Don't assume too much. About the only thing i do agree with you on is the 'dumming down' part. The only result of that is to get 'dumber' participants. Or, why not apply the same to a pilot's license, then everyone can have one, right? One's about as ridiculous as the other, it's just that one's a little more dangerous than the other? It's still stupid.
Icom, Kenwood, and Yaesu are not being shown any favoritism, they are following the rules. If someone else want's to compete in the same market they certainly can. All they have to do is follow the same rules. There have certainly been a few that have. Can't afford to follow the rules? Then you don't appear to be ready to compete in the same market. The only hypocrisy would be in letting someone compete who can't follow the rules. Don't like the rules? Change them in the correct manner. Just don't like rules in general? You need an attitude adjustment, and in most cases, you'll get one. You won't like that either.
- 'Doc
This is where you are wrong. Fact is that the only reason the FCC cares about the Ranger 10 meter radios is because they are cheaper than Kenwood, Yaesu and ICOM. If all radios were the same price, you would find all freebanders using Kenwoods, ICOMs and Yaesu radios. It is not a question of who is following the rules and who is not, it is the FCC focusing on the most popular radios.
The reason there is confusion over the legality of the radios is because the rules are so poorly drafted that there are numerous loopholes in the regulations. The FCC does not want to close the loopholes, because the people who would be the ones sponsoring closure are also some of the ones who want to exploit the loopholes. The FCC could surely make a rule that no radio, whether a Ranger or Kenwood, can be modifiable to work out of band. They don't. The ARRL would be against it and so would many of the people in the FCC, especially those holding Amateur licenses. Incidentally, the FCC did debate, internally, adopting such a rule but decided against it.
The problem with the original post is that it makes as assumption that is incorrect. Kenwood, ICOM and Yaesu are legal, even though modifiable, as are Ranger radios. From what I see, some Magnums and the Stryker radios are not.
The rules define a CB radio as one intended for operation on the CB. This ambiguity in the rules has caused this ongoing debate. Whose intent governs? Manufacturers? Retailers? End users?
In 1994(?) the FCC fined HRO for selling Kenwood radios that were easily modifiable to transmit on marine bands. At that time the FCC based intent on marketing. Was the radio marketed as an Amateur or as a marine? If a marine radio, it had to be type accepted (certificated) for marine. If an Amateur radio, it did not need certification. The FCC was forced to drop the fine in the face of Kenwood's argument that capability does not equal intent. Just because a radio is capable of transmitting on a particular band does not mean it is intended for that band.
In response to the Kenwood lose, the FCC issued a public notice in 1996 stating that if a radio was capable of easily being modified to work out of band it would be presumed it was intended to work on those bands. The FCC did not follow the Administrative Procedures Act in its attempt to change the rules, and the Public Notice is probably not enforceable. Further the FCC did not define what is considered easily modifiable, but the general counsel did in a letter. The courts have adopted that definition, and a radio which can be modified to work out of band by connecting a jumper or throwing a switch will probably be considered to be easily modifiable.
After the letter was issued by the general counsel, all Ranger radios have been modified such that they cannot be modified without using tools of some kind. That is why Ranger has won the case brought challenging the Galaxy radios and the case challenging the Connex radios. Its also why they will win the case against eBay. Modern Kenwoods, ICOMs and Yaesu radios all need some kind of tool, such as a soldering iron, to modify them. Some Magnums and Stykers can, to my understanding be modified to work on CB by changing jumper settings. Those radios will probably be found to be illegal if the FCC challenges it in court.
Amateur HF transmitters do not need to be certificated to be legal. Kenwoods, Yaesu, ICOMS do not have a certificate, other than a Part 15 certification. That certification is for the receiver, not the transmitter.
There is no prohibition in the rules against modifying any radio, or even building an Amateur radio that is open, despite the lack of an Amateur license. There is only a prohibition on transmitting on frequencies that require the use of certificated equipment or having a license to transmit on those frequencies. I know of some FCC agents that use modified ICOMS radios to "listen" to CB channels. (the Bill Clinton defense). There may be a prohibition on selling a modified radio, depending on who you ask at the FCC.
If you are a dealer in doubt, sell unmodified Ranger radios. Ranger has always defended dealers cited for selling unmodified Ranger radios.
