FCC Cites Baofeng Importer for Illegally Marketing Unauthorized RF Devices

from the ARRL Site:


08/02/2018

The FCC has issued a Citation and Order (Citation) to Amcrest Industries, LLC(formerly Foscam Digital Technologies, LLC), an importer and marketer of popular and inexpensive Baofeng hand-held transceivers, alleging that the company violated FCC rules and the Communications Act by illegally marketing unauthorized RF devices. The FCC asserts that Amcrest marketed Baofeng model UV-5R-series FM hand-held radios capable of transmitting on “restricted frequencies.” The Baofeng models UV-5R and UV-5R V2+ were granted an FCC equipment authorization in 2012 to operate under Part 90 Private Land Mobile Radio Service (Land Mobile) rules.

For the entire story click here

 

It took them long enough ! Sad it only applies to one model of the baoturd radios, most all of them are in violation of the same laws as these among other cheap Chinese radios. They're way to late, the baoturd radios have spread across the US like a cancer. Now we all get to listen to licensed and unlicensed operators who buy this crap on Amazon for $20.00 playing sirens and roger beeps, kurchunking repeaters endlessly, causing interference, you name it the baoturd radio operators will do it. What a mess ! Back when one had to spend a couple hundred bucks for a quality radio we didn't have half the problems we have on some repeaters now.

 

Old news.
https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/fcc-citation-for-selling-baofengs.622760/

 

Interesting information. I wonder how real it is.

 

IMO it's a combination of things. The FCC, over the past few of decades, has been reluctant to enforce the laws, they have published the question pools for all the tests, and dropped the code requirement. All these things have contributed to the dilution of Ham Radio. Yes, good for the numbers. But, bad for the quality of operators. Of course the decadence (moral decay) of today's society doesn't help either. Seems as though many (not everyone) have lost all respect for themselves and for others.

Respectful people don't do things like sell unlawful radios just because the profit is good. They don't engage in malicious interference, and they don't jam repeaters.

Dan KI4AX

 

Not sure what all of your hangups about publishing question pools and dropping code requirement has anything to do with equipment type certification or the marketing & sale of prohibited transmitters. Seems to be completely unrelated. So what ... you propose the FCC be more aggressive in say, going after you for not ID'ing every ten minutes or of possibly operating out of band due to an accidental spur? You want that kind of enforcement? You want the FCC to inhibit or interfere with possible new hams entering the fold, because they may be blind or do not have the time to learn code (especially when the FCC was the last government agency in the world to drop a code requirement). You want the FCC to be so oppressive as to effect the ability of individuals of pursuing our hobby by more regulation and enforcement? Really?

The so-called dilution of ham radio is more a constant of the nature of people and the lack of self-policing on our part as hams. We tolerate bad operating practice and actually encourage it by not being willing to be good Elmers anymore. Our behavior is our own, as a community. I for one do not blame the FCC for anything, and in fact prefer they continue with their soft hands-off approach to enforcement of our hobby.

This whining about code requirement and question pools is decades old ... move on. Good for the FCC for going after violators of non-type equipment sales and marketing. Why complain when they do some good and productive enforcement? That's just counter-intuitive.

By the way, when was the last time you gave a CW lesson or encouraged or inspired a young person to get their ticket? Never I bet. Complainers never do. They only complain, blaming others for their own lack of effort. It's always somebody elses fault.

 

We have the same thing happening here in New Zealand. I think ( The horse has bolted ) ( To Little to late )
Two English sayings. There are 1000s of these radio here may in un-authorized hands.

 

Although I did not quote him my post was in response to the post by KC2ZRT. Perhaps you could scroll up and read his post again. I apologize for not quoting him. You also might read my post again.

You call it 'the nature of people and the lack of self-policing,' I call it decadence and moral decay. You say 'soft hands-off approach to enforcement.' I call it a lack of discipline on the part of the FCC and Hams. We used to be self policing - why not now?

