|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
121.127.203.39
In Reply to: RE: clearwave fm antenna(Mapleshade) posted by Neff on March 14, 2012 at 03:48:21
Your very own FCC says these restrictions are - in principle - illegal.
I'd suggest that most people don't know /aren't told, how vital a good (ie directional with gain) antenna is and/or don't want to make the effort.
To suggest as Mapleshade do that being directional is a bad thing says it all about their standards in marketing.
That they imply that their rebuilds of a classic tuner / tuner stage in a classic valve receiver are 'Mapleshade special' - hiding that they are carried out for them by a conventional but respected technician - who could give you the same deal direct, is also instructive.
That it is even more important to drive a valve RF stage hard with a directional signal makes their approach even less respectable.
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
Follow Ups:
Tell that to the landlord.
n/t
Come to the Darkside. We have cookies.
nt
Note that a post in response is preferred.
Warmest
Timothy Bailey
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio Scrounger
And gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
The FCC OTARD ruling only deals with local video. The backstory is allowing homeowners or renters to install satellite dishes for services such as DirecTV or DISH.
There are size and height limitations on these antennas.
If challenged, you'll have to convince your HOA that its a TV antenna.
The FCC probably does not have the authority to uverturn retained property rights of an owner. Can not remember the Bill of Rights article but, there is a prohibition against the Feds interfering with a contract. Congress would need to enact a law and overcome the prohibition in the Constitution. The bar would be quite hard as property rights related to real property is almost holy.
Governments have overcome certain bundles or rights such as setbacks, fence heights, zoning and so on but they established the governments need for them and that there were no alternatives with a lesser impact on the owner.
If I were the owner, I'd not sweat the FCC in this position. Like a police officer telling you that you are breaking a law that does not exist.
That is why one's signature means EVERYTHING.
Personally, I would never sign one... for anything.
These covenants are now appearing here in America when one wants to buy land.
People don't have to sign the thing...but if they want that particular land or live in some deed restricted community, it is part of the process.
I fail to see why anyone would want to own something only to have said possession dictated in how to use it.
We are assuming common sense here. Throwing out your trash in your front yard is NOT freedom, it is a health hazard and possibly environmentally harmful as well.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
A rental is one thing, owning property with some control freaks poking around your business is not American. I would not buy-in either.
Tell that to the Association.....:(
Come to the Darkside. We have cookies.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: