Brian, Thanks for contributing the quote from title 47, part 15. As to your Apple ][ story - you are mostly right. I worked at Apple when this was going on. The RF modulator was actually designed at Apple by Rod Holt - our analog guru. At the time (76-80), the FCC wasn't really busting our but for the Apple ][ radiating as an unintentional radiator. The modulator was of course an (HF) RF oscillator, and was not a particularly tight design. It's true that Marty Spergel manufactured the devices, but they never had Apple's name on them, and the company kept it's working relationship with Marty (M&R Enterprises) at a safe distance. Marty never certified the thing (that's the kind of guy he was - risks never bothered him), didn't seem to care, and sold them to the market (with Apple's unofficial help) by the boatloads - until TV's as a display device went away when low cost RGB monitors hit the scene... But - Marty was in it for Marty more than he was in it for Apple. Riding on another business's coat tails was his way. I know - I was once one of his most serious competitors after I left Apple (no - I didn't sell RF mod's , but that's another story). I just thought I'd share a little history. Ciao, Chuck Mauro > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Schousek [SMTP:schousek@GEOCITIES.COM] > Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 6:46 AM > To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU > Subject: Re: Any PIC-based Product NOT require FCC Approval? > > Mark: > > I would refer you to title 47,part 15 of the code of federal > regulations. > 15.103 lists exempted devices and 15.103h shows that 'digital devices > in > which both the highest frequency generated and the highest frequency > used > are both less than 1.705 MHz and which do not operate from the AC > power > lines or contain provisions for operation while connected to the power > lines' are exempt. My from the hip reaction to your blinker would be > that if > you used a low frequency external RC to generate timing (so that no > harmonics approaching 1.705 were existant for all practical purposes) > you > would have no problem whatsoever. Note that a digital device is by > definition an unintentional radiator so you can't cheat and have a > battery > powered 1 MHz transmitter under this exemption. Of course under this > exemption you are required to shut the device down if it is found to > cause > interference. I would assume the security system operates or at least > can > operate off of AC so you start to have to pay more attention. > > To wander a bit, this reminds me of a story I heard about the early > pple ][ days. The RF modulator which allowed the machine to be hooked > up to > an ordinary TV of course violated some of the intents and letters of > the FCC > regulations which allowed for relatively easy certification of the > computer > itself. If Apple sold the RF modulator, it would cause the entire > system to > fall under the stricter rules. So instead, they inserted some verbage > in the > documentation to the effect of: 'hey, sorry we can't help you with the > RF > modulator, but we have heard of this guy that makes one and you might > want > to call him.' He had originally, as I understand it, agreed to build > and > sell these devices just to help his friends along with their new > business > but as history unfolded, he ended up making quite a pretty little > penny with > this product. > > Brian > > Disclaimer: for all legal intents and purposes, a squirrel broke into > my > office and typed this note. Neither me nor my employer bear any > responsibility. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Winters > To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU > Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 1:35 AM > Subject: Any PIC-based Product NOT require FCC Approval? > > > >Hello All, > > > >My apologies for the "newbie" question -- I was hoping someone on > this list > >might know or could point me to information on how to find out if a > product > >requires FCC approval before selling it commercially. > > >