1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!

Cellular Repeaters (in the USA)

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by John Navas, Dec 4, 2003.

  1. I think it speaks volumes that the AT&T reseller has a T-Mobile phone for
    himself. You can tell that his heart is in his own products.

    - Mark


    >Then, of course, it can be dangerous when they know TOO much! When
    >AT&T launched GSM in Kansas City last year, I found an independent
    >reseller in a kiosk in the mall. This reseller was supplementing the
    >"official" AT&T lineup with high-end unlocked GSM phones, probably in
    >an attempt to differentiate themselves from the other gazillion AT&T
    >stores. Anyway, unfortunately for them, one of the phones on display
    >was a Nokia 9210 Communicator. I asked about it because AT&T was
    >running some great promo plans for the GSM launch in KC, but I was
    >repelled by the cost of mMode data, and discovered after talking to
    >AT&T CS that they didn't support CSD. I asked the salesman about the
    >9210 and he knew the phone and it's features cold, and offered to give
    >me a demo. I was incredulous, knowing the 9210 didn't do GPRS, and
    >_thought_ I knew AT&T (by their 800# CS' own admission) that they
    >didn't do CSD. As the guy is doing an expert presentation demoing and
    >letting me play with the 9210, I ask how it's working,
    >since I thought AT&T didn't support CSD. The salesman pauses and asks
    >"are you sure?" I said that's what AT&T told me. He pauses again and
    >says "that exains why I can't get this thing to connect with the
    >store's AT&T SIM. I have to put the T-Mobile SIM from my personal
    >phone to make it work!" At least a less knowledgeable salesperson
    >can't snow you, intentionally or unintentionally! ;-)


    -----------------------------------------------------
    Mark W. McClure
    mrkmcclure@excite.com



    › See More: Cellular Repeaters (in the USA)
  2. Alas this does not fully answer the question.

    HOW does one GET a license to be legal ?

    IE by licensee do they mean the owner of the freq (well ok FCC legally owns
    all freqs and gives permission or license to use them) but in otherwords do
    they mean NExtel (etc.. etc..)

    OR

    Can I "get" a license from the FCC to legally operate a BDA ?

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/


    > Hello Mr. Daniels,
    >
    > Signal Boosters Bi-Directional Amplifiers or BDA's are only permitted
    > for use by licensee's only.
    >
    > Please see the FCC Rules and Regulations CFR 47 Part 22.527.
    > http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html
  3. Todd Allcock

    Todd Allcock Guest

    "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<br1ob7$26occn$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de>...

    > Just out of curiosity, what planet are you from? Been to a store lately?
    > While there are a few knowledgeable people, in my experience they are VERY
    > few and far between, heck, most managers don't even know that stuff, and if
    > training ever gets done, it's usually a few months after a product starts
    > selling (and about the time it is obsolete and replaced with a new model).
    > If you think the churn rate on phones is high, you should see what it is for
    > the store salespeople!


    Well, back when I owned a Cingular dealership, we knew our stuff! ;-)

    Seriously, though, I've been fairly impressed with the staff at the
    Cingular company stores I've used, as well as the two T-Mobile company
    stores I've used- a distinct lack of BS from the folks I dealt with-
    not everyone had a huge depth of knowledge, but the knew the
    "bullets", and more importantly knew to get help from managers or more
    experienced salespeople rather than try to fake it.

    I've never used a multi-carrier indirect retailer. I'm sure there are
    good ones, but most of the mall-kiosk guys are too busy assulting
    passerby with gee-whiz phones like a department store perfume lady on
    a Chanel high for me to take them seriously.
  4. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    Did you actually read what you posted?
    <START PASTE>
    (e) Cellular radiotelephone service. During the five-year build-out
    period, the service area boundaries of the additional transmitters, as
    calculated by the method set forth in Sec. 22.911(a), must remain within
    the market, except that the service area boundaries may extend beyond
    the market boundary into the area that is part of the CGSA or is already
    encompassed by the service area boundaries of previously authorized
    facilities.
    <END PASTE>

    Notice starting where it says "except that the service area boundaries....".
    Sure sounds like it contains an exception to me...



