I recently asked the ACA to verify the C-tick certification number on a fake 400W ATX PSU, and to provide the name of the grantee, but they refused, citing privacy legislation. This begs the question, what prevents an unscrupulous vendor from using a fake certification code to sell a non-compliant item to a consumer, if that consumer is prevented from verifying the authenticity of that code? The FCC in the USA maintains a public database, why not Australia?
- Franc Zabkar
-- Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
Franc Zabkar wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Good question, I'd like to know that too. I suspect the privacy leg. is in place because industry (esp. importers) want to hide badge engineering practices from the consumer.
"Franc Zabkar"
** That is utter bullshit - the name of the company that makes or imports electrical goods is not a private matter. Whom did you approach at the CA - some anonymous d*****ad on the phone ???Presumably the PSU comes from a PC - why have you not tried to trace the importer from the supplier of that PC ??
** Using an un-registered number would be a serious offence - far more so than the item emitting a bit of RFI. ** Knowing which company the number refers to does not prove much ........... Phil
There is nothing to prevent counterfeit use of a supplier code. It is a regular occurrence and goes along with use of counterfeit electrical safety marks and approval numbers. Many PC power supplies in 'unbranded' cases and the power cords supplied with them either have no marks, or use counterfeit marks.
ACA supplier registration pre-dates the privacy act, but because supplier registration is not restricted to only companies the privacy legislation prevents making the data publicly available.
The ACA used to make the data available over the phone. Now if you have a valid reason they will take your details and pass them along to the registered supplier, who may contact you at their option. It sucks.
The can of worms got real squirmy about two/three years ago when the ACA was still giving out details. The registered supplier must be domeciled in Australia or New Zealand and many registered suppliers are just family/friends/aquaintances of someone employed at an overseas manufacturer and have nothing to do with the actual 'supply' (importation/sales).
By releasing details of these private individuals the ACA was breaching the privacy Act and was advised by the AG's office to stop doing so. Because the database was not set up to distinguish between private and corporate registrations there was no way to easily make access of the dbase public.
The ACA issued notice 3 (?) years ago to registered identities that their details would be published or made publicly available. However there was a lot of objections by IT importers and distributers who do not want the source of the product to be identifiable by end users. This was so warranty, support and sales inquiries would be passed back to retailers in the first instance, and to prevent grey market imports from burdening authorised distributors. The program was stopped before all suppliers had even been notified.
It may still be in progress somehow, somewhere - I hope it is.
Not anymore. The USA does not register the supplier if they use the "FCC mark" and a declaration of conformity, but the responsible party must (quote from 47CFR):
§ 2.1077 Compliance information. (1) Identification of the product, e.g., name and model number; (2) A statement, similar to that contained in § 15.19(a)(3) of this chapter, that the product complies with part 15 of this chapters; and (3) The identification, by name, address and telephone number, of the responsible party, as defined in § 2.909. The responsible party for a Declaration of Conformity must be located within the United States.=========================================
Obvious question: what is the c-tick number you're querying, and what markings are on the goods in question. Some of us here work in the IT industry at the wholesale level, and may be able to name the supplier if given those details.
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 06:16:43 GMT, "David, not to be confused with the other Davids." put finger to keyboard and composed:
There is an Australian company that publishes the names, addresses, and phone numbers of millions of Australians in their publicly accessible database, in paper format and on the Internet, without their explicit consent, and then charges them a fee to remove their personal details each and every year.
- Franc Zabkar
-- Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
Sounds a lot like Telstra white pages to me.
Had such an argument with them recently over wanting a fee to remove my listing from the white pages.
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 10:12:17 +1100, "Craig Hart" put finger to keyboard and composed:
OK, the C-tick number is N12657.
The label on the cover reads as follows:
========================================= L&C Technology Inc Model: LC-B400ATX
+3.3V +5V +12V -12V -5V +5VSB 28A 40A 17A 0.8A 0.3A 2A +5V & +3.3V combined load 220W +5V & +3.3V & +12V combined load 380W Total output is 400W max. =========================================The PCB is labelled "Y-B200 ATX Ver 2.8" which suggests a 200W rating.
This circuit diagram appears identical to mine (mine has a few unpopulated locations):
"LC-B250ATX ch. Y-B200-ATX ver. 2.9 JNC Computer Co."
The +3.3V and +5V rails are each rectified by a S10C40C dual diode, and the +12V rail is rectified by two FR302 fast recovery diodes.
According to their datasheets, the FR302 is rated at 3A, and the S10C40C is rated for 10A (5A per diode).
By my calculations, the actual total wattage (assuming the other components are up to it) is close enough to ...
Pt = (3.3 x 10) + (5 x 10) + (12 x 6) + (5VSB x 2) + (-5/-12 wattage) = 175W approx
Printed on the PSU PCB is the following legend:
F5A/250V (for 180W -- 235W) F7A/250V (for 300W -- 350W) F6.3A/250V (for 250W)
The installed fuse is rated at 5A. :-(
The PC case looks like this one (JNC - RJA 70):
JNC Computer Inc appears to be represented in Australia by:
Friend Technology International Pty., Ltd., 17 Smallwood Street, Underwood QLD 4119
Tel : 61 7 3423 2588 , 61 7 3423 2688 Fax : 61 7 3423 2988
See
On the Net I found the following references:
These suggest that there is a genuine L&C LC-B400ATX PSU. Mine looks nothing like the ones pictured.
L&C appear to be part of the Deer Group:
However, I don't know how L&C are related to JNC Computer Corp, if at all.
Here is an interesting post from the Google archives:
"Blowing up 100's of Power Supplies":
And one from a person in the USA who has a fake 300W L&C PSU with the same PCB as mine:
- Franc Zabkar
-- Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 11:14:18 +1000, KLR put finger to keyboard and composed:
Exactly.
- Franc Zabkar
-- Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
The importer was Magnafield; they changed their name a couple of years back and I can't recal who they are now -- will post again if I think of it.
They are/were at 37 catalina dve tullamarine vic.
Craig
the company that took over magnafield is multi-e
magnafield's c-tick is/was N160, but of course after the takeover they would get a new number.
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 01:29:05 +1100, "Craig Hart" put finger to keyboard and composed:
Thanks.
My first impression of this company was bad. Their website wouldn't let me in without first enabling cookies - the home page was blank until I did so. None of their PSUs were identified by brand name, nor were there any specs. I suspect they may all be generics.
If Magnafield really was the source of my fake 400W L&C PSU, then the following statement rings very hollow:
"Magnafield is a respected computer equipment importer distributor. They have been trading for many years now and have survived in the very competitive computing market by delivering excellent quality and stable products at competitive prices."
After visiting my local computer store, I posted the following observations in another NG:
===================================================================== My local computer shop has nothing but generic PSUs. I looked at a "TT
400ATX" SMPS with *exactly* the same specs as mine, but in a different case. Peeking inside, I saw the same part number (EI-33ASG) on the main switching transformer. The circuit layout seemed the same, although the two FR302 diodes were replaced by a TO-220 package. The main filter caps looked about the same size as mine, but I couldn't be sure. The heatsinks looked slightly more substantial.If the "TT" PSU is indeed a 400W unit, then I'm left to wonder why it has the same transformers as my 180W unit, if indeed that is the case.
Another clue as to the PSU's origin was a small code on the label. Mine has a "LC34XA" in the bottom RH corner, whereas the TT PSU had a "TTnnXA" (I can't recall the nn digits). I'm guessing this could be some kind of OEM ID.
Here is a photo of my fake PSU:
BTW, the TT PSU had a different C-tick code. Sorry, I don't recall the number.
- Franc Zabkar
-- Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.