Yeah, its embarrassing - especially with Arena bowl XX going on this weekend. Real football clips would get better rankings if the algorithms were correct.
It's called trademark. Congress passed laws protecting registered trademarks...
My understanding was that this is a patent issue, not a trademark issue. If the Bluetooth protocol is patented technology, then isn't it true that you can't market products that use it without permission from the patent holders?
I have always thought that this is what the SIG was created to do.
Re:But is it available in Rural America?
on
The Other VoIP
·
· Score: 1
I'd love VOIP and this service IF it was available here in SW VA.
I hope I'm wrong though. I do have DSL, so maybe I'm wrong.
I live in rural america, have DSL, and use VOIP on my DSL service. If you have DSL then by default isn't VIOP available? I don't understand this statement. By the way, I use packet 8.
When the conditions in China improve, then we can start this conversation again.
But the conditions in China are improving - primarily because we are sending money there in exchage for goods and services. Economic conditions do not improve in a country that is not allowed to participate in the world economy.
Nobody ever complains about marketing our products overseas. I guess we just don't want the competition that comes with it. Maybe we really are as stuck up as others around the world say we are.
Using Part 15 spectrum for commercially related activities is risky at best
I agree with you completely when it comes to providing a wireless service. I would never purchase an Internet service from a WISP, for example, that hogs the entire spectrum.
For telemetry purposes, however, unlicensed spectrum works quite well. I have used it since the 80s with little problems. The problems that have existed have been resolved easily. After all, unlicensed spectrum is meant to be shared and those that can share easily (low duty cycles, short distances) will coexist easily.
By the way, the FCC does care. I have seen many situations where the FCC has stepped in. If someone is causing interference illegally and the FCC is contacted, they will be reprimanded. I have seen this many times.
I have received interference in multiple locations around the country. I would prefer not to go into further detail, but my systems are used for commercial purposes. The illegal systems have never been Wi-Fi, but have sometimes been wireless Internet systems.
Having an output power above the legal limits makes it an uneven playing field. Additionally, it makes it so that interference can be caused at larger distances away than at legal levels. In many occasions, interference would have been avoided if the interfering party were following the rules.
To be honest, interference tends to be more duty cycle related than power related, but the high output power spreads the effect over longer distances. Unfortunately, the FCC does not regulate duty cycle in a shared band, even though they probably should.
Regarding your comments on rural areas, keep in mind that many uses of unlicensed spectrum are because of rural areas. Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), for example, often use unlicensed spectrum in rural areas where other low cost, fast Internet solutions do not exist. Some telemetry services are also more useful in rural areas where information can be collected without having to walk long distances or possibly travel at all.
As far as complying with the new rules, it looks like you have some flexibility here. If you have the output power of the device (either through the FCC test report on the FCC web site or the users manual), then you may be able to get a replacement antenna that keeps the device in compliance and gives you better range... maybe.
Why would the FCC worry about the gain on these antennas? The transmitter can only pump out so much juice, and as far as I know the gain of the antenna can't boost the TX power (only direct it), and only the amount to power that is RX'ed is boosted. Someone please explain why High Gain antennas are/were evil to the FCC?
You just answered your own question. Interference is caused at the receiver of another unlicensed device that is not part of your system. By increasing the gain in any direction, you increase the interference potential in that direction. Unlicensed bands are meant to be shared.
I have not sued anyone, but I have on multiple occasions requested that someone remove illegal amplifiers and antennas from their system. Often, they are unaware of the rules. Usually, sending them a copy of the 15.247 rules is enough. Sometimes, a short form letter from my lawyer is necessary. It has never gone beyond that, but the next step would be to contact the FCC directly.
A quick search shows that in America you have to have an antenna gain over 14 dB before you have to start cutting power.
What about this rule:
15.247(b)(4)
Except as shown in paragraphs (b)(3)(i), (ii) and (iii) of this section, if transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 6 dBi are used the peak output power from the intentional radiator shall be reduced below the stated values in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate, by the amount in dB that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi.
