Crackdown on jammers continue with “NOJAM” and action against sellers on Craigslist

No one I know (Photo credit: Mickipedia)

The FCC has a new weapon in its continued efforts to aggressively enforce the law with respect to the sale and use of illegal radio jammers. The new weapon is a dedicated jammer tip hotline, 1-855-55-NOJAM. The hotline is intended to make it easier for the general public to report offenders.

The Press Release announcing the new hotline encourages the public to call the hotline if;

• you are aware of the ongoing use of a cell, GPS, or other signal jammer;
• your employer operates a jammer in your workplace;
• you observe a jammer in operation at your school or college;
• you observe an advertisement for a jammer at a local store; or
• you observe a jammer being operated on your local bus, train or other mass transit system.

In the Press Release, Michele Ellison, Chief of the Enforcement Bureau, said: “We need consumers to be our eyes and ears. Jammers do not just weed out noisy or annoying conversations and disable unwanted GPS tracking, they can prevent 9-1-1 and other emergency phone calls from getting through in a time of need.”

On the same day of the announcement, the Enforcement Bureau took action against another six individuals for advertising and selling signal jammers on the popular classified ad web site Craigslist.org. The actions come with a warning that the FCC intends to impose “Substantial Monetary Penalties” for similar violations going forward.

So how much will that $45 illegal jammer really cost? The Consumer Alert issued within an FCC Enforcement Advisory  explains penalties can exceed $100,000 per violation.

More about the activities related to jammer enforcement can be found on the Commission web site, http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/jammer-enforcement.

REF:

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db1015/DOC-316795A1.pdf

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db1015/DOC-316796A1.pdf

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db1015/DA-12-1642A1.pdf

2011 market surveillance report EU –are tablet PCs a target for 2012?

Image via Wikipedia

Bundesnetzagentur (Federal Network Agency) of Germany, for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Railway has the responsibility to carry out the market surveillance under the EMC and R&TTE Directives.

The agency published a summary of the 2011 market surveillance campaign on its web site. The campaign’s primary focus in 2011 was with the EMC directive and in particular, LED lighting equipment. The report also combines results from the 2010 and 2011 campaigns to give a summary overall and to achieve a low error probability due to the larger sample size.

For some background on emissions concerning LED product, see July 2011 post “Radio interference from LED lighting”.

The surveillance looked at administrative conformity, such as marking, documentation and declarations, as well as the technical aspects of the directive namely compliance with the emissions and immunity requirements. A total of 168 products were sampled in 2011.

On the administrative side, the surveillance found that 76.8% of the samples were compliant with the CE marking requirements, while only 39.9% were compliant with the Declaration of Conformity (DoC) requirements.

For the technical assessment, 61.5% of product complied with the radio emissions requirement, and 91.3% were found immune to specific interference phenomenon, out of 46 products tested overall.

In total, only 17.3% of LED lighting equipment was found to be fully compliant.

For the “reactive market surveillance”, the overall rate of non-compliance for electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) was 38.9%. For radio and telephone terminal equipment (R&TTE) a majority, 65.5%, was found non-compliant according to the report, but most concerning was that 75.6% of the R&TTE products checked were non-compliant with the safety and health measurement requirements.

The 2011 surveillance resulted in 90 EMC sales bans, 177 R&TTE sales bans, 353 “memoranda of understanding” between the two directives, and total revenues of €1,046,000

The report details some objectives for 2012 indicating supporting the revision of the EMC and R&TTE directives and transposition into national law, including harmonizing product assessment for market surveillance, and increasing cooperation with European market surveillance and customs authorities as well as adapting the national database for market surveillance results, to the European ICSMS database.

Two product group targets were mentioned for 2012, one a coordinated German/Dutch campaign targeting tablet PCs focused on the R&TTE directive, and another targeting “Ready-made connecting devices”, or laptop power supplies.

 

ref;

Market surveillance statistics 2011

FCC’s first wave crackdown against signal jammers

The Federal Communication Commission is making good on its warning to signal jammer vendors on Friday Sept. 30, issuing a sweeping citation to 20 of them.

Earlier this year, the FCC issued a warning to consumers and vendors of the illegal nature of jamming devices, and warned would-be violators of the consequences that may come if selling or using such devices.

The vendors listed in the citation order are all online vendors that offer a range of illegal jammers such as GPS blockers for vehicles, high-tech signal blockers with remote control capabilities, jammers disguised as paintings and cigarette packs, other small, easily-concealable cell phone jammers, as well as high powered industrial jammers that have the potential to disrupt radio signals in areas as large as a football field.

The citation requires that the online vendors report within 30 days on their specific actions taken to correct the violation. The citation also warns that continued violation may bring fines, equipment seizure or imprisonment.

By: J Klinger

Omission of Class B statement in users manual costs…

Image by wolfheadfilms via Flickr

The Federal Communications Commission( FCC) issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) to Marshall Amplification PLC, seeking $7500 for what the FCC claims is “willful and repeated” violation of section 302(b) of the Communications Act and sections 2.803(a)(2) and 15.105(b) of the
Commission’s rules.

