[reversethread]

In reality, Chinese manufactures will just ignore FCC licensing requirements. A good amount of cheap Chinese electronics on Amazon are already unlicensed, so I doubt any new changes will affect them. Online marketplaces like Amazon really need to crack down on products and make sure they are properly licensed.

[jauer]

and that's fine in the scheme of things. Random one-off imports by researchers or hobbyists via AliExpress? NBD.

Deployments at-scale where vendor support engineers could theoretically use cellular gear for passive collection? Major concern.

Hytera being used for commercial 2-way radio? Similar concerns on the repeater side, not to mention questions about encryption quality if they are used by governments.

You have to name the vendor for commercial 2-way radio licenses, for USDA RUS funding, etc. Lying on those forms brings far worse penalties than what a random individual buying a Hytera DMR for ham use off Amazon would face.

Hikvision is the odd name here. AFAIK they do not make cellular handsets or base stations and were already prohibited from being used on government contracts.

[noasaservice]

Regarding Hikvision: I have a wide assortment of radio gear, and found cameras in our trailer park running on channel 12 and 13 unencrypted Hikvision ip cams.

[markles]

Maybe someone should crack down on Amazon for allowing these sales to continue seemingly unabated.

[theGnuMe]

It’ll happen.

[phpisthebest]

I would rather Amazon focus on elimination of Counterfeits and Fraud, not enforcement of FCC protectionism

[onlyrealcuzzo]

I'd rather live in a society where businesses follow the law - and if the laws don't make sense - we change them.

[phpisthebest]

So you reject the idea of civil disobedience, and in reality reject the idea of case law and the entire legal system as most laws are written and challenged based on violations of the law.

Laws that everyone follows, 100% of the time NEVER get changed. For example Marijuana is only becoming legalized because of MASSIVE violations of the law and the public rejecting the idea that society should be punishing people for a plant, nor that tax payers should pay the costs to lock someone in a cage because they had a plant that was not approved by the government.

Further laws and regulations are only fleshed out, solidified, or invalidated via violations of the law. Rarely would have person even have standing to challenge a law unless they first violated... This is why you often see the government drop charges if they think the person will fight a law or regulation on constitutional grounds because they would rather take the single loss, then have their regulation ruled unconstitutional

[ip26]

Civil disobedience is not about ignoring the law because it’s inconvenient and hoping you get away with it. It’s about breaking the law publicly and accepting the punishment to show the injustice of the law.

[catlifeonmars]

That latter part is the one that breaks down in practice.

[FpUser]

The only government I would vote for is the one where politicians above some level are directly responsible for the living standard of their population except that 1% part and corps. This of course does not exist. If it did stupid laws or twisting of the normal ones would not be tolerated.

[toss1]

It IS a fraud and a counterfeit to illegally sell a device without a proper FCC license. They are either selling the device with a license ID for a different device (Counterfeit) or selling it without any license (Fraud).

Either way, it certainly has not gone through the required tests for not producing unacceptable levels of interference, and so could at the very least create problems in your environment and other devices.

[phpisthebest]

If would only be "fraud and a counterfeit" if they were to affix an FCC label on the device with out having it approved by the FCC.

However if they are simply selling a device that is not approved and registered with the FCC, they are violating FCC regulations but it is not "fraud and a counterfeit"

>so could at the very least create problems in your environment and other devices.

First that assumes facts not in evidence, there is nothing proving FCC provides any actual value to society in the realm of testing. Other standards bodies or even an international approval outside of the FCC can more than fill that void. Look at electrical safety, there is no governmental body that approves devices for electrical safety that is 2(?) private organizations the most famous being UL, but there are others

Second outside of regulatory requirements one would have to assume a consumer even cares if a device is "FCC Approved" I suspect most do not care at all.

[toss1]

>>If would only be "fraud and a counterfeit" if they were to affix an FCC label on the device with out having it approved by the FCC.

While I'm sure you meant "It" vs "If", it was a typo for me to write only "and" vs the intended "and/or".

I can also point out from having dealt with the FCC that it is a very common practice to do what you said and affix a label for a different approved device to a non-approved device.

As far as the FCC's value, it has been a while and may have changed, but IIRC it is up to the device manufacturer to get tests run in an approved RF lab and provide the results to the FCC (so it works/worked a lot like you are suggesting); AFAIK they do selected tests, not all tests.

And yes the FCC DOES provide significant value here. While no one cares about the "FCC Approved" label while buying, without the process there would be a huge amount of interference and most wireless stuff wouldn't work at all. There are thousands of ways to unintentionally fork-up a radio design and thousands more to fork-up a circuit design so it unintentionally emits and receives interference.

Only by being required to check and comply with emissions limits is the RF space even half-way usable — and we're talking about not only your wireless earbuds or car radio, but GPS and aircraft navigation. Even aircraft navigation systems are an issue today because of old-generation equipment and new 5G bandwidth usage creating interference, so they need to rework the standards and install upgraded devices.

Just because the average consumer doesn't know or care does not mean it's unimportant. The average consumer also doesn't know or care about the entire food safety regime, they just expect that they can eat what the get at the grocery store and not die. Similarly, because of the FCC regs, we can expect that we can bring home and turn on a new device and not have it make every other device on the street fail.

[dylan604]

well, yes and no. Amazon most definitely has a counterfeit/stolen goods problem that they are deliberately (from outside perspectives) not doing anything about. however, if a "legit" vendor is selling devices that does not meet local regulations and it is known by the seller this is true, then the seller has blame as well.

[deepsun]

And also the seller cannot just say "oopsie I didn't know". Well, they must make an effort to "know your customer", instead of "better not ask".

[dylan604]

I think there is/should be a grace period though. If a retailer is provided goods by a vendor where the vendor knows their products are illegitimate, it is possible for the retailer to be unaware. However, once it becomes known that the vendor is selling illegitimate products, it is up to the retailer to then remove those items. Most major retailers have agreements/contracts with these vendors that say they must buy back any merchandise unable to be sold. This would be a normal way of handling things. Once this avenue is not pursued and the retailer continues to sell the product, then the retailer is no longer innocent.

[azinman2]

Why does this have to be either/or?

[CoastalCoder]

Perhaps another approach is FCC enforcement against Amazon.

[erosenbe0]

Amazon started requiring FCC information on RF devices this year. Late is better than never.

While Amazon -- given its vast resources -- has no excuse not be a good citizen, obviously the burden on retailers and marketplaces needs to be balanced.

The local mom and pop toy shop selling a few uncertified RF-controlled cars isn't exactly the ideal place to initiate enforcement actions. I'd suggest volume importers or facilitators of volume imports.

[dylan604]

at some point, knowingly selling banned equipment should bring down some form of punishment to be sure. it just seems that the gov't is scarred of public outcry for going after amazon and its ilk. it's like they don't want to spill the apple cart when the apple market is in "turmoil"?

[reversethread]

Not to mention Amazon's lobbying efforts.

[dylan604]

didn't even consider Amazon actively trying to protect their front like that, but of course they would.

i still weep for the Citizens United decision

[bagels]

Worse than unlicensed, they just lie and say they have certifications that they don't.