As far as whining is concerned... NOT. I am simply stating some opinions, in response to a previous post, about the state of the hobby and how we got here. And, I don't think I have ever complained about the FCC enforcing the rule of law. Actually, quite the opposite. I often complain about the lack of enforcement (up and down the spectrum). I do not advocate the 'soft hands-off approach to enforcement' you write about. I have often posted that I would be willing to pay a small fee (like $20), when renewing my license, if it meant more/better enforcement.

IMO it is that soft handed approach that encourages and assists bootlegging, free-banding, jamming, malicious interference, AND the flow of illegal equipment into the country.

Dan KI4AX

 

About all that will happen is the price of the radios will go up.

 

Complaint received March 2013.

Letter of Inquiry send four and one half years later.

Complaint issued almost five and one half years after the complaint.

The rules would appear to apply to any person who markets one of these devices even for resale.

 

All this is larger companies giving the FCC money and greasing palms to increase sales of expensive radios that can be very easily be modified to transmit on the same frequency. There is no substantial proof that these radios interfere other then the siren. It's BS

 

And there is no substantial proof of your statement.

 

Well Dan I half agree. While with hams it is a lack of discipline, as far as the FCC it's a matter of lack of funding and a shift in emphasis towards catering to big corporations and profits for wealthy executives. Which is the ever growing and now accelerating norm with legislators and the executive; the ones who hold the purse strings and make appointments to the Commission. There is no balance anymore and enforcement is performed as a matter of opportunity. So the emphasis is on what can be done and using extremely lacking funding and personnel to build a case that can stick. Literally when you basically have two guys (as was this case) doing all the work it takes a long time to process, years in fact. But at least the forfeitures and legal power of the FCC are substantial enough that even large companies look and say, hmm ... is this worth it? And smaller companies know it will eat a years worth of profit with one forfeiture.

When a bare bones agency (as far as resources) actually does something good, don't complain. And when I say soft handed, I mean that they generally do not go after hams in general for simple rules violations. But do, working with what they have, go after equipment certification and malicious interference violations, as often and as quickly as their tiny enforcement arm can.

And don't say your whining is just "expressing an opinion", that's just cheap internet writing. It's whining. No code ... question pool .... WHAAAAAA!!!!! We've all heard it, done it .... moved on. You could have used a different topic to state the context of your "opinion". One not so ... dated. I'm mean seriously, issues dating back to 2000 & 2003? Really? That's an indication of the general attitude of our society today? That's you opinion? Something that was discussed and put to rest almost two decades ago. Even Pearl Jam is playing on "Oldies" stations (those that still exist that is). I was was on dial-up AOL in 2000. Really?! That's your argument?

Whining.

 

It is what it is. Call it whining if you like. I think I would like to call it 'the cheapening of Ham Radio.'

And, I guess if expressing an opinion about something is 'whining' then there are a lot of whiners on this web site.

I have been on the air for a long time. There has always been a 'bad apple' or two, here and there, on the Ham Bands; but never before has it been as bad as now. I mostly attribute that to the dumbing down of the licensing requirements and the lack of enforcement (on all levels) by the FCC.

I apologize if you don't like what I say. But, that's what I believe based on my observations over the past 35 years.

Dan KI4AX

 

Baofeng would been perfectly legal if transmitter only transmit within amateur radio frequency range that is 144.000 to 148.000 MHz and 420.000 to 450.000 MHz.
since there are no required certification for transmitter for amateur radio service.
if the radio did not have scanning function, it does not even need FCC part 15 certification for scanning receiver either.
it used to be FCC sort of looked at if the transmitter contained amateur radio frequency FCC looked it as amateur radio equipment so FCC did not force certification issue , such as 20-30 years ago, many amateur radio transmit in a little bit outside of amateur radio band. but that has been abused too much such as adding CB band into 10 meter amateur band, so FCC no longer accept that idea.