on this one simply by ignoring the complaints and evidence of interference that the Comtek system already has in their deployment.

masterpjz9

join:2000-10-14
Peabody, MA

court

What I don't understand is why doesn't the ARRL bring the FCC to court asking for a writ of mandamus? The FCC clearly isn't doing their job here...

Middieman
Eschew Obfuscation

join:2001-02-05
Elkins Park, PA

Re: court

I'll hazard a guess about why the ARRL is holding off on going to court, though that might be where this is headed.

From my simplistic perspective, the law is clearly on the side of hams. BPL cannot interfere with them or other radio services. Thus, the FCC should shut Comtek's BPL operation down. That's what's supposed to happen without going into court... and suing whom? Does suing Comtek put the FCC into a possible defensive position since they haven't shut Comtek down?

In court it is possible to loose, law on the ARRL's side or not. (Just a guess.)

-=[Middie]=-
--
All your base are belong to DSL Reports!

masterpjz9

join:2000-10-14
Peabody, MA

Re: court

I was saying that in my opinion the ARRL should file suit against the FCC asking the court to order a "writ of mandamus" which is basically a court order that orders a government official (or body) to do something (in this case, their job).

Middieman
Eschew Obfuscation

join:2001-02-05
Elkins Park, PA

Re: court

For what it's worth, my personal feeling is that it is critical for the ARRL to maintain a good working relationship with the FCC.

Beyond what the ARRL puts out, what the ARRL will do and for what reason is anyone's guess. But it looks like they're operating within the system that assumes the FCC has authority over the radio spectrum and will do something to stop interference.

Suing the FCC would not help improve relations.

-=[Middie]=-
--
All your base are belong to DSL Reports!
ronlandrus

join:2003-09-09
Holland, OH

Re: court

Here is the other side of the coin.

»www.arrl.org/news/stories/2006/01/18/2/?nc=1

richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith

There's also another reason why the ARRL won't go to court

Money
The ARRL is a membership organization and as such it is non-for-profit [I think] organization supported by membership fees and donations. It probably has a legal department, but it's small and there isn't that much money to play with. If they try to force the FCC [in effect the government] to do something, they [FCC] will want all sort of studies as to why they should do something, ect. The ARRL just doesn't have the resources for that.
Forums » Hams & BPL Industry Spar


Wednesday, 09-Dec 16:15:09 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole