From owner-freebsd-ppc@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 7 15:00:01 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA74716A4CE for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:00:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from aphrodite.gwi.net (aphrodite.gwi.net [207.5.128.164]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C5643D4C for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 15:00:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jcoombs@gwi.net) Received: from failure (murdoc.gwi.net [207.5.142.8]) by aphrodite.gwi.net (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with SMTP id j17Exx0m077726; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 10:00:00 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jcoombs@gwi.net) Message-ID: <02e201c50d25$a4e10ad0$1700a8c0@failure> From: "Joshua Coombs" To: "Mauro" , References: <1106542417.29481.168.camel@localhost.localdomain> <41F4ADC1.8070201@freebsd.org> <42017276.1010304@finnovative.net> <4201C54A.8090009@freebsd.org> <1107418085.4125.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050206002904.GJ9350@dragon.nuxi.com> <1107656286.4131.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050207045911.GA8619@dragon.nuxi.com> <1107761856.5631.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 09:59:37 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Subject: Re: airport estreme with Freebsd X-BeenThere: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the PowerPC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 15:00:01 -0000 >> It sure does then the company in question is a USA company. They >> certainly *ARE* under the FCC's regulatory jurisdiction. >> > > Really, so I assume you would hold that American companies who benefit > from overseas sweat shops and child labour follow american regulatory > agencies dictates (considering that clothing manufacturing occurs > overseas as with computer manufacturing)? If you want to sell your product in the US, and it transmits or recieves, or could possibly generate RF as a byproduct of it's operation, your product must meet all appropriate FCC regulations and recieve a certifcation from them. Doesn't matter where it's produced. Canada, most European nations, and others have a similar system. They all are generally working with the international body that covers similar functionality, the ITU. If the company is worried releasing firmware will invalidate their FCC cert to sell their product in the US, thats a pretty valid concern. Thats a large chunk of market to loose, not to mention the possibility of being fined at the same time. Net result, this isn't advancing the game. Can a driver be written without distributing the firmware? IE require the user download it, extract it from the windows distribuition, and place it in the correct spot? Joshua Coombs