    "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    news:723f6$3fd6c213$4451eda0$4327@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > Alas this does not fully answer the question.
    >
    > HOW does one GET a license to be legal ?
    >
    > IE by licensee do they mean the owner of the freq (well ok FCC legally

    owns
    > all freqs and gives permission or license to use them) but in otherwords

    do
    > they mean NExtel (etc.. etc..)
    >
    > OR
    >
    > Can I "get" a license from the FCC to legally operate a BDA ?
    >
    > Chris Taylor
    > http://www.nerys.com/
    >
    >
    > > Hello Mr. Daniels,
    > >
    > > Signal Boosters Bi-Directional Amplifiers or BDA's are only permitted
    > > for use by licensee's only.
    > >
    > > Please see the FCC Rules and Regulations CFR 47 Part 22.527.
    > > http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html

    >
    >
  5. MarkF

    MarkF Guest

    taite@panix.com ("RDT") wrote in message news:<br545u$6ev$1@panix1.panix.com>...
    > In article <35b1619d.0312090316.68e305ce@posting.google.com>,


    >
    > >My staff has found 3 that interfered with PS systems over the last 3
    > >yrs.

    >
    > Dude, you have staff looking it up? Get a life. Fuck. More people
    > died of food poisoning this year than were harmed by FCC approved cellular
    > BDAs.
    >

    We personally found 3 in the County that interfered with local
    systems. I didn't say that we found 3 by researching the net, as this
    information isn't compiled by anyone, who knows how many interference
    cases have been found and cleared. I was posting personally known
    cases.

    Yes I have staff and operate a radio shop with a talented staff of 5,
    those being 3 technicians, 1 supervior, 1 engineer, and I'm the
    Network Administrator of a Public Safety 10 tower site, 28 channel 800
    MHz simulcast radio system. My background is in radio system design
    and deployment and I also to private two-way radio consulting (like
    right now I'm in the Virgin Islands consulting on a Motorola SmartZone
    System).

    I concur with Al's comments on the reply to the rest of your prior
    post so I'll reserve comment and head to breakfast.

    Regards
    Mark
  6. Jer

    Jer Guest

    Chris Taylor Jr wrote:
    > Alas this does not fully answer the question.
    >
    > HOW does one GET a license to be legal ?
    >
    > IE by licensee do they mean the owner of the freq (well ok FCC legally owns
    > all freqs and gives permission or license to use them) but in otherwords do
    > they mean NExtel (etc.. etc..)
    >
    > OR
    >
    > Can I "get" a license from the FCC to legally operate a BDA ?



    There's an FCC license intended to provide technical certification for
    installing and/or operating radio transmitters, i.e. First Class
    Radiotelephone.

    There's another FCC license for each and every commercial radio
    transmitter with an antenna sticking out of it. This is the license
    held by the cellular carrier, and is the one that offers exclusive use
    of the frequencies listed on that license within the authorised
    coverage area. All cellular carriers have one of these for each and
    every one of their cell site locations.

    BDA manufacturers couldn't care less if a purchaser is licensed
    (certified) to install their products. They also couldn't care less
    is the purchaser is authorised to operate their porduct at any
    particular location (like a cellular carrier would be).

    If anyone was legally allowed to throw up any transmitter at any
    location they wanted, we'd have absolute pandemonium, the Wild West of
    Radio. This is the single-most reason why CB is the trash it is
    today. Having said that, I'm not comparing CB to cellular, but
    I remember the days when CB was actually worth having, even near the
    tender ears of a child. Without FCC enforcement, any particular radio
    service will end up in the same cesspool as CB. So, in that regard,
    if the FCC is only going to issue radio cellular licenses to whomever
    paid the highest bid, and that multi-million dollar licensee gets
    inundated with service complaints when their own radio
    engineers/technicians can't easily explain why, trust me on this, the
    FCC _will_ get involved if they learn a BDA of unknown origin is the
    root cause. Cellular RF engineers talk amongst themselves, between
    companies on a regular basis - they'll soon learn if a competitor is
    knowingly involved with a BDA implant. If one engineer puts out the
    question and all they get back is a blank stare, the FCC's phone
    number is at their fingertip. When a multi-million dollar authorised
    cellular carrier complains about a BDA of unknown origin wreaking
    havoc at a particular location, the FCC _will not_ ignore the request
    for resolution assistance. At no time will the BDA
    manufacturer/seller be involved.


