Wireless mics & legalities

[Lonman]

FCC may start enforcing licensing for wireless mic users with fines/penalties for those who do not comply???

A snippet of the first paragraph.

By Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Consumer groups are accusing Broadway actors, mega-church pastors, karaoke DJs and others who use popular wireless microphones of unwittingly violating Federal Communications Commission rules that require government licenses for such devices.

http://www.federalnewsradio.com/?nid=78&sid=1441391

Couple relevant links.
http://www.prosoundweb.com/install/c...wireless.shtml
http://www.shure.com/proaudio/products/us_pro_ea_dtv

[RandyMcCharles]

This is silly. Wireless mics are short range devices. Why would anyone need to license a short-range broadcast? Sounds like a cash grab.

[George]

Originally Posted by RandyMcCharles

This is silly. Wireless mics are short range devices.

Agree, so are cellular phones, cordless phones, toy walkie talkies, not to mention all the different bluetooth devices on the market.

I can see where the manufacturers of such products are probably FCC licensed to produce items to function in specific frequencies and regulated power levels, but not the end user.

[Lonman]

It sounds like the end user is supposed to be licensed according to those articles.

[capnvic]

The article seems to only address those frequencies in the 52-59 channel range, or 700mhz frequencies. It did not seem to address those devices on the VHF band, not all wireless devices operate in the UHF bandwith. If you have purchased a Shure Wireless system after November 2007 then you are ok.

It is just another way for the FCC to raise money and controversy.

[George]

When you read the below link, it really doesn't make any sense considering all the products using UHF.
Wonder what their agenda really is considering if wireless mikes required licensing, the interference they're using as an excuse would still be there, licensing or not.

http://ezinearticles.com/?UHF-Versus...er?&id=1328253

[muzicman144]

Seems to me that they have already done what they intended. Get everyone excited over nothing. This a non issue, non enforceable item designed to do exactly what it has done. I just can't see anyone getting excited over this one.
muzicman

[ddouglass]

Maybe what they are trying to do is get the FCC to realize that the current "White Space" between the existing TV channels is in use by a lot of people and should not be allocated to new owners.

[swany]

The eyes of "TAXES" are upon you. More for the coffer so they can keep their voter bases in comfort. The taxation party after all is in control. Kind of like the .05 for internet use tax they are proposing. It's BS and we know it, it's all about the money. GM plant I used to work at banned cel phones because they were interfering with wireless crane operations under the guise of safety. They lied, a friend brought in a frequency counter and started looking into the range of phones and the cranes. It was a wireless system used by the fork lift operators scanning stock bar codes that was doing the dirty deed. Did they lift the ban, nope not until someone started a lawsuit after her child was hurt and the company took two hours to find her. Just another control tax.