The notice follows a complaint received by the FCC that Marshall had not included the proper consumer disclosure in the users manual of some Class B digital devices being sold by Marshall. It is noted in the NAL that the products were verified for compliance with the Class B limits and the technical requirements had been met, thus the base forfeiture amount was adjusted down as a result, however, the forfeiture amount was adjusted  back up based on Marshall’s ability to pay, stating “large or highly profitable entities, such as Marshall should expect forfeitures higher than those reflected in the base amounts”

In general most consumers are unfamiliar with the requirements and rules of the FCC, and it can be assumed that a large amount of complaints received by the FCC are filed by industry competitors, excluding those cases that deal with actual radio interference.

The consumer disclosure in question is intended to inform the user of the potential for interference and what to do should it occur, and is required for all class B digital devices.

“ This equipment has been tested and found to comply with the limits for a Class B digital device, pursuant to part 15 of the FCC Rules.  These limits are designed to provide reasonable protection against harmful interference in a residential installation.  This equipment generates, uses and can radiate radio frequency energy and, if not installed and used in accordance with the instructions, may cause harmful interference to radio communications.  However, there is no guarantee that interference will not occur in a particular installation.  If this equipment does cause harmful interference to radio or television reception, which can be determined by turning the equipment off and on, the user is encouraged to try to correct the interference by one or more of the following measures:

• Reorient or relocate the receiving antenna.
• Increase the separation between the equipment and receiver.
• Connect the equipment into an outlet on a circuit different from that to which the receiver is connected.
• Consult the dealer or an experienced radio/TV technician for help. “

A NAL is not a forfeiture order, it usually follows a Letter of Inquiry, and the recipient of one can still seek dismissal and/or reduction in the amount. The process ends in one of three ways, an actual forfeiture order, a consent decree, or criminal prosecution, with the latter being rare.

While, with regard to this particular incident, the cost of this omission may be $7500, and some may consider this as simply the cost of doing business, it should be noted that the fines can be much higher for willful and repeated violations, and could be cumulative based on each product sold and compounded for each day the violation occurs.

The complete NAL can be found at http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0830/DA-11-1468A1.pdf

FCC reminds the public that radio jammers are illegal to operate in the United States, and warns would-be violators of the consequences of selling or using them

Image by G0SUB via Flickr

In a News Release titled “FCC ENFORCEMENT BUREAU STEPS UP EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS AGAINST CELLPHONE AND GPS JAMMING.”  The FCC warns and reminds consumers that it is a violation of federal law to use a cell jammer or similar device that would intentionally block, jam, or interfere with authorized radio communications.

In a kind of public outreach, the news release by the FCC Enforcement Bureau explains what can happen if you use a cell jammer, why jammers are prohibited, and information on how to file a complaint alerting the FCC to illegal jamming device usage. A copy can be downloaded at http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0209/DOC-304575A2.pdf.

Additionally, the FCC Enforcement Bureau released a public notice in the form  of an FCC Enforcement advisory. The public notice warns of the strict penalties for marketing or selling jamming devices. Among the penalties, a fine of up to $112,500 can be issued for a single violation. A complete list of jammer enforcement activity can be found at http://www.fcc.gov/eb/jammerenforcement/ A copy of the FCC Public Notice can be downloaded at http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0209/DA-11-249A1.pdf

Compatible Electronics, Inc. operates a fully certified telecommunication certification body for radio device approvals in accordance with FCC rules, please visit our site at http://www.celectronics.com/us.htm or contact us with your questions about the wireless device approvals process and regulations.

By: J Klinger

Company fined $10k for impacting weather radar near San Juan airport

Image via Wikipedia

Terminal Doppler Weather Radar (TDWR) serving San Juan International Airport received interference adjacent to 5.61GHz, source tracked by FCC and FAA agents to radio transmitters providing wireless internet atop a nearby building.
The company responsible for the interference was issued a forfeiture order by the FCC enforcement bureau in the amount of $10,000. While the company used equipment that had been previously certified under the FCC rules for UNII operation, the equipment causing interference was operating on frequencies that it had not been approved for. Moreover, if the transmitters would be considered non-UNII devices and subject to section 15.407(2) of the FCC rules, then the power allowed would have been limited to ¼ Watt in that particular frequency band, however, the devices in question were designed to operating in excess of three times that level.
The full FCC forfeiture order can be found at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-138A1.pdf.

FCC Issues Citation

Vector Products, Inc. dba Vector Manufacturing, Ltd

Released Date:
06/30/2009

Description:
Issued an Official Citation to Vector Products,Inc. dba Vector Manufacturing, Ltd. for marketing in the US an unauthorized radio frequency device, the Vector iMobile VEC 429 FM transmitter in violation of Section 302(b) of the Communications Act

Documents:

Word : DA-09-1485A1.doc

Acrobat : DA-09-1485A1.pdf

Text : DA-09-1485A1.txt