    --
    jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' ICQ = 35253273
    "All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
    what we know." -- Richard Wilbur
  7. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 04:09:29 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:

    >On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:40:42 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
    >in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    >>Even then, the savvy customer will be treated like a 2-year-old during
    >>potty training.

    >
    >I never put up with that - I always challenge them if they're wrong,
    >and dare them to prove me wrong. I haven't lost an argument with one
    >of them yet.


    How does one argue with a stump?


    Larry W4CSC

    NNNN
  8. I did not post it and I am not sure how what you posted relates to my
    question.

    CAN and end user GET a license to operate a BDA legally ?

    Yes or No if yes how.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:br6nsf$29v3kp$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Did you actually read what you posted?
    > <START PASTE>
    > (e) Cellular radiotelephone service. During the five-year build-out
    > period, the service area boundaries of the additional transmitters, as
    > calculated by the method set forth in Sec. 22.911(a), must remain within
    > the market, except that the service area boundaries may extend beyond
    > the market boundary into the area that is part of the CGSA or is already
    > encompassed by the service area boundaries of previously authorized
    > facilities.
    > <END PASTE>
    >
    > Notice starting where it says "except that the service area

    boundaries....".
    > Sure sounds like it contains an exception to me...
    >
    >
    >
    > "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    > news:723f6$3fd6c213$4451eda0$4327@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > > Alas this does not fully answer the question.
    > >
    > > HOW does one GET a license to be legal ?
    > >
    > > IE by licensee do they mean the owner of the freq (well ok FCC legally

    > owns
    > > all freqs and gives permission or license to use them) but in otherwords

    > do
    > > they mean NExtel (etc.. etc..)
    > >
    > > OR
    > >
    > > Can I "get" a license from the FCC to legally operate a BDA ?
    > >
    > > Chris Taylor
    > > http://www.nerys.com/
    > >
    > >
    > > > Hello Mr. Daniels,
    > > >
    > > > Signal Boosters Bi-Directional Amplifiers or BDA's are only permitted
    > > > for use by licensee's only.
    > > >
    > > > Please see the FCC Rules and Regulations CFR 47 Part 22.527.
    > > > http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
  9. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:27:18 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
    in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 04:09:29 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:40:42 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
    >>in alt.cellular.verizon:


    >>>Even then, the savvy customer will be treated like a 2-year-old during
    >>>potty training.


    >>I never put up with that - I always challenge them if they're wrong,
    >>and dare them to prove me wrong. I haven't lost an argument with one
    >>of them yet.


    >How does one argue with a stump?


    It's an art, Larry, an art. :)
  10. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    The point was that according to the fcc rules, and the exception for 5 years
    on anything relating to cell phones <part (e)>, there is no rule currently
    in effect on them anyhow, so how are you gonna follow a rule that doesn't
    exist for 5 years? If you don't need a license according to the rules, how
    are ya gonna get one when one isn't needed?

    PS, not a law, so no legal/not legal question., but if it makes you feel
    better, send me money, and I will give you permission to follow the FCC
    rules *exactly* and do *exactly* what is in part (e), including after the
    word **EXCEPT**.




    "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    news:e0f5f$3fd7bc1c$441b8566$28699@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > I did not post it and I am not sure how what you posted relates to my
    > question.
    >
    > CAN and end user GET a license to operate a BDA legally ?
    >
    > Yes or No if yes how.
    >
    > Chris Taylor
    > http://www.nerys.com/
    >
    > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:br6nsf$29v3kp$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > Did you actually read what you posted?
    > > <START PASTE>
    > > (e) Cellular radiotelephone service. During the five-year build-out
    > > period, the service area boundaries of the additional transmitters, as
    > > calculated by the method set forth in Sec. 22.911(a), must remain within
    > > the market, except that the service area boundaries may extend beyond
    > > the market boundary into the area that is part of the CGSA or is already
    > > encompassed by the service area boundaries of previously authorized
    > > facilities.
    > > <END PASTE>
    > >
    > > Notice starting where it says "except that the service area

    > boundaries....".
    > > Sure sounds like it contains an exception to me...
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    > > news:723f6$3fd6c213$4451eda0$4327@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > > > Alas this does not fully answer the question.
    > > >
    > > > HOW does one GET a license to be legal ?
    > > >
    > > > IE by licensee do they mean the owner of the freq (well ok FCC legally

