Slashdot Mirror
FCC Rule Cuts Bandwidth For 72-Mile 802.11b
sonamchauhan writes "This Computerworld article reported a 72-mile 802.11b wireless link (discussed in
this Slashdot story). Now a Computerworld followup story is reporting the link power has been reduced by 75% to comply with FCC regulations for the 2.4-GHz band -- reducing the link's throughput from 1 Mbps to 300 Kbps. The owner is reported saying that: "any violation of the power limits was unintentional and resulted from the fact that the personnel working [on it] primarily have expertise in computers and not radio technology.""
So set up two more of them, and multiplex. Bingo! 1MBit.
FCC regulations exist for a reason, folks.
Cretin - a powerful and flexible CD reencoder
Its pretty easy to go over the maximum power output, which I believe is two watts. Assuming certain combinations of high-gain antennae and an amplifiers, there is no helping blowing past the FCC regs.
To find out if you are over, you need to calculate to total db of gain you have, and convert that to watts.
geogeek
Everytime there's a story about 802.11b I wind up posting this link which provides a lucid explanation of the FCC rules in order to correct wrong information.
(without reading the article of course}
I ask a simple wuestion of the slashdot brain trust(tm)-
Why?
Why is building your own transmitter ilegal?
Who decided that any government "owns" the radio spectrum?
Who gives this organization such power to control the "airwaves"?
Bah.
comment directly in my journal
Building your own transmitter is perfectly legal, and kinda fun. However, turning it on and broadcasting above the LPFM limits is illegal because you're interfering with someone else's transmission.
The reason these rules exist (at least theoretically) are to prevent any and every organization from building hundred-thousand watt transmitters (or more!) and broadcasting their message willy-nilly... such as the KKK, NAMBLA, the RIAA, Coca-cola, etc. In order to get a license to broadcast, broadcasters must show signifigant community need, they have to have a local point-of-presence for the public to come in to see them, they must maintain public records, they must broadcast community interest messages (ads for local businesses, PSAs, etc.)
These rules have been enforced a little bit loosely lately, but that's starting to step up - the FCCs enforcement budget was drastically increased this past year.
Stop and consider what would happen, though, if the FCC didn't exist - companies would start broadcasting their advertisements non-stop, and if a competitor tries to broadcast theirs, the first one simply brings up the power on his transmitter and jams the other one out. Pirates (who, of course would not be pirates if there was no FCC) wouldn't have a chance, as there would be so much radio being broadcast that there wouldn't be anywhere they could find to put in a low power transmitter (and before you think about a high power one, keep in mind how expensive they are). After a short time of this, people would stop listening to the radio, stop watching TV, etc. There would be no reason to do so, as there would be nothing of entertainment or educational value. Radio and television would then die out.
In essence, your question is very much the same as saying "why is carrying a gun around illegal? Who decided that any government could make laws telling me I can't carry a gun? Who gives them such power to enforce 'laws'?" The reason why is that it would be disruptive to society otherwise - that's why the FCC is there.
We may not like 'em, but they're much better than the alternative.
-T
Check out Motorola's Canopy system.