... No agent of the FCC. No local police officer. No IRS agent, etc can POSSIBLY KNOW every single nuance of every single law on the books for their agency. It is NOT POSSIBLE. The human brain can simply not hold that much knowledge. These rule books are thousands of pages long. With VERY small print. And with a LOT of technical data.
You simply cannot take the word of one of these people as law. They may be tasked with enforcing the law, but they are not capable of knowing them all. That is why courts, appeals processes, and lawyers exist. That's why if you get a NOUO, or a traffic ticket, or an FAA rule violation, or a tax audit, you have the right to a hearing, and an appeal if necessary.
If you want ot know the ACTUAL law, you look in the FCC rulebook and read it. Or the traffic law book, or the FAA rule book, or whoever. The Part 15 rules are pretty clearly spelled out. The interpretation of these rules (or any rules or laws) often have some room for interpretation but experience has shown me that the interpretation is almost ALWAYS done by the offender, not the enforcer. People wish and/or believe that their interpretation is right, and when they get caught they believe the agent is interpreting it wrong. I really see no real gray areas in the Part 15 rules. It's always seemed pretty clear cut to me. The fact that an agent might interpret a rule differently is up to them. For example, it's said some have allowed long ground leads. This is clearly a violation as far as I can read, but they interpret it to not be. How about if YOU interpret it to be OK, but an agent doesn't? Do you tell him he's got it wrong and you are actually illegal? No, you shut up and are happy you got away with something.
If we suddenly started posting the positions of all enforcing agents from every agency as actual law the country would be in a hell of a mess.
As for releasing names, I've been in the media for 43 years. Any reliable source should expect their name to be included with their statements. "Agent John Doe of the St. Paul Minnesota FCC field office stated today that the Part 15 rule......" As a public employee this is free information, unless he's not officially allowed to speak, then it's more like "An agent of the FCC who asked not to be named because he was not officially authorized to speak on the matter...." would be used. Anytime someone doesn't want their identity given in a quote in a news story immediately brings doubt to their reliability.
My son got pulled over repeatedly a few years abo driving a 1949 Chevy that had blue dot tail lights. (If you're a car buff you know what these are). They are illegal in Minnesota. UNLESS you're driving a car licensed as, or eligible to be licensed, as a collector car. A 1949 Chevrolet certainly is a collector car. He beat the tickets no problem by simply quoting the law. But shouldn't a cop know EVERY law? I got pulled over about 20 years ago for having a police receiving radio in my car. It was a 2 meter ham rig that also received the police bands. I planned ahead and had the law in my glove box. It's against the law to have a police receiiving radio in your car, UNLESS you are a licensed ham radio operator. I was, had the law and my license with me. Beat the ticket. Shouldn't the cop know EVERY law?
These are just a couple examples. The same would apply to ANY agent of ANY agency tasked with enforcing rules or laws.
And for the last time there is no "Part 15 Department" at the FCC. There may be a group of agents whose area of enforcement includes Part 15, but there is NO department for Part 15 exclusively.
If you were to call your local FCC office and inquire about all this you would have to ask to speak to maybe a dozen agents, and find that each would have a different answer or state that they would have to look it up and get back to you. An agent does not make the rule.
Firther any CHANGE to the laws do NOT take effect until they are published in the FEderal Register, and THEN published in the official rules. they just don't say one day "hey, lets change this" and it changes. If there were any Part 15 rule changes we'd all know about it through official channels long before the rules took effect.
TIB
I agree with your last statement 100% timinbovy!
Well said!
Bruce.
Rich detects: "Thanks for posting this admission, but might doing so lead to questions/distrust about your past and future statements?"
I should have thought of that.
Okay here is the real deal.
A Facebook page post on the "Part 15 AM & FM Radio" page by Michelle Bradley from REC posted a link from REC
The Title is:
An FCC field agent told me that the operation of a micro-powered AM or FM transmitter under Part 15 requires an experimental license. Is that true?
More reading at the REC link below:
http://faq.recnet.net/index.php?action=artikel&cat=2&id=116&artlang=en
She also posted this statement on the Facebook page:
Michelle Bradley The rules never "changed".. it's confusion within the rules. Most people these days equate Part 15 with microbroadcasters. Part 15 covers everything from intentional radiators (items that radio transmission is their function) to unintentional radiators like light fixtures, etc. Someone who is truly doing an enforcement action will need to be able to cite the rules. Also, the FCC normally works on complaints so they should know what they are getting themselves into.
End of quote.
This was posted to Thelegacy's Facebook post in Part 15 AM & FM Radio post entitled:
"Check this out....could NO unlicensed broadcasting(even part 15) be allowed in the USA?"
Bruce.