The rule changes were made to 47CFR15.204(c), which previously stated:
15.204 External radio frequency power amplifiers and antenna modifications (c) Only the antenna with which an intentional radiator is authorized may be used with the intentional radiator.
Now, it says:
15.204 External radio frequency power amplifiers and antenna modifications (c) An intentional radiator may be operated only with the antenna with which it is authorized. If an antenna is marketed with the intentional radiator, it shall be of a type which is authorized with the intentional radiator. An intentional radiator may be authorized with multiple antenna types.
(1) The antenna type, as used in this paragraph, refers to antennas that have similar in-band and out-of-band radiation patterns.
(2) Compliance testing shall be performed using the highest gain antenna for each type of antenna to be certified with the intentional radiator. During this testing, the intentional radiator shall be operated at its maximum available output power level.
(3) Manufacturers shall supply a list of acceptable antenna types with the application for equipment authorization of the intentional radiator.
(4) Any antenna that is of the same type and of equal or less directional gain as an antenna that is authorized with the intentional radiator may be marketed with, and used with, that intentional radiator. No retesting of this system configuration is required. The marketing or use of a system configuration that employs an antenna of a different type, or that operates at a higher gain, than the antenna authorized with the intentional radiator is not permitted unless the procedures specified in Section 2.1043 of this chapter are followed.
The one thing that.tgz is missing is dependencies. It would be nice to see a list of dependencies when I install a package so I don't have to reverse engineer them.
Don't get me wrong - I like the simplicity and do NOT want a package management system that automatically loads dependencies or doesn't let me install something that it thinks requires files that are not installed.
I just would like to know what else I should install or what the consequences of removing a package are before I do it.
Isn't a patent by definition open source? Maybe the patent holder has full rights to revenues, but in exchange for this right the patent holder must teach the public. What you do on your own lab bench or for your own personal use with this information is beyond the control of the patent holder. If you make money off of the patented technology, then that is a different story.
And yes, it has been shown that women are more likely to get back in their car during fueling.
Yes, but this is not the whole story. It has also been shown that women are more susceptible to ESD in general. Some say that it is the shoes that they wear, others claim body composition.
However, the level of spark that can cause an ignition of gasoline is very close to the theoretical maximum of 25kV. The temperature would have to be just right (like -40) and the humidity would have to be very low. Also, the approach angle would be very difficult to make, given that the discharge would more likely happen to the automobile chassis at the time of pump insertion and prior to the introduction of large quantities of gasoline.
Tivo is painfully expensive for the actual service.
Tivo is not a service, it is a design flaw. Sure, it is a service when trying to use it with analog cable or rabbit ears, but not with a provider that has an interactive guide.
The worst extreme of this is when DirecTV crawled into bed with Tivo. They still charge a "service" fee for a guide even though DirecTV already provides one.
Dish Network provides this "service" for free because it is not a service. I switched to Dish Network as soon as I heard about DirecTV partnering with Tivo. I really liked DirecTV, but I had to switch on principle.
Sure, I lost some things, but at least I was not supporting poor engineering practice at the expense of non-technical consumers.
Actually, the limits are the ones that I sent in the previous post.
Example:
You can have a CW signal at 25 MHz coupled on the power line as long as it is no stronger than 60dBuV. There is no "duty cylcle limit", but there is a relaxation when using a quasi-peak detector (or average detector with a 50dBuV limit).
Hey dbc,
Any thoughts on my previous post? I still am trying to find out what duty cycle limits we are talking about here. Knowing this could help me determine worst case powerline emissions levels.
I would like to have my company's products tested for conducted RF suceptibility testing before the comments deadline approaches on the BPL NPRM. This would allow me to determine if I need to submit comments (on my company's behalf, not my own) to the NPRM.
However, I have no clue what these levels might be with this type of equipment because, at the moment, it is illegal. Any information would be helpful.
What duty cycling are you referring to? From my understanding, the FCC powerline conducted limits are:
emission (MHz)... Quasi-peak... Average
0.15-0.5.......... 66 to 56*........ 56 to 46*
0.5-5................... 56.................. 46
5-30.................... 60.................. 50
* Decreases with the logarithm of the frequency.
