Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Vendor Could Pay $34.9M FCC Fine In Signal-Jammer Sting
alphadogg writes A Chinese electronics vendor accused of selling signal jammers to U.S. consumers could end up leading the market in one dubious measure: the largest fine ever imposed by the Federal Communications Commission. The agency wants to fine CTS Technology $34,912,500 for allegedly marketing 285 models of jammers over more than two years. CTS boldly—and falsely—claimed that some of its jammers were approved by the FCC, according to the agency's enforcement action released Thursday. Conveniently, CTS' product detail pages also include a button to "report suspicious activity." The proposed fine, which would be bigger than any the FCC has levied for anti-competitive behavior, or a wardrobe malfunction, comes from adding up the maximum fines for each model of jammer the company allegedly sold in the U.S. The agency also ordered CTS, based in Shenzhen, China, to stop marketing illegal jammers to U.S. consumers and identify the buyer of each jammer it sold in the U.S.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
It's even easier than that - a spark gap radio transmitter will jam most things.
But you should expect to get your ass handed to you for using them regardless of how you got one. They're an unlicensed radio transmitter transmitting on licensed spectrum. If you piss off the FCC enough to come find you, they won't fuck around - I'd post a citation, but funnily enough there's one at the top of the article.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Unless the company has assets and/or a legal presence in America, they will laugh and give the FCC the middle finger.
In that case they will no longer be able to sell anything in America. The US can also prohibit any bank doing business in the USA from doing business with them. That means pretty much every multinational bank in the world, which will prevent CTS Technology from engaging in any business outside of China. I doubt if there is a big domestic Chinese market for jammers.
I'll bet it simple and cheap to form a new company, though.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
You seriously equate jammers with the "right not to be killed by some idiot on the road who decides that his right to text supersedes the fact that he's supposed to operate his vehicle in a safe manner"? What, are you jamming from your mobile vehicle? Great, so when you're passing a wreck, your jammer floods out the call they're currently making to 911, requiring a redial, costing precious seconds which could quite literally cost that person their life. All in your quest to stamp out texting and driving. News flash - all it takes is a single packet to make it through for a text to send.
FC Closer
They were advertising and selling openly. I fail to see how any kind of "sting" operation was required to trick them into selling the illegal hardware, or to catch them doing it.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
To see others the FCC has gone after, check out their website. Some of them are really interest; such as:
$49K for this guy: http://www.fcc.gov/document/48k-penalty-proposed-against-individual-cell-jammer-investigation-0
http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2014/FCC-14-26A1.html Thiscompany got dinged 29K for operating a cell phone jammer in their warehouse.
What size of an area should you have the right to block all signals? Why should you not have the right to block all signals in a larger area?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Go for it. Don't complain when you get fined by the FCC.
What size of an area should you have the right to block all signals? Why should you not have the right to block all signals in a larger area?
One example:
A movie theatre or restaurant should have the right to block all cell phone signals on their premise with proper testing
to make sure it stays within it's property lines and with proper signs stating that they do so.
Currently this is illegal so they sometimes go out of their way to passively block it at a much greater expense or
in some cases even require you to "check" your phone.
Why shouldn't I be allowed to block cell phone signals inside my home?
What if I want to test my home security system that relies on cell towers?
I could think of plenty of other "fair use" reasons that buying and using a cell jammer should be legal.
All it takes is a single jammed packet for the texter to look down at their phone again and re-send the message that failed to send.
They now took their eyes off the road a second time, because someone jammed their text message.
I heard that a someone bought a signal jammer. I tried calling this guy at his Meth Factory, but I couldn't get through.
One example:
A movie theatre or restaurant should have the right to block all cell phone signals on their premise
Or... they could politely ask anyone using a cell phone to leave, pointing to the signs they have prominently posted.
Sure, some patrons will be upset, but not as upset as the parent who misses a call from the baby sitter telling them to get to the hospital right away.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
A movie theatre or restaurant should have the right to block all cell phone signals on their premise with proper testing to make sure it stays within it's property lines and with proper signs stating that they do so.
