April 5, 2014 at 8:17 am #2339semoochieParticipant
Actually, you lie before the Lord today, but you lay before him yesterday, Of course, you could lay a bible on the table. 🙂April 5, 2014 at 6:29 pm #2340892RParticipant
Re Alfredo’s post: 121.5 is an Air Traffic Control emergency frequency. That’s why the concernApril 5, 2014 at 8:57 pm #2341Alfredo_TParticipant
Steve could also say, “I have lain before the Lord.” This is the past participle form; see http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/lay-versus-lie
Getting back to the 5110 SE Stark location, I am wondering, is this a building with leased offices, some of which happen to be Bustos and one for Riverside Broadcasting? Does Riverside have any control of KXPD’s programming from there (or even just the EAS equipment)? Or is this strictly a business office?April 7, 2014 at 4:32 pm #2342scowlParticipant
Regarding the question of how CB shops get busted… there are law-abiding people who visit these shops and report illegal products they find. Many of the people are hams who are looking for converted transmitters that also operate on their bands. They do not want CB operators discovering these “new” bands that allow them to talk all around the world.April 7, 2014 at 5:27 pm #2343Alfredo_TParticipant
To me, the issue of linear amplifiers seems a bit tricky. The reason for this is that solid state HF amplifier designs are nearly always broadband and can thus cover all the bands from 80 meters to 10 meters without retuning. The amplifier cannot discern a CB band signal from a 10 meter band signal.
I seem to recall reading that one way that linear amplifier manufacturers discourage CBers from using their products is by keeping the gain down so that 4 watts of input comes nowhere close to the recommended input drive level for the amplifier. However, how can a retail store know whether an amplifier it sells will be used by a licensed amateur operator or whether it will be used by a CBer? What if I were to sell an HF amplifier on ebay or Craigslist–could I be in trouble?April 8, 2014 at 4:49 am #2344shipwreckParticipant
As far as I know, it’s legal to sell or own such equipment, it’s the operator who runs the risk.April 9, 2014 at 1:52 am #2345boisebillParticipant
It is illegal to sell non-FCC certified devices:
III. applicable law and violations
4. Federal law requires that radio frequency devices be certified in
accordance with the FCC’s technical standards before they can be
marketed in the United States. Section 302(b) of the Act provides that
“[n]o person shall manufacture, import, sell, offer for sale, or ship
devices or home electronic equipment and systems, or use devices,
which fail to comply with regulations promulgated pursuant to this
section.” Section 2.803(a)(1) of the Commission’s implementing
regulations provides that “no person shall sell or lease, or offer for
sale or lease (including advertising for sale or lease), or import,
ship, or distribute for the purpose of selling or leasing or offering
for sale or lease, any radio frequency device unless: “n the case
of a device subject to certification, such device has been authorized
by the Commission in accordance with the Rules in this chapter and is
properly identified and labeled….” Section 2.803(g) of the Rules
provides in pertinent part that “radio frequency devices that could
not be authorized or legally operated under the current Rules…shall
not be operated, advertised, displayed, offered for sale or lease,
sold or leased, or otherwise marketed absent a license issued under
part 5 of this chapter or a special temporary authorization issued by
the Commission.” Section 2.803(e)(4) of the Rules defines “marketing”
as the “sale or lease, or offering for sale or lease, including
advertising for sale or lease, or importation, shipment or
distribution for the purpose of selling or leasing or offering for
sale or lease.”
April 15, 2014 at 6:38 pm #2346
Uptown Manhattan pirates busted, four transmitters confiscated.April 15, 2014 at 10:21 pm #2347msndrspdxParticipant
St. Nicholas Av. In upper Manhattan is a few blocks east of Columbia University.
Best, Mike 8)April 16, 2014 at 6:32 pm #2348
Broadcast ownership rules to remain in place, so far. No change in limits of stations are being considered to this point in the quadrennial review process. Some minor changes in TV duopoly rules and the possible elimination of tv-radio cross ownership limits.
The Commission also stated in as many words that if you want to get into broadcast ownership you can buy some loser AM in the boonies and build from there. Seriously, they said that.
They continue to claim that the current system fosters competition and provides a diversity of program options.
Really? That’s news to me.
Those of us that realize the oligarchical aspects of telecommunications law make it un-representative of the will and needs of the public at large and only fill the coffers of the industry titans that own not only the majority of licenses in broadcast but apparently the majority of commissioners shall continue to stew in our own juices.
That’s all folks.April 17, 2014 at 3:26 am #2349semoochieParticipant
In regard to “diversity of program options”, I suppose that if you really break it down, it’s true. Most music-based stations don’t have a direct competitor. Before 1996, they did and in some cases, several.June 26, 2014 at 6:29 pm #2350
Three more Portland area hotels/motels were cited for MVPD violation. (Multichannel video programming distributor http://tinyurl.com/ovr5k43 )June 26, 2014 at 9:48 pm #2351boisebillParticipant
Wonder who is setting these up?
Kinda browsed some of the Hotel-Motel professional association sites and could find nothing about MVPD issues in their advisories and “governmental affairs” discussions.
Looks like the FCC has found a new revenue stream.June 27, 2014 at 5:47 am #2352August 19, 2014 at 7:25 am #2353KevanGCParticipant
Well, something’s been happening here in San Antonio for three years and the FCC has yet to act.
The K272EK 102-3 translator does *not* retransmit what’s on it’s license. When I looked I noticed it’s supposed to rebroadcast 1540 KEDA but instead they have it transmitting KBRN 1500 (which is off 85% of the time I might add). KBRN is in Boerne, TX. That is too far away from the 102-3 transmitter site for 102-3 to transmit it legally, I believe. Yet if you get on Global Tuners or listen to the webstream they announce 1500 all the time, not 1540. KEDA is retransmitted on 87-7 FM, at least it’s supposed to be but 87-7 has had extremely HORRIBLE audio problems for a month at least now. Aircheck: http://sndup.net/fpx6 I haven’t heard anything quite like this…
This is the same broadcaster that has KROB in Corpus Christi, TX. I’ve only heard this, and am not sure if it’s true: “K-Rob transmits at 1000 watts all the time and has done so since 2002 when the current owner bought it!” The problem is, it’s licensed as a 500 watt daytime only station.
Somebody should start paying attention to the rules, I would suggest. Or is it the FCC down here who’s not been on top of things? I just don’t understand how this stuff has happened for so long, but I guess we’ll see what happens. 😉
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.