I guess there is some duty cycle relaxation with the averaging or QP measurements, but even a real peak measurement below these limits passes. What rule specifically are you talking about?
Slashdot Mirror
warm cookies in just 2 short hours
Yeah, its embarrassing - especially with Arena bowl XX going on this weekend. Real football clips would get better rankings if the algorithms were correct.
Someone should send him this link.
My understanding was that this is a patent issue, not a trademark issue. If the Bluetooth protocol is patented technology, then isn't it true that you can't market products that use it without permission from the patent holders?
I have always thought that this is what the SIG was created to do.
$100m! That's like 10 cents!!!!
use 05-235 as the proceeding number and The FCC will actively ignore your comments after the comment deadline.
You can also see existing comments
Type 05-235 under proceedings and search.
I'd love VOIP and this service IF it was available here in SW VA.
I hope I'm wrong though. I do have DSL, so maybe I'm wrong.
I live in rural america, have DSL, and use VOIP on my DSL service. If you have DSL then by default isn't VIOP available? I don't understand this statement. By the way, I use packet 8.
But the conditions in China are improving - primarily because we are sending money there in exchage for goods and services. Economic conditions do not improve in a country that is not allowed to participate in the world economy.
Nobody ever complains about marketing our products overseas. I guess we just don't want the competition that comes with it. Maybe we really are as stuck up as others around the world say we are.
I agree with you completely when it comes to providing a wireless service. I would never purchase an Internet service from a WISP, for example, that hogs the entire spectrum.
For telemetry purposes, however, unlicensed spectrum works quite well. I have used it since the 80s with little problems. The problems that have existed have been resolved easily. After all, unlicensed spectrum is meant to be shared and those that can share easily (low duty cycles, short distances) will coexist easily.
By the way, the FCC does care. I have seen many situations where the FCC has stepped in. If someone is causing interference illegally and the FCC is contacted, they will be reprimanded. I have seen this many times.
I think you misread my reply. You may want to read it again.
Having an output power above the legal limits makes it an uneven playing field. Additionally, it makes it so that interference can be caused at larger distances away than at legal levels. In many occasions, interference would have been avoided if the interfering party were following the rules.
To be honest, interference tends to be more duty cycle related than power related, but the high output power spreads the effect over longer distances. Unfortunately, the FCC does not regulate duty cycle in a shared band, even though they probably should.
Regarding your comments on rural areas, keep in mind that many uses of unlicensed spectrum are because of rural areas. Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), for example, often use unlicensed spectrum in rural areas where other low cost, fast Internet solutions do not exist. Some telemetry services are also more useful in rural areas where information can be collected without having to walk long distances or possibly travel at all.
As far as complying with the new rules, it looks like you have some flexibility here. If you have the output power of the device (either through the FCC test report on the FCC web site or the users manual), then you may be able to get a replacement antenna that keeps the device in compliance and gives you better range ... maybe.
You just answered your own question. Interference is caused at the receiver of another unlicensed device that is not part of your system. By increasing the gain in any direction, you increase the interference potential in that direction. Unlicensed bands are meant to be shared.
I have not sued anyone, but I have on multiple occasions requested that someone remove illegal amplifiers and antennas from their system. Often, they are unaware of the rules. Usually, sending them a copy of the 15.247 rules is enough. Sometimes, a short form letter from my lawyer is necessary. It has never gone beyond that, but the next step would be to contact the FCC directly.
What about this rule:
15.247(b)(4) Except as shown in paragraphs (b)(3)(i), (ii) and (iii) of this section, if transmitting antennas of directional gain greater than 6 dBi are used the peak output power from the intentional radiator shall be reduced below the stated values in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate, by the amount in dB that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi.
15.204 External radio frequency power amplifiers and antenna modifications (c) Only the antenna with which an intentional radiator is authorized may be used with the intentional radiator.
