"the device must accept any interference received"?

Because if you're next to a guy who's transmitting perfectly legally and your stuff doesn't work, then it is, ipso facto, your stuff's fault. The FCC just spells that out for you.

--

Tim Wescott 
Wescott Design Services 
http://www.wescottdesign.com

ONce upon a time, one amateur radio operator ended up with all kinds of trouble because his transmitter caused problems in his neighbor's tv set. Lots of testing was done, the transmitter was declared clean, but the problem didn't go away. There was a civil suit (which I think never went to court) and the ham ended up with modified license preventing him from using one band. This was in the early sixties.

This clause is to prevent that. Lots of equipment may suffer from a nearby transmitter, but unless the transmitter is not up to standards, it's not the fault of the transmitter. The consumer equipment is often not protected well from nearby transmitters, but people will blame the transmitter, rather than accept that the consumer equipment is at fault.

This clause merely warns the user about this.

Michael

** This kind of wording refers to particular bands that are unlicensed and shared by many users, essentially at their own risk. What it boils down to is that complaints about interference will not get any attention from the authority.

For example, wireless microphones often share bands used by broadcast TV signals. The mic must not case interference to nearby TV viewers but the other way around is your bad luck.

... Phil

I don't think FCC cares about suceptability. CE does.

OK, that makes sense. It seems to me that condition 2 is strangely written; what it really means is "*you* must suck it up if the device receives interference".

--
Random numbers should not be generated with a method chosen at random. 
                                                      --- Donald Knuth

That is correct. If you buy a device so labled, it is up to you to make sure it will work if there are other transmitters around. Say you have several wireless routers in the same house or apartment building. As they may operate on the same band, they may interfear with each other. If someone a few blocks away has one, he is probaly far enough away it will not cause problems.

Years ago the Citizens band radios were licensed and some 100 miliwatt handy talkies that did not require a license were legal. The HTs had to put up with the licensed transmitters. When CB became very popular for a few years, the FCC set aside a few frequencies for them around 49 MHz instead of around 27. Later they were moved to around 460 MHz .

There was some low powered wireless FM microphones that used the same frequencies of the FM broadcast band. As they only hada range of around a few hundred feet, they did not usually cause any problems with the broadcast station, but if the broadcast station hapened to be on the same frequency it could wipe out the wireless mic.

It pretty much agrees with common sense. If the label had said "the user must tolerate interference", I wouldn't have asked the question!

--
We do not debug. Our software does not coddle the weak. Bugs  
are good for building character in the user. 
                              --- Klingon Programmer's Guide

It's simply this.

It is not allowed to mess up other equipment but you can't complain about other equipment bothering it!

In otherwords, to bad if it gets screwed up from the CB'er next door, but don't you be screwing with his receiver with RF emissions from this unit.

Short version, don't bother to call anyone about it cause they don't care.

How do you like description?

Jamie

There's also the question of priority. There are signals in what I believe is called the 'Standard Frequency Service' that are deemed so important they must not be interfered with (big TV and radio stations for instance) but THEY can give you grief if you're in their neighbourhood and there's nothing you can do about it legally.