🚀 go-pugleaf

 >/ hpspkla:comp.robotics / connolly@livy.cs.umass.edu (Christopher Connolly) /  2:27 pm  Feb  5, 1991 /
 >In article <772@sousa.enet.dec.com> smith@sndpit.enet.dec.com (Willie Smith) writes:
 >>
 >>In article <7481@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU>, ins_atge@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Thomas G Edwards) writes...
 >>>In article <771@sousa.enet.dec.com> smith@sndpit.enet.dec.com (Willie Smith) writes:
 >>>About the Waldo teleop robot...
 >>>>stay tuned for results.
			 >...
 >>>(just remember Ham bands are for purposes which do not include making
 >>> money)
 >>
 >>Is it OK to use them for purposes which include losing money?  As I'm sure 
 >>you noticed when you read the document I posted, Sunswick Engineering isn't 
 >>a company as such, it's just me with my OEM hat on, which allows me to call 
 >>large companies and communicate with them, instead of being brushed off as 
 >>just an end-user or a (yuck) consumer. :+)  I realize it's probably an 
 >>unusual use of the ham bands, but I consider the radio gear a means to an 
 >>end, not an end in itself. (Is that heresy? :+)
 >
 >It's not really unusual.  Remote control hobbyists do have amateur
 >licenses and use portions of the spectrum for that purpose.  As long
 >as your use is personal (i.e., of a home-hobbyist nature), then there
 >should be no problem, as long as you observe power and frequency
 >limits.  If "Sunswick Engineering" is just a ruse, as you suggest,
 >then this shouldn't be a problem.

As long as "Sunswick Engineering" is not a registered company and is not
selling Waldo I agree with Christopher. If, however, this work is part of
an R&D effort for a registered company then it is technically illegal.
By registered company, I am refering to a company that exists as a tax entitiy
and which is registered with a public agency. The FCC rules spell it out.
(you do need to learn them to get your liscence 8-)

 >
				 >-CC (wa2ifi)
 >----------

David Burgess - N7IQQ
#include <standard_funny_all_purpose_disclamers>