Now, it says:
15.204 External radio frequency power amplifiers and antenna modifications (c) An intentional radiator may be operated only with the antenna with which it is authorized. If an antenna is marketed with the intentional radiator, it shall be of a type which is authorized with the intentional radiator. An intentional radiator may be authorized with multiple antenna types.
(1) The antenna type, as used in this paragraph, refers to antennas that have similar in-band and out-of-band radiation patterns.
(2) Compliance testing shall be performed using the highest gain antenna for each type of antenna to be certified with the intentional radiator. During this testing, the intentional radiator shall be operated at its maximum available output power level.
(3) Manufacturers shall supply a list of acceptable antenna types with the application for equipment authorization of the intentional radiator.
(4) Any antenna that is of the same type and of equal or less directional gain as an antenna that is authorized with the intentional radiator may be marketed with, and used with, that intentional radiator. No retesting of this system configuration is required. The marketing or use of a system configuration that employs an antenna of a different type, or that operates at a higher gain, than the antenna authorized with the intentional radiator is not permitted unless the procedures specified in Section 2.1043 of this chapter are followed.
The one thing that .tgz is missing is dependencies. It would be nice to see a list of dependencies when I install a package so I don't have to reverse engineer them.
Don't get me wrong - I like the simplicity and do NOT want a package management system that automatically loads dependencies or doesn't let me install something that it thinks requires files that are not installed.
I just would like to know what else I should install or what the consequences of removing a package are before I do it.
Isn't a patent by definition open source? Maybe the patent holder has full rights to revenues, but in exchange for this right the patent holder must teach the public. What you do on your own lab bench or for your own personal use with this information is beyond the control of the patent holder. If you make money off of the patented technology, then that is a different story.
Yes, but this is not the whole story. It has also been shown that women are more susceptible to ESD in general. Some say that it is the shoes that they wear, others claim body composition.
However, the level of spark that can cause an ignition of gasoline is very close to the theoretical maximum of 25kV. The temperature would have to be just right (like -40) and the humidity would have to be very low. Also, the approach angle would be very difficult to make, given that the discharge would more likely happen to the automobile chassis at the time of pump insertion and prior to the introduction of large quantities of gasoline.
No, it's still dying. I am still running FreeBSD at home because I have not found the time yet to switch back to Linux.
Tivo is not a service, it is a design flaw. Sure, it is a service when trying to use it with analog cable or rabbit ears, but not with a provider that has an interactive guide.
The worst extreme of this is when DirecTV crawled into bed with Tivo. They still charge a "service" fee for a guide even though DirecTV already provides one.
Dish Network provides this "service" for free because it is not a service. I switched to Dish Network as soon as I heard about DirecTV partnering with Tivo. I really liked DirecTV, but I had to switch on principle.
Sure, I lost some things, but at least I was not supporting poor engineering practice at the expense of non-technical consumers.
Actually, the limits are the ones that I sent in the previous post.
Example:
You can have a CW signal at 25 MHz coupled on the power line as long as it is no stronger than 60dBuV. There is no "duty cylcle limit", but there is a relaxation when using a quasi-peak detector (or average detector with a 50dBuV limit).
Hey dbc, Any thoughts on my previous post? I still am trying to find out what duty cycle limits we are talking about here. Knowing this could help me determine worst case powerline emissions levels. I would like to have my company's products tested for conducted RF suceptibility testing before the comments deadline approaches on the BPL NPRM. This would allow me to determine if I need to submit comments (on my company's behalf, not my own) to the NPRM. However, I have no clue what these levels might be with this type of equipment because, at the moment, it is illegal. Any information would be helpful.
emission (MHz) ... Quasi-peak ... Average .......... 66 to 56* ........ 56 to 46* ................... 56 .................. 46 .................... 60 .................. 50
0.15-0.5
0.5-5
5-30
* Decreases with the logarithm of the frequency.
I guess there is some duty cycle relaxation with the averaging or QP measurements, but even a real peak measurement below these limits passes. What rule specifically are you talking about?
Thanks for following up.
Sorry for the repeat - just sending a more "on the record" reply so that I am notified of a response.