    > > owns
    > > > all freqs and gives permission or license to use them) but in

    otherwords
    > > do
    > > > they mean NExtel (etc.. etc..)
    > > >
    > > > OR
    > > >
    > > > Can I "get" a license from the FCC to legally operate a BDA ?
    > > >
    > > > Chris Taylor
    > > > http://www.nerys.com/
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > > Hello Mr. Daniels,
    > > > >
    > > > > Signal Boosters Bi-Directional Amplifiers or BDA's are only

    permitted
    > > > > for use by licensee's only.
    > > > >
    > > > > Please see the FCC Rules and Regulations CFR 47 Part 22.527.
    > > > > http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
  11. How about you pay your self to explain how part E means what you "seem" to
    be implying it means without actually SAYING what you think it means.

    I read part E over and Over again. to but it quite bluntly it looks like a
    bunch of garbage to me. I get NO usable "meaning" from that part.

    I am thinking MAYBE it has meaning withing the full context of where it
    sits. I do not know you will not explain yourself.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:br8lr2$l0lc$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > The point was that according to the fcc rules, and the exception for 5

    years
    > on anything relating to cell phones <part (e)>, there is no rule currently
    > in effect on them anyhow, so how are you gonna follow a rule that doesn't
    > exist for 5 years? If you don't need a license according to the rules, how
    > are ya gonna get one when one isn't needed?
    >
    > PS, not a law, so no legal/not legal question., but if it makes you feel
    > better, send me money, and I will give you permission to follow the FCC
    > rules *exactly* and do *exactly* what is in part (e), including after the
    > word **EXCEPT**.
  12. Larry W4CSC

    Larry W4CSC Guest

    On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 02:43:14 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:

    >On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:27:18 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
    >in alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    >>On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 04:09:29 GMT, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.org> wrote:
    >>>On Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:40:42 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
    >>>in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >
    >>>>Even then, the savvy customer will be treated like a 2-year-old during
    >>>>potty training.

    >
    >>>I never put up with that - I always challenge them if they're wrong,
    >>>and dare them to prove me wrong. I haven't lost an argument with one
    >>>of them yet.

    >
    >>How does one argue with a stump?

    >
    >It's an art, Larry, an art. :)


    I DO find it very entertaining, if, sometimes, frustrating beyond
    belief.....

    Larry W4CSC

    NNNN
  13. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    Sorry you flunked elementary school English and have no idea what
    ***EXECPT*** means... If you know how to read, you may just want to look in
    a dictionary and see what ***EXCEPT*** means.





    "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    news:27965$3fd905f0$441bf850$21610@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > How about you pay your self to explain how part E means what you "seem" to
    > be implying it means without actually SAYING what you think it means.
    >
    > I read part E over and Over again. to but it quite bluntly it looks like a
    > bunch of garbage to me. I get NO usable "meaning" from that part.
    >
    > I am thinking MAYBE it has meaning withing the full context of where it
    > sits. I do not know you will not explain yourself.
    >
    > Chris Taylor
    > http://www.nerys.com/
    >
    > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:br8lr2$l0lc$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > The point was that according to the fcc rules, and the exception for 5

    > years
    > > on anything relating to cell phones <part (e)>, there is no rule

    currently
    > > in effect on them anyhow, so how are you gonna follow a rule that

    doesn't
    > > exist for 5 years? If you don't need a license according to the rules,

    how
    > > are ya gonna get one when one isn't needed?
    > >
    > > PS, not a law, so no legal/not legal question., but if it makes you feel
    > > better, send me money, and I will give you permission to follow the FCC
    > > rules *exactly* and do *exactly* what is in part (e), including after

    the
    > > word **EXCEPT**.

    >
    >
  14. On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:36:39 -0500, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    <nospam@nerys.com> wrote:

    >CAN and end user GET a license to operate a BDA legally ?


    No, the cell phone operator already has the exclusive license, they
    are the only licensee.

    You can (theoretically) get a PERMISSION from the operator, but this
    usually means You have to buy their preferred and tested brand of
    repeater (BDA/booster/whatever) . And they are not cheap.


