Total posts : 45366
Thank you for pointing out my error. Maybe I was overly influenced by how the FCC characterized this gentleman’s actions. Who knows, perhaps this matter will be litigated further. I will try to be more circumspect as I coment on this matter some more:
Part 15 does not address the legality of kits directly. It looks like the FCC accepts kits as home-built devices, and Part 15 allows each person make up to five such devices for personal use. The kit builder (or home-brewer) is responsible for the proper technical performance of the devices. I note that SSTRAN provides the service of installing a surface-mount IC for their customers for a small fee. This is not enough to disqualify the SSTRAN as a kit in the view of the FCC.
It may have been an error on the part of the the kit assembler to advertise on his web site how easy the final steps left to the customer are, and that no tools are required. The FCC seems to have characterized the kit assembler’s representations as a “sham.”
About 30 years ago, it was common to see classified advertisements in the backs of popular technical magazines offering certificates of ordination for a small fee. These certificates were from entities representing themselves as churches. This allowed the recipient of the holy orders to transfer his assets to his own church, and shield his income from taxation. The IRS ruled that such arrangements were transparent attempsts to avoid paying taxes, and many of the new clergymen got into trouble. I know of one particular case where a fairly large business was transferred to such a church, and the penalties and interest assessed by the IRS forced the pastor/businessman to sell out to another company.
I think that if someoneone is trying to do something like the kit assembler did, even before seeing a lawyer, one should consider for himself if the arrangement appears to be reasonable. To put it another way, does the scheme pass the “smell test?”