Why? What makes you think that a free-for-all radio frequency spectrum is in anyone's best interest?
I'm guessing from your selfish attitude that you've never been an emergency services volunteer who donates a large amount of his free time to training how to save the lives of other people and might want to be able to go to a movie or a restaurant every so often and not be unable to get the notification that someone needs help. That's just one kind of person who needs to have cell service while in a movie theater or restaurant.
I could think of plenty of other "fair use" reasons that buying and using a cell jammer should be legal.
I doubt it. You can think of reasons why you think you are important enough that nobody should ever interfere with your personal pleasure, but that attitude ignores the fact that other people have the same rights. You cannot produce one argument that shows that my cell phone in my pocket at a restaurant interferes with you in any way, shape or form, yet you'd happily jam it so I can't get messages or calls just because you want to.
I think the best use of a jammer would have been to block the call to your Mom's ob/gyn when she went into a difficult labor with you. Why don't you go upstairs and ask her?
Someone has been out in the sun too long.
think harder.
it MAY be easy for them to find the jammer. if the person who plants one has any brains, it will be hard to impossible to find who owns it.
with some truly creative use of coax and multiple antennae, it is also possible to make it impossible to even find the source of the signal with triangulation
And the law should be used to enforce against people who operate a device. Not because the device exists.
It is much more efficient to enforce laws against illegal devices on the limited number of manufacturers and not on the billions of potential users.
I.e., if a device cannot legally be used, then stop before it is sold when you can get thousands of them at one time, instead of doing it one by one after tracking down the users.
Suppose the manufacturer in this case was a Chinese company making a cheap radio that emitted signals that interfered with the radio stations you wanted to listen to? Would you rather the FCC stop the manufacturer from making and selling such a piece of interfering garbage, or would it be better for you to have to call the FCC to have someone come out to track down the source and deal with it then? And then you have to call them again in a week because another neighbor bought the same piece of crap radio. And then again a week later...
Yes, I think you're right. Let the market be flooded with crap that creates interference for you all day, every day, and you can deal with tracking it down one by one by one ...
Owning one should not be illegal. If the FCC wants to regulate usage, that's fine, unless you actually USE it, it's not transmitting anything, and thus shouldn't be banned.
The same principle goes for amateur Radio equipment (HAM). I own several handheld transceivers, capable of transmitting in VHF/UHF even though I don't have a my HAM license yet (plan on it here one day when I have some free time). The equipment is not illegal for me to purchase or own just because I don't have a valid license. Only transmitting becomes illegal without a license. For instance, I can fire up my VHF/UHF and tune in an receive signals and listen to other 'Elmers' rag-chew all day long without a license. It isn't until the moment I "Press that PTT button" and 'key up' that it becomes illegal without a license.
The FCC has powers to regulate EMF and radio transmissions and by extension, regulate people and electronics that ARE transmitting radio freqs...however, they don't have authority over the actual electronics (or people) that have not transmitted anything over radio freqs.
Ham radio equipment has valid and legal uses. You can get a license for ham radio. You can't get a license for a jammer. There is no scenario in which it can be used, legally.
It makes no sense to claim companies should be able to market and sell a device, which has NO POSSIBLE legal use. If nothing else, devices that can emit RF have to be approved by the FCC before they can be sold, and there is their authority to ban jammers, just by another name.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I saw the "they can find the jammer but not me" angle pretty easily, but not the next thing you said. Just curious, how might you make it truly impossible to find the source of the signal, with multiple antennae? Do you think it would still be impossible if the searchers considered the possibility of multiple antennae? If that's an impossible problem to solve, the reason isn't obvious to me, I wonder if you could explain why?
I'm sorry, you seem to be forgetting why the guy in Florida was fined. It wasn't solely the cell phone communications, it was more because he was jamming the 800MHz Public Safety band on either side of the 850MHz GSM allocations, because it's not really possible to make a "neat magical jammer" that only gets the cell bands. it's going to spill onto adjacent public safety and land mobile allocations.