    /Marcus

    --
    Marcus AAkesson marcus.akesson@NO_SPAM_PLEASE_home.se
    Gothenburg Callsigns: SM6XFN & SB4779
    Sweden
    >>>>>> Keep the world clean - no HTML in news or mail ! <<<<<<
  15. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:34:14 GMT, nospam@home.com (Larry W4CSC) posted
    in alt.cellular.verizon:

    >I DO find it very entertaining, if, sometimes, frustrating beyond
    >belief.....


    I don't allow myself to get frustrated - ever. Not even money is
    worth doing that.
  16. Except is irrelevant.

    That like me saying you can not do this except ....*#^@#)$%Y%&#

    sure you get what I said but I still gave you NOTHING.

    IE the CRAP I read did not translate into anything USABLE to me.

    WHAT THE FUCK DOES PART E MEAN and HOW do you come to whatever conclusion
    you come to.

    IS IT THAT HARD for you to comprehend what I want.

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:brb3cf$1f13i$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Sorry you flunked elementary school English and have no idea what
    > ***EXECPT*** means... If you know how to read, you may just want to look

    in
    > a dictionary and see what ***EXCEPT*** means.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    > news:27965$3fd905f0$441bf850$21610@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > > How about you pay your self to explain how part E means what you "seem"

    to
    > > be implying it means without actually SAYING what you think it means.
    > >
    > > I read part E over and Over again. to but it quite bluntly it looks like

    a
    > > bunch of garbage to me. I get NO usable "meaning" from that part.
    > >
    > > I am thinking MAYBE it has meaning withing the full context of where it
    > > sits. I do not know you will not explain yourself.
    > >
    > > Chris Taylor
    > > http://www.nerys.com/
    > >
    > > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > news:br8lr2$l0lc$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > > The point was that according to the fcc rules, and the exception for 5

    > > years
    > > > on anything relating to cell phones <part (e)>, there is no rule

    > currently
    > > > in effect on them anyhow, so how are you gonna follow a rule that

    > doesn't
    > > > exist for 5 years? If you don't need a license according to the rules,

    > how
    > > > are ya gonna get one when one isn't needed?
    > > >
    > > > PS, not a law, so no legal/not legal question., but if it makes you

    feel
    > > > better, send me money, and I will give you permission to follow the

    FCC
    > > > rules *exactly* and do *exactly* what is in part (e), including after

    > the
    > > > word **EXCEPT**.

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
  17. THANKYOU :)

    Since the CELL provider is the licensee that means the only way I imagine I
    could become a licensee is to BECOME a cell provider (VERY Expensive I
    imagine :)

    With that I assume any EXCEPTIONS only apply to the LICENSEE which I am not
    therfore they do not apply to me ?

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Marcus AAkesson" <marcus.akesson@NO_SPAM_PLEASE_home.se> wrote in message
    news:jkaitvscbvjkiro1ckn2kmdlgii2pmci0n@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:36:39 -0500, "Chris Taylor Jr"
    > <nospam@nerys.com> wrote:
    >
    > >CAN and end user GET a license to operate a BDA legally ?

    >
    > No, the cell phone operator already has the exclusive license, they
    > are the only licensee.
    >
    > You can (theoretically) get a PERMISSION from the operator, but this
    > usually means You have to buy their preferred and tested brand of
    > repeater (BDA/booster/whatever) . And they are not cheap.
    >
    >
    > /Marcus
    >
    > --
    > Marcus AAkesson marcus.akesson@NO_SPAM_PLEASE_home.se
    > Gothenburg Callsigns: SM6XFN & SB4779
    > Sweden
    > >>>>>> Keep the world clean - no HTML in news or mail ! <<<<<<
  18. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    Well obviously whatever the hell you want has nothing to do with what is
    actually out there in reality, and those are the FCC regs that you call
    crap.

    Since you obviously don't understand basic English and the FCC regulations,
    you are probably too stupid to understand this.

    Many people have posted the link to the FCC regs, and I pasted a sentence
    that applicable to this discussion straight from part E, seems to me if you
    have a problem understanding the FCC regs, you should consider a new career
    working as a Customer Service Rep for a cell phone company.

    If you have a problem with the exception in the FCC reg, take it up with the
    FCC. I didn't put it in there.



