[Noisebridge-discuss] Radio: FCC rejection letter

[Norman Bradley]

J.C. Please wait for a week.

To protect myself and my Ham license I will be at the Tuesday meeting 
and resign as "Radio Officer". I didn't want the job in the first place 
and now I can leave it. In addition I will need to change our FCC 
records to reflect that. A single "station" is fine. Range about 200 
ft., maybe 500 feet. Multiple "meshed" stations may bring the FCC down 
around our heads.

After I resign if you want to put Noisebridge in danger of having 
$10,000 fines it will be on your head.

You are entitled to your own opinion.
You are NOT entitled to your own facts.

Norman

On 12/20/2013 4:15 PM, J.C. wrote:
> ...specifically the FCC Unlicensed Part 15 devices
>
> *Unlicensed operation* on the AM and FM radio broadcast bands is 
> permitted for some extremely low powered devices covered under Part 15 
> of the FCC's rules.  On FM frequencies, these devices are limited to 
> an effective service range of approximately 200 feet (61 meters).
>
> http://www.fcc.gov/guides/low-power-broadcast-radio-stations#PART15
>
> So what if you combined that with a "mesh" aspect, and you could 
> create pocket stations around the city
>
> Seems like it would make for a fun kit as well, building mini fm 
> transmitters & receivers.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 4:10 PM, J.C. <r33lmm at gmail.com 
> <mailto:r33lmm at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     So I see a couple of ways to hack this, all is not lost in the
>     broadcasting realm.
>
>
>
>     On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Al Sweigart <asweigart at gmail.com
>     <mailto:asweigart at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         There are drawers at the front desk station currently used to
>         hold office supplies. The membership binder is kept near there
>         also. Its probably the best place even though it isn't locked.
>
>         On Dec 20, 2013 8:57 AM, "Noisebridge Radio"
>         <noisebridgeradio at gmail.com
>         <mailto:noisebridgeradio at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             When I filed I was afraid that that the physical distance
>             might be a problem. I filed for channel 215 (90.9 MHz). In
>             the Bay Area there just isn't much / anything available.
>             The best candidate frequency 102.5 had 8 different
>             organizations file for it in San Francisco alone. In many
>             ways the FCC rules haven't kept up with technology. The
>             reason for the distance / adjacent channel rules have to
>             do with selectivity and signal rejection. Due to the
>             nature of FM radio if you have 2 transmitters on the same
>             frequency (generally) a radio will only pick up the most
>             powerful signal and you won't hear the weaker one at all.
>
>             It was an interesting experiment.
>
>             I believe that Hilaire is working on an internet radio
>             project so all is not lost.
>
>             PS. Is there a place to store paper records at
>             Noisebridge. I can keep them however as time goes by they
>             may get misplaced or forgotten and if anybody deals with
>             the FCC for any reason in the future they may be
>             necessary. It would better if they were stored up there.
>
>
>             On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Tom Lowenthal
>             <me at tomlowenthal.com <mailto:me at tomlowenthal.com>> wrote:
>
>                 Hello hammies (or whatever). The FCC thinks we're too
>                 close to other radio stations. Here's their letter.
>
>
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>                 Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>                 <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>                 https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>             Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>             <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>             https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>         Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>         <mailto:Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
>         https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     ThanX,
>     ;+)
>
>     https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Fort
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ThanX,
> ;+)
>
> https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Fort
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131220/537c4a0b/attachment-0003.html>