Home › Forums › temp › New SSTRAN AMT5000 High Efficiency Transmitter Preview › Reading Law
Total posts : 45366
It is interesting to compare technical language with legal language.
Technical language is based on total precision, being very precise in stating even the smallest pertinent facts, down to the size of washers and the color of a wire.
Legal language is something else. It is “codified,” put in code familiar mostly to attorneys with four years of law school. With law we hear people say, “If it isn’t specifically banned then it’s o.k.” But a lawyer might not agree; or a court might overrule the lawyer.
RFB is right in cautioning against that final acid test of getting a NOUO, which, to be fair, is contestable, if we have $24k to take it to court with the burden of proof being ours.
And with that dark shadow of violation always in the air, we need also to worry if we are entirely compliant. The installation that meets the closest micro-meter measurement of compliance could be hit with a NOUO.
Using the airwaves is dangerous.
Driving on roadways is dangerous.
Deep sea diving is dangerous.
But holding these discussions, back and forth, is our civilized way of taking seriously the Part 15 opportunity. Please keep agreeing and disagreeing while we sort it all out.