    "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    news:1c162$3fd94b63$441be328$31589@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > Except is irrelevant.
    >
    > That like me saying you can not do this except ....*#^@#)$%Y%&#
    >
    > sure you get what I said but I still gave you NOTHING.
    >
    > IE the CRAP I read did not translate into anything USABLE to me.
    >
    > WHAT THE FUCK DOES PART E MEAN and HOW do you come to whatever conclusion
    > you come to.
    >
    > IS IT THAT HARD for you to comprehend what I want.
    >
    > Chris Taylor
    > http://www.nerys.com/
    >
    > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:brb3cf$1f13i$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > Sorry you flunked elementary school English and have no idea what
    > > ***EXECPT*** means... If you know how to read, you may just want to look

    > in
    > > a dictionary and see what ***EXCEPT*** means.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    > > news:27965$3fd905f0$441bf850$21610@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > > > How about you pay your self to explain how part E means what you

    "seem"
    > to
    > > > be implying it means without actually SAYING what you think it means.
    > > >
    > > > I read part E over and Over again. to but it quite bluntly it looks

    like
    > a
    > > > bunch of garbage to me. I get NO usable "meaning" from that part.
    > > >
    > > > I am thinking MAYBE it has meaning withing the full context of where

    it
    > > > sits. I do not know you will not explain yourself.
    > > >
    > > > Chris Taylor
    > > > http://www.nerys.com/
    > > >
    > > > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > > news:br8lr2$l0lc$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > > > The point was that according to the fcc rules, and the exception for

    5
    > > > years
    > > > > on anything relating to cell phones <part (e)>, there is no rule

    > > currently
    > > > > in effect on them anyhow, so how are you gonna follow a rule that

    > > doesn't
    > > > > exist for 5 years? If you don't need a license according to the

    rules,
    > > how
    > > > > are ya gonna get one when one isn't needed?
    > > > >
    > > > > PS, not a law, so no legal/not legal question., but if it makes you

    > feel
    > > > > better, send me money, and I will give you permission to follow the

    > FCC
    > > > > rules *exactly* and do *exactly* what is in part (e), including

    after
    > > the
    > > > > word **EXCEPT**.
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
  19. Obviously you do not understand english AT ALL otherwise you would recognize
    crap when you see it.

    FCC does NOT speak normal bsic english.

    they will not even explain their own language.

    I have been trying to get them to explain Part 15 to me and they refuse.

    Basically part 15 is analogous to me saying You can not punch me AND you can
    not STOP ME from punching you if I decide to do so.

    They refuse to explain their wording.

    People do not know how to hold conversation in this thread. so let me
    EXPLAIN basic english to you.


    This thread is about BDA's repeaters for cell phones from what I understand.

    someone said you can use them (as end users) others said you can not
    according to FCC regs.

    some claimed those regs say you can not use BDA's which while NOT clear in
    basic english in the parts posted here so far I and leaning toward agree
    with.

    Others said their was an "exception" in the rules (this part e) that ALLOWS
    end users to use BDA's et NO WHERE in the Part E does it specify this in any
    form of basic english normal english or complex english that I am able to
    determine.

    so I asked for clarification. then you opened your mouth and left no doubt
    how foolish you are.

    are we clear now ?

    Chris Taylor
    http://www.nerys.com/

    "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:brbilc$1i4g4$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > Well obviously whatever the hell you want has nothing to do with what is
    > actually out there in reality, and those are the FCC regs that you call
    > crap.
    >
    > Since you obviously don't understand basic English and the FCC

    regulations,
    > you are probably too stupid to understand this.
    >
    > Many people have posted the link to the FCC regs, and I pasted a sentence
    > that applicable to this discussion straight from part E, seems to me if

    you
    > have a problem understanding the FCC regs, you should consider a new

    career
    > working as a Customer Service Rep for a cell phone company.
    >
    > If you have a problem with the exception in the FCC reg, take it up with

    the
    > FCC. I didn't put it in there.
    >
    >
    >
    > "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    > news:1c162$3fd94b63$441be328$31589@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > > Except is irrelevant.
    > >
    > > That like me saying you can not do this except ....*#^@#)$%Y%&#
    > >
    > > sure you get what I said but I still gave you NOTHING.
    > >
    > > IE the CRAP I read did not translate into anything USABLE to me.
    > >
    > > WHAT THE FUCK DOES PART E MEAN and HOW do you come to whatever

    conclusion
    > > you come to.
    > >
    > > IS IT THAT HARD for you to comprehend what I want.
    > >
    > > Chris Taylor
    > > http://www.nerys.com/
    > >
    > > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > news:brb3cf$1f13i$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > > Sorry you flunked elementary school English and have no idea what
    > > > ***EXECPT*** means... If you know how to read, you may just want to

    look
    > > in
    > > > a dictionary and see what ***EXCEPT*** means.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    > > > news:27965$3fd905f0$441bf850$21610@allthenewsgroups.com...
    > > > > How about you pay your self to explain how part E means what you

    > "seem"
    > > to
    > > > > be implying it means without actually SAYING what you think it

    means.
    > > > >
    > > > > I read part E over and Over again. to but it quite bluntly it looks

    > like
    > > a
    > > > > bunch of garbage to me. I get NO usable "meaning" from that part.
    > > > >
    > > > > I am thinking MAYBE it has meaning withing the full context of where

    > it
    > > > > sits. I do not know you will not explain yourself.
    > > > >
    > > > > Chris Taylor
    > > > > http://www.nerys.com/
    > > > >
    > > > > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > > > news:br8lr2$l0lc$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
    > > > > > The point was that according to the fcc rules, and the exception

    for
    > 5
    > > > > years
    > > > > > on anything relating to cell phones <part (e)>, there is no rule
    > > > currently
    > > > > > in effect on them anyhow, so how are you gonna follow a rule that
    > > > doesn't
    > > > > > exist for 5 years? If you don't need a license according to the

    > rules,
    > > > how
    > > > > > are ya gonna get one when one isn't needed?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > PS, not a law, so no legal/not legal question., but if it makes

    you
    > > feel
    > > > > > better, send me money, and I will give you permission to follow

    the
    > > FCC
    > > > > > rules *exactly* and do *exactly* what is in part (e), including

    > after
    > > > the
    > > > > > word **EXCEPT**.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >
  20. Peter Pan

    Peter Pan Guest

    "Chris Taylor Jr" <nospam@nerys.com> wrote in message
    news:63545$3fda3ed4$4451eda0$15672@allthenewsgroups.com...
    >
    >
    > This thread is about BDA's repeaters for cell phones from what I

    understand.
    >
    > someone said you can use them (as end users) others said you can not
    > according to FCC regs.
    >
    > some claimed those regs say you can not use BDA's which while NOT clear in
    > basic english in the parts posted here so far I and leaning toward agree
    > with.
    >
    > Others said their was an "exception" in the rules (this part e) that

    ALLOWS
    > end users to use BDA's et NO WHERE in the Part E does it specify this in

    any
    > form of basic english normal english or complex english that I am able to
    > determine.
    >



    Okay, I can't make the regulations any clearer (heck even lawyers don't
    understand some of the wording!)
    but here's the link again (in case any lurkers want to look them over)
    http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html

    Basically I think the disagreement came about from the rules and
    definitions.

    There are two different camps and two different regulations that people
    think apply.
    Part 22 Public mobile services
    Part 27 Wireless communications service

    Some people believe a BDA should be under part 22 (in which case it has to
    be licensed),
    and others believe it is regulated under part 27, and it along with mobile
    phones are too low powered, covered by the carrier license, rather than the
    end user, or covered by the exemption.
    =======================================
    Personally I believe it's Part 27. (I'll use the following example since the
    power output is the same)
    Argument- Does a 3 watt Bagphone/Carphone have to be licensed or is it
    covered by the manufacturers/carriers license, or is below the output level
    and doesn't require a license? A BDA output is 3 watts, the same as a
    Bagphone/Carphone, and can be in any location the same as a BDA. Since a
    bagphone/Carphone doesn't need to be licensed by the end user, why would a
    BDA need to be? According to the same regulation, every cell phone of 3
    watts or less that people own would have to be licensed since they are
    "mobile transmitters".
    Since there are thousands of people with bagphones/carphones, and they
    aren't all licensed, either they are all breaking the rules, or they are
    exempt from part 22 and are covered by part 27.

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?